Exclusive from our Correspondent, Brian Landever
Changing the world with sustainable public spending was the buzz phrase in Chicago at the end of September. For four days, The American Monetary Institute (AMI) hosted a conference on monetary reform. The director, Stephen Zarlenga, author of, “The Lost Science of Money,” gathered dozens of supporters to speak to the audience of approximately 100 attendees on the necessity, and the how-to of nationalizing the creation of money. Professor Michael Hudson, columnist for the Financial Times, discussed current economic predictions and explained how their fate could be altered with the reforms. Ben Dyson, a young British economist, thoroughly explained the details of the reform and how a transition period would proceed. David Kelley, economic advisor to Congressman Dennis Kucinich, spoke passionately on economic justice. Professor William Black, author of, “The Best Way to Rob a Bank is to Own One,” explained the disastrous results of combining loose lending regulations with lending money into existence through mortgages. Many others contributed to a complete picture of the benefits that would come from ending the practice of creating money as debt.
Three key points and a long historical examination of successes and failures highlight the suggestion for reform developed by The American Monetary Institute. It suggests ending private control over money creation by nationalizing all twelve federal reserve banks. They would be placed under the careful watch of a monetary control board, connected to the currency division within the US Treasury. Any new money created for the society would be spent into existence. Once created, it would be given to government entities to spend into the society. Careful analytic tools would determine how much to be created so as to support growth with minimal inflation, and the elimination of interest payments would gradually eliminate all public debt.
The second main point of the reform is 100% financial backing to bank loans. This contrasts from the current backing requirement of 10%. In order to ensure that banks only lend what they have, savings accounts would have limited access and provide a return on the money.
The third point discusses the details of how the money will be created and spent by the government into existence. While a monetary authority would be responsible for calculating the specific amount to be created, congress would be able to accept or reject their proposal. The reform specifies that the first three expenses to be covered would be the $2.2 trillion need in physical infrastructure, such as bridges and highways, education, and healthcare.
Prominent politicians throughout history, most recently by Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich, have recognized the importance of publicizing money creation. Congressman Kucinich has worked closely with director Stephen Zarlenga to shape the reform into The American Monetary and Financial Security Act. Kucinich personally called in during the second day of the conference and announced that the final revision of the act was printed and scheduled for presentation in the upcoming congress session.
Debate also existed amongst attendees. Ellen Brown, investigative journalist and author of Web of Debt, argued that spending money into existence and 100% reserves would cause many private banks to fail due to insufficient revenue. She explained that the result of her research supported creating public state banks. Each bank would create credit, lend it out to trustworthy business operators and entrepreneurs, collect the interest, and add it to public budgets. Reserve requirements would go unchanged, private banks could compete at will, the money supply would remain flexible, and interest rates may be lower than those in AMI’s plan.
The significance of this effort is far reaching. Hundreds of social and environmental ambitions would be easily funded were money not siphoned into private banks. There would be accountability in the money creation process, transparency would be easy to enforce, and private banks would be forced to slow their lending habits. Monetary reform, regardless of the inner circle debates, allows for greater distribution of wealth, more handsome infrastructure, and financial backing to social progression. Visionaries can delight in a high number of school scholarships, fully funded pension plans, and expansion of green technologies. As great a country as America currently is, a greater capacity to promote general welfare could create a mood of ongoing celebration and pride as people worldwide witness how much more we achieve.
Referenced Individuals and Information
American Monetary Institute
Professor William Black: