News & Analysis
Debriefing a Sovereign Money Hater
In 1750, this New England was very prosperous. Benjamin Franklin wrote: "There was abundance in the Colonies, and peace reigned on every border. It was difficult, even impossible, to find a happier and more prosperous nation on all the surface of the globe. Comfort prevailed in every home. The people, in general, kept the highest moral standards, and education was widely spread." When Franklin went over to England to represent the interests of the Colonies, he saw a completely different situation; the working population of the home country was gnawed by hunger and plagued by inescapable poverty. ... People in London asked Franklin how the American Colonies managed to collect enough money to support their poorhouses, and how they could overcome this plague of unemployment and pauperism. .... Thanks to debt-free money issued by the colonial governments ... Franklin replied; "We have no poorhouses in the Colonies, and if we had some, there would be no one to put in them, since in the Colonies there is not a single unemployed person, not a beggar nor a tramp." ... And Franklin told them: " In the Colonies, we issue our own paper money. It's called 'Colonial Scrip.' We issue it to pay the government's approved expenses and charities. We make sure it's issued in proper proportion to make the goods pass easily from the producers to the consumers. In other words, we make sure there is always adequate money in circulation for the needs of the economy. – No-debts.com
Dominant Social Theme: Money power is everywhere and most pernicious. The only solution is sovereign money pumped out by the US Treasury and states and maybe municipalities.
Free-Market Analysis: We just had an argument with a furious friend of ours and since we are tired of being shouted at, we will now present the argument of our friend and the crux of his cranky argument. It is a little like lancing a boil, we suppose. Please bear in mind, by the way, that the following is a summary and we have used our own words to paraphrase what he told us (while spluttering). He really should calm down. We'll get it all out and then we won't have to write about it anymore – or listen to it either! Here goes. (We apologize in advance to anyone who is offended; we're not sure what to believe about his claims anyway.)
"You elves at the Daily Bell [our friend was speaking sarcastically] think you are so clever but the powers that be have long anticipated the arguments you have been making. You would never come out and say that some of the leaders who advance the argument of sovereign money are seemingly sponsored by US intelligence or how the sovereign money movement is suddenly springing up like crazy just the way every other promotion does when they get it going.
"Why have you never pointed out that every part of the sovereign money argument is crafted to provide a statist solution – that state or local banks should print non-debt money and choose how to circulate it to the local community? When have you ever clearly come out and said that the power to print money is the power to destroy as surely as taxation is a similar destructive power? When have you ever pointed out bluntly that the entire argument is crafted to blame the bankers while avoiding putting any blame on government. And why haven't you made the point clearly that when entities other than the market itself have the power to issue money TOO MUCH IS NEVER ENOUGH. Only the market itself can regulate the quantity of money. No state or central bank can do that because no one knows what the future holds or how much money will be needed. Benjamin Franklin was wrong!
"It doesn't seem to matter though. You've held your tongue – or been overly polite anyway – and so have others. And now it's an explosion on the 'Net. All these people out of nowhere starting sites, babbling about Frank Baum and the Wizard of Oz and the yellow-brick road to debt-free banks. All power to the people and down with the banksters! An explosion of websites and people seemingly committed to the movement of sovereign money. A lot of them using military terminology too. And with "pledges" just like the Tea Party pledges after it was taken over from the Libertarians by Armey and Palin. Where'd those come from?
"It's how these promotions work, Daily Bell. It's all very clever and very contemptuous. They are sure we can be manipulated – and have years of data and experience to prove it. You know it, Daily Bell! They find people – usually military people – and help them make the right presentations. It is phony but it makes it look like there is a swelling movement. And it is a phony movement and the sovereign money is a phony solution. But still they appear out of nowhere with videos and articles and websites and suddenly they are all over the place, apologizing for their former beliefs and using free-market rhetoric to argue for statist solutions. And all the videos are sort of the same! And all the rhetoric is the same! You'd have to be blind not to spot a "pattern."
"In fact, the powers-that-be would love the US and the world to move toward sovereign money! They work like a kind of mafia and are always trying something new. Think about it: If states or the US Treasury begin to print sovereign money, Leviathan will STILL be in charge of the printing press. Do you really think the powerful families – your perspective – that seem to run the world will have any trouble influencing the government as its prints more money? They could care less if it's "debt money" or not, just so long as they stil control the printing presses. Do you really think the money won't end up in THEIR pockets? The one thing they DO control is government.
