Re: [Taler] note to 035-regional-currencies.rst

[Calvin Burns]

Hi Oliver,

thanks for picking up those questions.

On Mon, 03/13/2023 06:32:50 PM, Oliver Endrikat wrote:
> 
> > Why are private banks allowed to print money?  Why are they allowed to take
> > tribute for printed money?  Why are they allowed to decide who gets money 
> > and
> > for what?
> 
> 
> 
> Because the banks are close to the customer and know his business.
As I see it every credit is also a political decision that has consequences not
only for the bank and the creditor.  Usually those who have to carry the
negative consequences don't have any saying in it.
> New money is normally given as credit to some customer who expects that the 
> lent money will earn the interest, at least.
The money is not lent.  A is newly created for free.
This is not the problem (I think).  The problem is who gets that deposit and for
what purpose.
> And the bank takes the risk that the credit is not payed back, or tries to 
> avoid the by defining securities to be given. In case, they also have the 
> burden to liquify the securities.
> 
Usually banks and their rich investors/owners are rescued even if it means
violation of human rights and impoverishment of whole countries.
I'm not sure if those securities make sense.  Compare to a GNU Taler based local
currency community where the banks are controlled "democratically" or where
banks serve the community.  Now if the community decides to give
someone credit (through a bank) they (the members of the community) also carry
the risk.  And in this situation the motivation to create credit is not to
create rent for the rich. Rent that usually is based on slavery or forcing
someone to sell live time that physically can't be bought back with any amount 
of money.
The motivation is to organize the creation of something that the community
actually wants or needs.  So there is also no pressure for "interest".
> By this approach, you have the overall volume of money increasing with the 
> overall economic output.
> 
Isn't it the other way around?  First money/dept then economic output?
And don't we have a "debt crisis"?  There is much more debt than ever can be
possibly be paid.  Which means banks created much more money then "economic
output".  But to me it is not clear what "economic output" means.  For instance
Andrew Wiles walked to a lake for relaxation when he got stuck with his proof of
Fermat's last theorem.  For me the proof is something worth living for.  But
from a commercial bank perspective it's not economic output I guess.  How would
you measure it with money and should it?  From a commercial bank perspective a
car park or consume center instead of a lake would generate more "economic
output" even if nobody wants or needs it.
> The actual paper money or coins is not printed by the banks, they only create 
> ’new money’ by granting credits to customers.
> The actual paper money and the coins are created by the central bank.
It's difficult or even impossible to use cash these days.
I think you can't even pay a coffee with cash in London.
Isn't cash forbidden in Kenya (for the profit of corporations)?
That's not because people don't want to but because they are not given the
choice to pay cash. It's even possible that you don't get medical treatment if
you insist on paying with cash.
Most money is private digital money as far as I know.
> 
> Oliver
> 
>  
> 

I put those questions in the signature because from my point of view with my
current state of understanding of the money system they seem to point to
important fundamental problems in the current money system.  In my opinion
people should question it.  Banks should be useful tools for society but they
are far from it.  What use is GNU Taler if it is just another tech make-up on
top of a corrupting and corrupt credit/ledger system?

signature.asc
Description: PGP signature