[p2p-research] DEBT IS THE constructed PROBLEM AND DEFLATION IS THE reactionary SOLUTION

Sun Jul 11 17:08:12 CEST 2010

Michel,

1971, Bretton Woods, wasn't the privatization of money.  Banks in the US and
Britain, etc. used to regularly print their own notes for 10s and hundreds
of years.  1971 represents the trading of money as a requirement for good
standing of non-commodity currencies.

The rules of contracts are formal.  Money moves via contracts such as
futures, options, debt, etc.  The rules in these areas are highly
formalized, and those govern the way money moves.  One must appreciate the
way money is created...typically through debt...either public or private.
Banks are, and always have been, quasi-governmental.  They are a regulatory
function in some respects...like stock exchanges.

If states tried to provide all banking services, economies would shrink
dramatically.  If one considers that a good, it would be wise.  I am perhaps
old-fashioned enough to hope for continued growth and a growth-based
economy.

My views are relatively straightforward on these topics:

1. I believe free market capitalism has largely proved the happiest time for
humans by far.
2. I believe in governments regulating markets.
3. I believe these things require careful balances.
4. I believe that technology is all important in changing the rules.
5. Technology has made labour and learning problematic.
6. Because of 5, the credit/debt economy of the world is now broken.
7. There may be ways to fix 6, but I don't see how.
8. If there is no way to fix 6, there will be great disruption and trauma.
9. Something else will ensue.
10. P2P may be part of 9.  I think "free" economies are a logical technical
outcome.
11. Understanding free economies is therefore important.
12. There is no future in the past.
13. State socialism and communism are the past.
14. It is possible that debt-based capitalism is becoming the past.
15. If 14 is true, there is an urgency to uncover some means of solving what
will replace it.

Ryan

On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 1:00 AM, Michel Bauwens <michelsub2004 at gmail.com>wrote:

> Ryan,
>
> you say, as a response to Patrick: The rules of money are complex and very
> formal.  They are typically best left to the province of states.
>
> BUT then the question is, since states have long ago lost their sovereignty
> over money supply, which is created by private banks (fractional reserve)
> and circulates through the shadow banking system outside state control, how
> would you re-assert that sovereignty?
>
> If your wish is to be followed, the situation pre-1971 should be restored,
> how do you intend to achieve the de-privatisation of money?
>
> Michel
>
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 6:01 AM, Ryan Lanham <rlanham1963 at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> Sovereignty is an agreement.  That is why it is problematic.  If you agree
>> to being an American, a Japanese, a Frenchman, etc. you are participating in
>> a common framework that empowers governments with sovereignty.  In the
>> British system, the monarch literally embodies sovereignty.  In the US
>> system, it is "the People."  The People have rights and responsibilities.  A
>> person cannot simply choose to no longer participate in a sovereign
>> framework because it leaves huge questions unanswered (e.g. who says you are
>> an acceptable traveler?)  Who says you will agree to live under certain
>> laws?
>>
>> Nations are in fact a commons.  And their currencies are also commons that
>> have even broader sway.
>>
>> Every imaginable scheme for money has been tried and tried again.  There
>> is little likelihood someone will happen upon a scheme that is simple and
>> fresh.  Innovation takes intense study in very complex frameworks (typically
>> like science).  That said, I think small currencies and small means of
>> establishing local value can be beautiful, fun and very fruitful.  I do not
>> think of them as "money."  Money is a currency, but not all currency is
>> money.
>>
>> The rules of money are complex and very formal.  They are typically best
>> left to the province of states.  Currencies, on the other hand, can be made
>> and used by anyone from the S&H Green stamp store to the local homeless
>> shelter.
>>
>> Ryan
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 10, 2010 at 2:17 PM, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Can anyone in the universe tell me *why* a nation would choose to go
>>> into massive debt to foreign powers when we (as much as any national
>>> is "the we") could far more easily take the responsibility of issuance
>>> upon ourselves?
>>>
>>> If 12 of us were abandoned on a deserted island, would would it be
>>> better for us to issue some sort of currency so we could trade skills,
>>> or would it be better to rent that money from someone on another
>>> island?
>>>
>>> If peers are going to use alternate currencies, should they issue it
>>> for themselves, or should the RENT it from someone else?
>>>
>>> If We, the Peers choose to RENT our money from someone else, then
>>> *who* are those other issuers, and how did they become so superior to
>>> us that they have the right to invent money out of thin air and then
>>> demand payment for the use of it?
>>>
>>> By what authority do international bankers issue currency used by most
>>> every nation on earth?
>>>
>>> I live in the USA.  We have a massive National Debt *ONLY* because we
>>> have been taken over by foreign powers and so will not issue our own
>>> currency.
>>>
>>> What good does that do?
>>>
>>> Those who *do* issue the currency are using those fiat notes to buy
>>> bonds backed largely by federal lands and other national treasures.
>>>
>>> When we finally default on those massive loans, we will have lost
>>> title to our country to clever thieves that have never done anything
>>> of value except to trick us out of our sovereignty.
>>>
>>> WHY, WHY, WHY!?
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> p2presearch mailing list
>>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>   --
>> Ryan Lanham
>> rlanham1963 at gmail.com
>> Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
>> P.O. Box 633
>> Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
>> Cayman Islands
>> (345) 916-1712
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2presearch mailing list
>> p2presearch at listcultures.org
>> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> P2P Foundation: http://p2pfoundation.net  - http://blog.p2pfoundation.net
>
> Connect: http://p2pfoundation.ning.com; Discuss:
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
> Updates: http://del.icio.us/mbauwens; http://friendfeed.com/mbauwens;
> http://twitter.com/mbauwens; http://www.facebook.com/mbauwens
>
> Think tank: http://www.asianforesightinstitute.org/index.php/eng/The-AFI
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> p2presearch mailing list
> p2presearch at listcultures.org
> http://listcultures.org/mailman/listinfo/p2presearch_listcultures.org
>
>

-- 
Ryan Lanham
rlanham1963 at gmail.com
Facebook: Ryan_Lanham
P.O. Box 633
Grand Cayman, KY1-1303
Cayman Islands
(345) 916-1712
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listcultures.org/pipermail/p2presearch_listcultures.org/attachments/20100711/2f5b3ceb/attachment.html>