Home | About | Donate

If China Can Fund infrastructure with Its Own Credit, So Can We


Very concise statement of what is going on here. Turning pubic ownership to public rentier-ship for private profit is the whole idea of neoliberalism to begin with.


Who is "China" that is doing this funding with "china's credit?" The leading communist party families? The Triad princelings? Beijing officialdom? And who does Ellen Brown mean by "we" when she says, "so can we?" Unless things were to change drastically around here, "we" means Congress. When Congress has the power to make money and to spend it into circulation on "infrastructure" and "public facilities" of their own choosing, their power over the people becomes too great. They will no longer require the billionaires to fund their elections, the incumbents will do it all with pork, and the incumbents we soon get rid of any who are not with the Congress party. They will rule the world by the rewarding of contracts. In the past Ellen Brown has called for a "super federal reserve" and she has praised the "trillion dollar coin" which Congress approved (because the denomination of the commemorative platinum coin was never specified in the legislation) -- which coin if the President deposits with the Fed, could be used to by-pass Congress because he would have a trillion dollars to spend through executive orders -- making him the absolute power that Congress would become if they started writing their own checks on the "people's credit." Yet who can deny that we -- the real we, the people -- need to reclaim the credit -- the social credit as some have called it. Right now we are in trouble because all of our national money supply is borrowed and at compound interest -- when it could be, as they say, taken from thin-air by government and made effective money simply by government declaring it to be legal tender for paying taxes and private debt. We need permanent money and we need to repudiate the debt accrued under the all-borrowed money supply system. Government can create the money by fiat, but we must never let government be the first spender of the new money it creates. That is a recipe for slavery to an institution given far more power than any institution should be given. What we must have -- for a populist republic along Jeffersonian lines with some Henry Ford and Thomas Edison thrown in -- it to have government originate new money but distribute it exclusively to the household sector in the form of a "new-money dividend." Let the people be the first spenders of new money, since it is their credit, their productivity, their provision of the goods that the money will buy that everything relies upon. Money should be provided to the people as a public utility, as necessary infrastructure for our market economy -- a market economy which does not belong to the government, but which represents the cooperation of the people in using the land to make their livings. That is not the Chinese communist way or the Triad princeling way. That is the way of freedom and true economic democracy. Ellen Brown wants the state to have the power of money creation over the people -- here with Congress creating money on social credit to be spent as the state run by corrupt families dictates; and before giving the power to the president with the trillion dollar coin; and to the states with public banking where the states give free loans who who they decide needs a free loan. Giving that power to the state, to politicians is totalitarian. She expects the infrastructure spending to drizzle down to the people. She is no populist. A populist puts all new money in the people's hands to spend or save as they choose, so that the consumer is really sovereign, the master of the entrepreneur who must please the consumer and of the politician who must look to the citizen and the citizen's money to get elected or re-elected. We all owe a debt of gratitude to Ellen Brown for her diagnosis of the problems of debt and deflation, but when she goes to Red China for a model to liberate us from our debt crisis, we need to be more circumspect.