"It's being orchestrated! That's how these things work. You will notice also how they always cite people like Martin Luther King and Abraham Lincoln and even John F. Kennedy. Always the same names! They aren't concerned with the truth, only a facsimile of it. They criticize but then they reinforce the credibility of some iconic US political figures. They point fingers at the "bankers" but then offer up American politicians as praiseworthy role models. And how is that possible? Abraham Lincoln arrested anyone who disagreed with his unnecessary war – without constitutional authority or justification. Martin Luther King was apparently adopting radical communist views toward the end of his life, and who knows what Kennedy thought – but he was no icon of free-market thinking as you term it.
"This is a very nefarious promotion. But except for Gary North it's been pretty much ignored by the Libertarian movement (some of whom are sympathetic) but it's been in play for at least a decade now. If you read the recent literature they've even adopted terms used by YOUR Daily Bell blog – terms like New Renaissance and New Enlightenment. But it's all scam. You know it is! They claim the Fed is a private institution and then claim the bankers control it. Well, the Fed wouldn't be authorized to do what it does without the force of government behind it. But they skip that part because they don't want to paint government as corrupt or untrustworthy. More recently, if you listen to their arguments, they've even started to criticize government. But they'll always be careful to say that government doesn't work because of the bankers and big corporations.
"They'll never talk about the wealthy families BEHIND the corporations and bankers. No, that's conspiratorial thinking. We're supposed to blame Wall Street. It's the "system" that's gone wrong. And the system can be fixed if "the people" take control and institute "sovereign money." Not a free-market system of gold and silver but exactly the reverse. A system in which GOVERNMENT IS STILL IN CHARGE OF MONEY but in which the governors are supposed to be provided by "the people." What a joke. What a promotion. And why is it gaining momentum? Because people like the Daily Bell aren't speaking out.
"It's a promotion. Yes it is. They're that SMART. Sure they are! They hire the best communicators. They use the most sophisticated ideas of the day and then twist them to gain or regain power. It's crystal clear now, Daily Bell. You've documented it yourselves, though you won't take it to the natural conclusion. The IMF proposes one set of global money solutions while some sort of homegrown US sovereign money movement proposes another. That's how they work! They never offer just one idea. They come at it from a number of directions to see what sticks. And they're ramping up every type of money promotion – that's very obvious – to keep control.
"C'mon, now! Who studies money for years and then comes up with the idea that government should control it? Who looks at the broad sweep of history and figures out that if money were printed DIFFERENTLY (but still by government) the outcome would be different? And why do they always have military backgrounds, these geniuses that appear out of the blue?
"I dare you to print this Daily Bell!"
All right. Calm down. Presumably we don't have to listen to YOUR rants, anymore. We have presented the gist of your argument; if you want to repeat it you can go elsewhere. Anyway, in our defense, we have taken on the sovereign money movement many times and made our points about it. We don't believe that more government is the answer to anything. We believe in less government. We don't believe government should be printing money at all, ever. It is inevitably inflationary – the sovereign money folks (it is true) get around this point by redefining what inflation is and claiming that it is not a monetary phenomenon.
The main point, in fact, against sovereign money is that so long as money is issued out of manmade entities, the amount of money being printed will always exceed what is necessary. That is just human nature. Leaving aside all the rest of it (see above) which may be most questionable, the crux issue remains as with the central banks – how does an entity other than the market decide how much money is enough or too much? If there is no price competition, there is no way to determine the volume of money that should be in circulation. This would be the downfall of sovereign money in our view.
Conclusion: Having said all this we also believe that many in the growing sovereign money movement have their hearts in the right place and are sincerely concerned for the country – and want what's best. That could include the leadership of the sovereign money movement. Who are we to judge? In fact, we apologize once more to any who have been insulted by the above, or have had their feelings hurt. But we don't want to be shouted at over the phone anymore. So we have presented the above as a service partially for our own ears!
Edited on date of publication
Posted by David W on 01/13/11 06:40 AM
T'was in 1913, when Mr. Mitchell Innes published his essays on this very question: What is Money?
He convinced me, formerly believing otherwise, that Gold is NOT the way to go.
