If Congress were to allocated a trillion dollars to be used to repair all of our nation's roads, bridges and levees, the government would need to borrow the money from the bankers the National Debt would increase by a trillion dollars and taxes would need to be raised of pay the interest on the money borrowed.
If Congress were to issue a trillion dollars we could hire 1,000,000 laborers and pay them each $50,000 per year to repair our nation's infrastructure.
If Congress by-passed the Federal Reserve we would be able to issue the debt free money an there would be no interest to pay.
The taxes we pay are used to pay the interest on the National Debt and if we were to stop borrowing we would be able to substantially reduce the amount of taxes we pay every year.
Even after paying the salaries of 1,000,000 laborers we would still have $500,000,000,000 to pay for the steel, cement and other materials needed to complete the projects.
By hiring a million men and women and paying them each $50,000 per year, they would have $50 billion dollars to add to our economy. Do you think that this would stimulate the economy?
If Congress were to borrow a trillion dollars with a 4% interest assumption we would be required to pay $40 billion dollars in interest to the International Bankers.
In Article I Section 8, Congress is given the power to coin nation's money supply. In 1913 Congress authorized a private banking corporation with the authority to issue our money. Instead of borrowing money, Congress should be creating their money. By issuing our own money, their would never be a need to borrow in the future and we would save the trillions of dollars we pay annually to service the debt..
Amen to that!
Only problem to what really has to be done, is that we are too few, and not, as a nation in a bad enough hurt where the whole populace feels the pain as of yet.
Otherwise, we are barking at the moon.
This discussion makes no sense. If Congress created those jobs and funded the 1 Trillion Dollar project they would of course be creating debt because there is no money to pay for it, so where is the choice between debt and jobs?
Government funded jobs, while some are necessary, do not create wealth, they only provide short term prosperity with the cost being passed on to future generations with borrowed money Sooner or later the 'credit card' must be paid off in one fashion or another.
Dave, Our Government would create the money either in numbers like the banks do in checkbook money, or in paper or in coins. Therefore the money would exist.
There is no debt creation in the 'Monetizing' Public Roads and Bridges proposal. Government and private sector workers would be paid. If the government workers related to roads and bridges were paid in this manner you would no longer need to be taxed to pay their wages. You would take home more in your paycheck.
You are correct that when our government borrows numbers from the banks and goes into debt to fund jobs it is not long lasting. Why? Because the money borrowed and spent, plus more to pay the interest, needs to taxed back away from the people. When the principal of the borrowed money is repaid it is extinguished. The Money supply shrinks.
The 'Monetizing' Public Roads and Bridges proposal does not work that way. It works the opposite. It works for Economic Freedom not Economic slavery.
Gregory Kenneth Soderberg ,,, "There is no debt creation in the 'Monetizing' Public Roads and Bridges"
That's PLAINLY not true. Essentially worthless paper stamps exchanged for truly valuable machines, materials and Labor, leaves a DEFICIT of real things and their real value in the economy. ONLY production of equivalent items into the economy creates genuine balance and ONLY such production as exceeds consumption creates wealth.
The 'proposition' that these stamps 'monetize' ANYTHING' is a FRAUD. It's nothing more than continuation into ever more devastating ruin than the stupid notion has ALREADY wreaked upon the world's finance and economy.
Dave while it is not my intention to offend you, but the reason my post makes no sense to you is because you obviously do not understand how money is created.. Banks create money by loaning it to governments, but governments can lawfully by pass the banks and issue their own money and eliminate the parasitic bankers from the equation. Banks print money our of thin and charge us interest to pay interest of this fictitious money. If Congress would cut out the middle man we would have debt free money.
Keith Broaders ... "governments can lawfully by pass the banks and issue their own money"
Maybe other governments, but the States mutually agreed to explicitly forbid themselves from ever again issuing Bills of Credit ... and conspicuously omitted allowing their Trust Administrator (aka: the United States) from exercising that power! You realize, it was an enumerated power under the Articles ... which went horribly awry with Continentals.
Keith, why then are you promoting a blatantly un-Constitutional notion?
Workers do not create wealth; it is the efficient use of labor and capital to produce American Made Products that people buy, and the sale of natural resources that creates wealth for America. Since we make very little as we have deliberately sent all of our wealth producing industries offshore and have stopped using our natural resources, we have little chance to create wealth for America so therefore it is difficult to pay workers for labor on government funded jobs – except by borrowing or printing money for the workers who of course want their money ‘upfront’. These jobs, while necessary and important, take some of the wealth as investment needed to provide infrastructure to enable future wealth creation, but they are a cost of doing business, not wealth creation.
