...
Printable View
...
I don't subscribe to any economic ideology, and I abhor economic reductionism.
"Untouched by the breath of God, unrestricted by human conscience, both capitalism and socialism are repulsive."
- Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
I support "hard money". It is impossible to run precious metals off on a prijnting press., This encourages economic responsibility. Deficit spending is the high road to disaster. You and I can not spend money we have not got. Neither, though they refuse to admit it, can the government.
We have to accept as money whatever the government calls money. We are compelled to by legal tender laws. However, these laws are not binding on other nations. They can recognise stage money for what it is and reduce the amount of their own currency that they will give for it. Thus the exchange rate is changed in our disfavour.
Domestically, the degradation of our currency by printing trillions of dollars in unsupported bogus currency decreases the buying power of the money already in circulation, (Gresham's Law: "Bad money drives out good.") Thus does deficit spending generate inflation.
The number of Silver Certificates that could be issued was limited by the language thereon. Take the dollar bill for example; "This certifies that there is on deposit in the Treasury of the United States of America one dollar in silver , payable to the bearer on demand."
In other words, the Silver Certificate was a promissory note. The Federal Reserve note is not. It says nothing about paying anything to anybody. It asserts that it IS a dollar.So, of course, the Federal Reserve notes, which can be printed in any desired quantity, had to replace the Treasury notes which can not.
It has been claimed thst our money is now based on the Gross National Product . HOW CAN IT BE ? The government doesn't OWN the GNP. ,They might as well claim that our money is based on the paintings in the Louvre; they don't own them either.
The drastic measure which would cure inflation and our ever-escalating national debt would be to abolish paper money and replace it, for all but the very smallest denominations, with precious metal coins.
Of course , this will never be done because, the government doesn't WANT a stable economy. Pork barrel projects buy votes, economic responsibility doesn't.
"Suppose I were a member of Congress, and suppose I were an idiot.....but I repeat myself." - Samuel Langhorn Clemens
2nd answer
Socio-Capitalism = The future for humanity.
Keeping capitalism as a standard system, decreasing some of its influence, creating a much effective social welfare that will benefit citizens and the economies themselves.
This poll is laughably oversimplified.
I believe in Listian economic nationalism.
Inflation is not a problem, at least not in the serious way some make it out to be.
There is nothing wrong with fiat currency, you just need good government. Gold standards also have their issues, if you don't have good government on a gold standard problems come just as fast and as hard as they do with improper management of fiat currency.
As a rule:
I'm capitalistic on frivolous things and cooperative on necessary ones.
When the capital and the work conflict I stay with workers and against the shareolders/owner.
I stand for the right to use rather than for the right to own.
I don't think there's a right of private property per se, if the owner of an enterprise cannot lead well its business or wanna close/delocalize it, the workers have the right to socialize it and use it better, as they were the owners.
I'm for a re-regulation of the financial sector, limitin and directly forbiddin certain product.
I'm for the endin of conflict between capital and work i.e. more for the cooperative form rather than the typical private firm scheme.
I'm against the monopoly of printin money, everytime new money is needed the governement should put it up an auction downward among a set of regional PUBLIC banks so as to put an end to the plutocratic privilege of seigniorage.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The question becomes : 'How hard should I work given that you will take away from me the fruits of my work ?'
It is this very subjectivity of Socialism that makes its logic impossible.
How much should one volunteer ? How much should one donate ?
Who decides on the criteria ? This works for a small village in which every member knows each other quite well and is able to (more or less) judge merit. On a large scale is just an invitation to fraud.
Why are you talkin to me as if I was a socialist?
I lay toward an organic conception of economy, I wouldn' takeaway anything from those who work.
I'd put a set of rules and then lasseiz faire to the people.
The problem is that today we don't have those kind of rules and the rules that are in function are not beneficial to the whole system but rather to a small minority of ultracapitalists and financial speculators.
They've taken over the system and are gettin the entire system poorer and poorer.
God has been so generous with His creation, that we think that our possessions actually belong to us; but they actually belong to Him.Quote:
1) The earth is the LORD's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein.
2) For he hath founded it upon the seas, and established it upon the floods.
Psalm 24:1-2, King James Version