Perhaps it would be worthwhile to discuss his arguments for what Daily Bell states differently.
Innes: Money is credit!
Why? Let's listen " and hopefully discuss:
Innes, What is Money? @, e.g.:
Click to view link
The Credit Theory of Money, by A. Mitchell Innes @, e.g.:
Click to view link.za/docs/The%20Credit%20Theoriy%20of%20Money.htm
Posted by Philip Mccormack on 12/26/10 02:27 PM
Sovereign Money-Phooey, Flummery. The backdoor to State control. China just one example, on and off for a thousand years. The Frauds of Finance are a collective-the Fed in complicity with the Executive,Legislative and Judicial tentacles of (all) Governments. Moody's and Standard & Poors legalized thuggery.
Money doesn't need a name, just a weight and purity of a metal(s) Gold and Silver and the market will decide in a short space of time if it needs paper, bank notes or any other method of exchange. Let us not forget there cannot be Freedom with paper money. Gold and silver protect us from political and legal institutions as long as there is a free market rate of exchange between gold and silver. Without this debts are turned into currency to distribute 'welfare' to political cronies and special interest groups.
OUR ENEMY THE STATE, by Albert Jay Nock
According to Nock, "government" and "the state" are two different things. "Government" is a legitimate, impartial vehicle for the administration of justice, such as the safeguarding of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
By contrast, writes Nock, "the state" represents a corruption of democracy in which special interests use the coercive power of government in order to extract concessions and advantages not available to other citizens. Ultimately, "the state" becomes an instrument of oppression, allowing those special interests to compel the rest of society to behave in ways they would not otherwise do.
As this book says, "The State is the legal apparatus perverted, forever seeking out the means of its own support and finding it in the form of interest groups yearning for special privilege. The State has economic advantage to dispense, and there are pressure groups, factions, and individuals organized to take advantage of the give-aways. Thus a cabal forms, part political and part private, using public power for private advantage." This book was first published in 1935, and it is amazing how the future that Nock foresaw has come to pass!
WE MUST PROTECT THE INTERNET.
HAPPY NEW YEAR
Reply from The Daily Bell
Same to you.
Posted by Schofield on 11/23/10 11:38 AM
Full link :-
Click to view link of England Act&utm_campaign=8daeea3bd2-PM_Student_Conference_Nov_2010_10_12_2010&utm_medium=email
Posted by Schofield on 11/23/10 11:34 AM
How is the volume of money to be created determined now? By the quasi-private and government Federal Reserve manipulating the interest rate and the private banks deciding what to speculate on.
This produces a system where the private banks can be hitting the accelerator at the same time the Federal Reserve is hitting the brake. Clearly unsatisfactory.
So how should a nation determine the amount of its money (credit) creation? It should have an independent and sovereign body free of sectional private interest and politicians which monitors inflation and increases or decreases money creation accordingly in its own right. This money should be spent into existence through government either by public spending and/or tax rebates or stipends. The effects will be immediate other than interest rate manipulation. See :-
Click to view link of England Act&utm_campaign=8daeea3bd2-PM_Student_Conference_Nov_2010_10_12_2010&utm_medium=email
Posted by TL From Japan on 11/13/10 05:53 AM
To agree or disagree with our friends argument is secondary in relation to realizing that no monetary system will be "perfected"...ever. As long as corruption remains in the heart of the men and women in charge, then no system will ever be good enough.
That said, we must learn to recognize the "opportunities" in each system that will benefit "us who are aware" for the short and the long term. Take what the defense (banks, politicians, corporations) gives you and legally exploit it from an investors perspective to prosper financially, emotionally, and if your very fortunate somehow spiritually.
My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.
Posted by Tawny on 11/02/10 11:47 PM
Well, a friend of mine from a long way back used to talk about someone 'changing his name from Joe Bleep to John Bleep.'
The 'monetary reform' of changing from the present set-up, the Fed/Click to view linkrtnership, to one in which the govt. alone runs the counterfeiting operation, seems to be like that. I mean, we know who 'owns' govt. at this point in time...
Also, calling Austrian economics a religion of course implies that it is faith-based rather than scientific/rational, and that its adherants are like religeous nuts or zealots. This is mud-slinging, name calling, and not rational and substantive debate. The personal attack, argument ad hominem, is used by those who know they will lose if they stick to rational debate/substantive issues.