And yes we certainly can print our own money for free instead of paying the Fed to do it with their fractional reserve banking system, just ask Kennedy. However printing money devalues it; it always has and always will, be it by the government itself or by an unconstitutional agent such the Fed. Only a fraction of output of pay for the labor of the workers goes back to the government via taxes or even stays in America as much is spent on foreign made products, including the materials used for construction; causing a big drain hole in our money supply and of course big debt. We have been abusing our currency’s status as the reserve currency and this is about to cause huge problems for us as other nations refuse to abide by our one-sided rules.
Monetizing the production and maintenance of public roads and bridges proposes 'paying' the people who do the labor and provide the materials and organization. The work is done. The money is earned. The money is created either in numbers, paper or coin just as is now. The only difference is that the money will be created and Spent, not Lent into circulation as a final, debt-free, earned payment.
It would work just like your paycheck. You exchange your time, labor, ideas, etc. to your employer and he pays you. You don't owe him. He doesn't owe you. The money represents the value of your production.
You are not in debt for your paycheck but it still has value to you.
Monetizing the production and maintenance of public roads and bridges is the same principle as the Free Coinage Act of 1792. People produced gold or silver bullion, presented it to their government mint which weighed, assayed and coined the raw material into uniform coins, declared it 'money' and thereby 'monetizing' the people's production.
This was done free of charge to the producer. No 'money' was created until the people produced the material. The people controlled the amount of money created. Their government simply did its duty to monetize the people's production as a debt-free wealth to them. This kept the people economically Free in the Spirit of Freedom America intended.
Gregory Kenneth Soderberg ... "money will be created and Spent, not Lent into circulation as a final, debt-free, earned payment"
Mumbo-jumbo bunkum. The matter of interest on Bills of Credit is unavoidable. Delaying the onset of its accrual one step removed, does not stop its initiation on arrival at a bank. Thereafter, the exact same exponential process of 'monetary/ self-destruction ensues.
Moreover, Sir, I'm afraid I have to be blunt to point out that you don't understand what debt is in reality.. Debt is an imbalance between production of goods and consumption. Maintenance and repair is an economy; a conservative preservation of usefulness, but produces nothing incrementing the real wealth.of humanity.
There is no free lunch! To get products, one must trade products of relatively equal standing, or the gross wealth of the whole is diminished. Paper Plantation Scrip is NOT on an equal standing with precious, irreplaceable time requested from the lives of People. To make such claim with specious confabulations is literally Crime Against Humanity. Whether perpetrated by bankers or politicians is of no distinction.
Money is a token representing wealth. If you mow my lawn, I will pay you $20. Your labor has created the money.
If Congress creates the money to fund this trillion dollar project instead of borrowing it from Federal Reserve Banks, we would be able to turn the labor of a million workers into money. If we monetized labor instead of monetizing debt, we could save over over three trillion dollars we spent last year servicing a fictitious national debt.
The bankers create the money our of thin air and we pay them interest on this imaginary money. If the Fed can print the money, why can't we do the same thing. The only difference is that we would not have to pay the U.S. Treasury interest on the money that they create.
Dave as long as you think inside of the box that the financial elite have constructed for you, you will never see how they have deceived you a hundreds of millions of debt slaves.
If you are proposing government create fiat money to pay these people, I can't subscribe. Fiat money, whether created by a bank or the government has the same ill result: inflation. Now if you are suggesting the government coin money or create specie (gold or silver-backed money) I'm with you.
I think Ron Paul's idea of having a competitive market in the production of money is the best way to go, in End the Fed page 205 he writes:
"An end to the money-creating power and a transfer of remaining oversight authority from the Fed to the Treasury would be marvelous steps in the right direction. But let us stretch these ideas a bit further and reconsider the entire idea of government monopoly on money. The Founding Fathers never set out to create a single national monetary system. Money and banking were left to the states, with the proviso that the states themselves could only make gold and silver legal tender. At the same time, there were no restrictions on private minters and private(free) banking. We should embrace this system again, repealing legal tender laws and letting everyone get into the business of the production of money. This would create a competitive market in which the best monies would emerge over time to compete directly with the federal government's dollar."