[p2p-research] Bonds VS Bills for P2P Money

[Kevin Carson]

On 7/16/10, Patrick Anderson <agnucius at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thomas Edison wrote:

>  > The difference between the bond and the bill
>  > lets money brokers [bankers] collect twice
>  > the amount of the bond plus interest.
>
>  > Whereas the bill [currency] pays nobody but those
>  > who contribute directly in some useful way.
>
>  > The People are the basis for government credit.
>  > Why then cannot the People have the benefit of their
>  > own credit by receiving non-interest bearing currency,
>  > instead of bankers receiving the People's credit
>  > in interest bearing bonds?

Again, this makes perfect sense.  If government is going to control
the money supply by the creation of fiat money out of nothing, I see
no reason whatsoever what's more "free market" or "liberal" about the
government delegating the function to banks that lend it into
existence at interest, rather than depositing it directly into
existence itself interest-free.

-- 
Kevin Carson
Center for a Stateless Society http://c4ss.org
Mutualist Blog:  Free Market Anti-Capitalism
http://mutualist.blogspot.com
The Homebrew Industrial Revolution:  A Low-Overhead Manifesto
http://homebrewindustrialrevolution.wordpress.com
Organization Theory:  A Libertarian Perspective
http://mutualist.blogspot.com/2005/12/studies-in-anarchist-theory-of.html