As in, calling your critics 'crazy paranoid (or, currently, 'angry') right-wing conspiracy theorists' rather than meeting them in debates, issue by issue.
Posted by Adam on 11/02/10 07:38 PM
"Click to view link's a bit ... weird."
Creepy would be my word.
Posted by Adam on 11/02/10 07:03 PM
Vrabel: "(I'm always amused by atheists who are fundamentalist disciples of Austrian religion)."
Click to view link
He's a troll. After 'debating' him, that's my impression. The lack of curiosity is the clue.
Reply from The Daily Bell
It is apparently more than that, according to those who are trying to expose it. They come from nowhere, have military backgrounds or backgrounds, generally in fields associated with the military industrial complex, suddenly start writing articles or creating videos with a great deal of sophistication, urge people to get together to create a "movement" and spend a great deal more time discussing the problem of "banksters" than the solutions - which are statist and often big-government oriented.
Military vocabulary is used (See "the Swarm) and these sovereign money proponents seem intent on transferring the power to print money from the Fed to the Treasury. (That's Damon Vrabel's MO anyway, as has been pointed out to us.) We are on the fence about it, if only because there is no hard evidence (and of course we are not conspiratorial by nature!). But certainly it's a bit ... weird.
Posted by Tawny on 11/02/10 02:47 PM
Thanks for pointing that out.
Well, Vrabel is good, very good. Smart as a whip, and so sincere.
He does have an interesting background, as I recall. In fact he was a Wall Streeter, I believe... also a military man. Hmmm. Military.... hmmm... trauma-based mind control. But no, I am just getting entirely too speculative here, and casting unfounded Click to view link's just that this ordinary world of ours has become increasingly like 'Smiley's World'... here an intelligence operative, there an intelligence operative, everywhere a bloomin' intelligence operative...
Posted by Tawny on 11/02/10 01:31 PM
It isn't that I just can't let this 'sovereign money' issue alone... it's that IT won't let ME alone. I keep moving on to other issues, and yet there it pops up again. Btw who coined that term for it? " 'sovereign money' dignifies what is still at base a process of legal counterfeiting by government, makes it sound so solid, good, wonderful, and populist, doesn't it? Anyway, as regards the subject suddenly being everywhere I look...
... a friend emailed me this great, informative article by Marilyn M. Barnwell, titled MORTGAGE MAYHEM AND MERS, HOT TUBS, AND THE FBI, which I thought was so good at explaining all this complicated mortgage-backed-securities crap (rackets, basically, to which the 'captured' regulatory agencies turn a blind eye --see Patrick Byrne's website, also Judd Bagley, The Sanity Check) that the Wall Streeters have been up to that I emailed it on to others (most of whom probably don't pay much attention to my nervous, gloomy 'the sky is falling' posts and forwards).
And in this Barnwell article, the author recommends a series of You Tube videos by someone I'd never heard of, Damon Vrabel (website, The Council on Renewal), which I watched, and I was hugely enthusiastic over them so clearly explaining that all money is created as debt, and how the banksters are moving the center of the economic/productive world to the south and east parts of the globe, away from the north and west, and are getting more overtly late-stage fascist in their ways of dealing with the people etc.... but rather mysteriously, Vrabel, in all of these five segments, never came out and said what the 'remedy' was that he recommended, in terms of monetary unit, though he did drop a very quick word to the effect that it didn't have to be gold and he as a quick aside a couple of times kind of mildly dissed the libertarian/money of substance crowd...
It was surprisingly hard to find out what Vrabel DOES promote as 'remedy,' but I finally tracked him down to an interview with Max Keiser in which he comes out more explicitely saying that we need to break the power of the banks creating all money as debt on the shoulders of the people and governments, and that "
" yes, that 'sovereign money' put out by the states would work just fine. Earlier in his video series he also mentioned, quickly and in passing, the North Dakota bank that Ellen Brown keeps talking about.
I really liked his five part U tube talk, and he's very bright, obviously, and he oozes sincerity, and his website talks about spirituality... but I just now went back and read your spluttery friend's 'rant' on sovereign money, and the sovereign money promoters suddenly cropping up everywhere like daisies in the springtime, and I had to think to myself, this curmudgeonly friend of yours really seems to know the territory here.
