Ett utdrag ur Michael Hudsons senaste artikel som jag tipsade om i förra inlägget. Om det gränslösa hällandet av pengar över bankerna.

"How many families would like a "give-back" on every bad investment they’ve ever made? It’s like a parent coming to a child who has just broken a toy, saying "That’s all right. We’ll just go out and buy you a new one." This from the apostles of "responsibility" for poverty, for mortgage debtors owing more than they can afford to pay, for people who get sick and can’t afford medical care, and for states and cities now left high and dry by the fiscal wipe-out that the Bush-Obama "cleanup" has foisted onto the economy. No do-over for anyone but the hundred or so billionaires who have just been endowed with enough free money to become America’s ruling elite for the rest of the 21st century.

After spending a lifetime denouncing socialism as inherently unfair, Wall Street is now doing a hideous parody – as if "socialism for the rich" were not an oxymoron in the first place. Certainly the banks are not being "nationalized." Giving away the largest sum of spendable securities in history without direct managerial power that goes with ownership is not "nationalization." Ask Lenin."

Jag gillar hans sätt att uttrycka sig, förutom hans grundmurade kunskaper, han pratar t.ex om att USA styrs av en "kleptocracy" en elit som roffar åt sig så mycket man kan. Ett annat uttryck för hur USA styrs är "corporatocracy", som John Perkins brukar använda, att regeringen framför allt agerar i storföretagens och bankernas intresse.
Någon avgörande skillnad är det väl inte i Sverige, att det inte är folket som styr eller att det styrs i folkets intresse är väl helt klart. Det skrämmande är att folk verkar ha vant sig, resignerat. Man är dresserade, tämjda.

James Robertson, Bernard Lietaer och Michael Hudson, tre verkliga tungviktare när det gäller förståelse av det ekonomiska och monetära systemet, har var sin ny högintressant artikel (i James Robertsons fall är det ett nyhetsbrev).

Nedanstående är utdrag från Bernard Lietaers:

"It is hard to believe, but true, that the US bailout has cost more than the inflation adjusted cost of the Louisiana Purchase, the New Deal and the Marshall Plan, the Korean and Vietnam War, the S&L debacle, NASA and the Race to the Moon combined!"
...
"This begs the question: What happens when the costs for rescuing the bank system become unbearable? Governments learned in the 1930s that they can't afford to let the banking system go under, as this brings down the entire economic system. What they may learn in our times is that they can't afford to save the banking system."
...

..."contrary to what some people believe, our money isn't created by the governments or the central banks, it is created as bank debt. When banks are private, as they are in most of the world, the creation of money is therefore a private business. If the banking system abuses this prerogative, this privilege could or should be withdrawn. The logic is not new: money is a public good, and the right of issuing legal tender belongs at least theoretically to governments."
...

"Under a government run monetary system, the governments would simply spend money into existence without incurring interest at its creation; banks would become only brokers of money they have on deposit, not creators of money, as is the case now.

This would definitely make systemic banking crises a problem of the past. It would also make it possible to re-launch the economy through a large-scale Keynesian stimulus at a much lower cost to the taxpayers, given that the money thus created wouldn't require interest payments to be reimbursed in the future."

James Robertsons nyhetsbrev - Michael Hudsons artikel