From Thos. Jefferson:
Yes, we need gold and silver as money, but we do not need much money to make an economy prosper. We need a separation of business and state, the state having no role in the economy, so natural banks can evolve and the necessary element of private credit might thrive.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
... “I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.” He also wrote, “The trifling economy of paper, as a cheaper medium, or its convenience for transmission, weighs nothing in opposition to the advantages of the precious metals.” You’ll notice that Jefferson identified “the precious metals” (plural) – meaning gold and silver – as being superior to paper currencies.Two abominations we now have, standing armies and paper currency, have very much harmed the republic. The armies are extensions of the banks, and the banks need to armies to protect their mischief worldwide.
Yes, we need gold and silver as money, but we do not need much money to make an economy prosper. We need a separation of business and state, the state having no role in the economy, so natural banks can evolve and the necessary element of private credit might thrive.
Feel free to forward this by email to three of your friends.
5 comments:
Americans should be infuriated at American foreign policy which seems to be enforcers for American big businesses. The U.S. is actually instigating conflict with other countries, like Russia, Iran and China. The media is not giving the American public an accurate picture of what is going on in the rest of the world. How can the U.S. government support the apparently Nazi government in Ukraine? Is it just because they are anti-Russian?
It's capitalism, not free markets.
Business and state will always be inseparable as long as there are revenues (i.e. taxes) to be acquired by the state.
The problem with completely free markets:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2015/06/30/Problem-Completely-Free-Markets
Mustn't fall for the false dilemma and straw man arguments, and certainly never expect a free market definition that includes politicians.
All of the problems catalogued started with state intervention, so calling state policy failures market failures is dishonest. Monopolies only survive by state power.
There is no role for the state in a free market. Start from there, not from the assumption we need state intervention, and you'll start asking the right questions.
JOhn
Post a Comment