And I did hear something I didn't like about Max Keiser, the other day. Something to do with his monetary views not being that sound in that he does not support a return to money of substance, I believe it was, or that he has socialistic leanings... maybe, if anyone is still reading this thread, they can help me re Keiser's views.
Anyway your grumpy friend seems to have it nailed, as regards the 'sovereign money' supporters suddenly crapping up, sorry, cropping up everywhere and being as numerous as... well as disinfo agents on the web...
Reply from The Daily Bell
Damon Vrabel clearly and specifically says at the end of his long string of videos that one "solution" is to have the US Treasury take over from the Federal Reserve and print "sovereign money."
He says it quickly, so you may miss it ...
Posted by Tobey Llop on 11/01/10 10:37 PM
Kudos for your presumed accurate precis of the ranter's diatribe! Intellectuals never see more than a part of the pictures they look at, myself, I'm afraid, included.
It's no secret that power corrupts, the many seek power, and some actually get it. The best one can hope for in the real world is that the ones who get the power are reasonably sane and that their keen self-interest is enlightened to the point that they promote fair play at least when their own profits are secure.
Control of the currencies is only useful if contracts are honored to a fairly high degree and people accept the currencies as tender, legal or otherwise. Gold and Silver have long held value, waxing in times of crisis and waning when calm prevails. The nice thing about bouillon is that possession of it makes belief in anyone's promise unnecessary. The downside is it's heavy to carry, and expensive to store safely, since guards are required.
There must be some assurance (promise) that the guards won't steal it. Of course if the government guards it, say at Fort Knox (remember Fort Knox? the legendary storehouse of Gold?), if governments get the gold and silver, mischief will be done. Governments are really just collections of individual people with all the failings, potential and probable, humanhood implies. Further, the power of which the government classes have custody isn't usually hard won anymore by dint of conquest, but conferred by the ability to dress up in lies and pretense of having grand ideas.
The work of bloody conquest is done by brainwashed grunts in the field or by techno jockeys of unmanned bombers half a world away who are home safe in time for dinner. Anyway, I may now perk up my ears if the occasion arises to learn what the sovereign money movement is all about " unless of course the volume broaches the pain threshold!
Posted by Leonardo Pisano on 11/01/10 10:06 AM
Thanks for your advice, John. I understand what North implied, but living in a country occupied by the Nazi's in 1940-45, here reactions would go bezerk. North could have made the same points without making such ad hominem DIRECT connection between Ms Brown and this despiccable ideology. As I said, he may be 100% right, in the way he packaged his "warning", it's very insulting and infuriating.
Posted by John Danforth on 11/01/10 08:52 AM
Gary North called Ellen Brown "Cheerleader for Hitler's Economics".
That's because the monetary system she advocates is the same as Hitler's. It's not just an insult, it's a warning. Be careful what you swallow.
Posted by Jim Quinn on 11/01/10 03:06 AM
Except for the writer's negative opinion of your intelligence and your valiancy in naming the criminal behind the crime of counterfeiting money, there is nothing wrong with the conclusions that this unnamed writer has come to.
He is basically right about his assertion that there is a conspiracy behind the unconstitutional and immoral manipulation of the money supply of the U.S. and the rest of the world, by a specific group of conspirators over many generations.
I can understand his frustration with the weak kneed and faint hearted, and his outrage towards the perpetrators of this crime. I am sorry, but if you seek to defend the truth and those moral people that wish to live according to it, then you have no choice not only to identify the crime, but the criminals who perpetrate the crime. How else would you propose to maintain live, liberty and property.
Posted by Leonardo Pisano on 10/31/10 06:23 PM
"She [Ellen Brown] comments on his [Gary North's] analysis on her block. She merely thanks him politely and says she will take his comments into account for the next version of the book."
I don't agree with Ms. Brown's solutions, but I admire her energy and dedication to challenge the central banking theme. North called her "Cheerleader for Hitler's Economics" [Click to view link]. How can you possibly defend to something like that? Dr North may be right on contents, but "c'est le ton qui fait la musique". If someone would attack me with such wording, I would reply far less politely for sure. Her genteel response tells me she is not only intelligent but also decent. It would be perfect, if she joins our camp (private money, gold/silver backed), but as we all know life doesn't always give us what we want. Anyhow, she deserves my respect, and I am usually frugal with such attribution.
Posted by Tawny on 10/31/10 01:57 PM
To DB "
thanks for the info in that most recent post of yours in this thread. I didn't know a lot of that.
To Katoa " very well written and accurate reply to Cityeyrie " thanks for it.
Money should not be any complex system of credits, etc. etc. that ordinary people cannot understand. Money should be something relatively scarce, something of stable and intrinsic worth, something durable, portable, and divisible, something that human society has valued, for its beauty and usefulness as a medium of exchange, for centuries... and something THAT THE WORKING MAN CAN BE PAID IN AND HOLD IN HIS HAND AND PUT INTO HIS POCKET AT THE END OF THE DAY'S WORK... and can take to any country and use to buy a meal or a pair of shoes.
To some of those not yet fully in support of honest money/money of substance/money of intrinsic worth, I suggest, read G. Edw. Griffin's book, THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND. The info in it is accurate, to the best of my knowledge, and he includes some relevant history and actually manages to make the dry subject of economics .... interesting! And de-mystifies it at the same time. The elites definitely don't want it de-mystified!
To cityeyrie " with all due respect, we 'need a new theory of money' about as much as we need a new theory re what happens to a rock when you drop it from a second story window. Read Griffin's book. In order to get their nefarious way, the elites love to confuse and complexify matters/issues, and they pay many fine minds good money and tenured positions to do a superb job of it, so that Ordinary Joe throws up his hands in surrender, abandons the field to 'the experts'and goes off in search of bread and circuses. And none are so befuddled as some of those with advanced degrees, who have imbibed truly staggering quantities of dis-information in drag.
Algernon Sidney, it was, I believe, who, shortly before being hanged for going up against the Crown, sadly and accurately opined, 'The law was simple, but hath been industriously rendered perplex.' This certainly is also true of economics (and the branch of modern medicine that treats degenerative disease, as well).
I would suggest that Ellen Brown is a 'perplexifier.'
Posted by Victor Barney on 10/31/10 10:42 AM
"Debriefing a Sovereign Money Hater" another great article done through staff report! Unfortuneately, this still is Lucifer's world and there is but short time left for the devil! We soon will see a Republican landslide in the next election and President Obama will take Africa's 70% of UN countries and ride the white horse in the UN over America! No? Watch!
Posted by Katoa on 10/31/10 04:17 AM
I only have time right now to partially respond to your impassioned argument: "here people seem to think the Market is a God-like force and people have nothing to do with making it happen".
To respond to former, let me quote from a libertarian writer: "Libertarians don't believe the free market is a god-like panacea, only that it is by far the best and most humane economic system possible in the real world, and that central planning always leads to disaster and human suffering."
As for the latter claim, nothing could be further from the truth. The economic philosophy of this site and many of those posting responses follow the brilliant work of Mises whose landmark treatise was titled, "Human Action". It is not light reading, but impeccably demonstrates that all economics has EVERYTHING to do with real, fallible, self-interested individuals making choices and performing actions.
You see, because self-interested individuals are forced to truly compete in a free marketplace (one without the interference of government), their self-interest is naturally disciplined. Because governments have a monopoly on the use of force, there is no restraining power to discipline the self-interest of those with political power.
These are not theoretical arguments " you can see their fulfillment in countless experiments throughout history. Inevitably, the greater the power of the State and its usurpation of the role of the free market, the greater the economic misery of its people.
Public monopolies on money and banking are no better than private monopolies. [And coincidentally, they really are one and the same since you can't have a private monopoly without the power and force of government.]
Posted by Window Washer on 10/30/10 10:56 PM
Regardless of what should happen, I believe what will happen is as follows:
A) "End the Fed" by their own design; only Treasury remains
B) Money in short supply " Fallout blamed on Ron Paul, Alex Jones, Tea Party, et al.
C) "Spare some change?" (See link to South Park video below)
D) Newly impoverished compelled to work for Gov or rot in camps
E) Final Point: I think the current denominations of bullion mean something.
Click to view link
Posted by Lila Rajiva on 10/30/10 09:54 PM
@Eyes to see,
thanks to you too.