Just to be clear, central banking can be a symptom of "Western" imperialism, too. Of course, this larger, worldwide problem has motives in addition to vulgar cupidity.
Central banking is a symptom of insatiable capitalism, esp. corporate capitalism. It solves some problems which any cabal of superambitious go-getters would otherwise face if they dream of establishing a great firm like any of the Fortune 500 in the USA. For starters, CB provides a common unit of account for use over a wide geographical area. Without that common unit (USD, the Euro, whatever), the go-getters would have to buy and sell with both vendors and customers in a multitude of different currencies with shifting exchange rates, just like most (or all) cross border firms do now. This would make economic calculation and record keeping (income statements, balance sheets, cash flow stmts) fiendishly difficult even for what we regard now as medium sized business.
Libertarians, of course, are nothing if not shills for corporate capital, which has other problems, too, such as its rootlessness and fondness for irresponsibility (i.e. for limited liability). So libertarians, who expel much hot air against CB, have been some of its best tools, channeling possible resistance to CB into a defense of the statist institution AND cupidity which is responsible for the CB craze which swept the world starting more than 100 yrs ago. In yet another irony, libertarians huff and puff about communists who pretend to hate capitalism but who NEVER get around to organizing a movement to abolish incorporation or its CB racket. One wonders if the latter would be willing to admit an obvious truth: If incorporation were not yet the status quo, communists would collaborate with libertarians to impose it.
An interesting idea or two there. Certainly the idea of a corporation as a person is convenient for directors avoiding responsibility. And as a small business person I'm very much aware that at that level directors can not get off the hook, due mostly to personal guarantees that they must give, but at corporate level it is an assumed position.
My idea for the future is small cities maybe of no more than 400k and I'd assumed currencies for them too based on the previous paper Bristol Pound (the idiots have now gone digital, which maybe they always intended to do)
Where would we be now without shills, like libertarians*, who pretend that they oppose the Central Banking State?
=============
* in the sense of the word when used by Lew Rockwell and his ilk
In what way?
Just to be clear, central banking can be a symptom of "Western" imperialism, too. Of course, this larger, worldwide problem has motives in addition to vulgar cupidity.
Central banking is a symptom of insatiable capitalism, esp. corporate capitalism. It solves some problems which any cabal of superambitious go-getters would otherwise face if they dream of establishing a great firm like any of the Fortune 500 in the USA. For starters, CB provides a common unit of account for use over a wide geographical area. Without that common unit (USD, the Euro, whatever), the go-getters would have to buy and sell with both vendors and customers in a multitude of different currencies with shifting exchange rates, just like most (or all) cross border firms do now. This would make economic calculation and record keeping (income statements, balance sheets, cash flow stmts) fiendishly difficult even for what we regard now as medium sized business.
Libertarians, of course, are nothing if not shills for corporate capital, which has other problems, too, such as its rootlessness and fondness for irresponsibility (i.e. for limited liability). So libertarians, who expel much hot air against CB, have been some of its best tools, channeling possible resistance to CB into a defense of the statist institution AND cupidity which is responsible for the CB craze which swept the world starting more than 100 yrs ago. In yet another irony, libertarians huff and puff about communists who pretend to hate capitalism but who NEVER get around to organizing a movement to abolish incorporation or its CB racket. One wonders if the latter would be willing to admit an obvious truth: If incorporation were not yet the status quo, communists would collaborate with libertarians to impose it.
An interesting idea or two there. Certainly the idea of a corporation as a person is convenient for directors avoiding responsibility. And as a small business person I'm very much aware that at that level directors can not get off the hook, due mostly to personal guarantees that they must give, but at corporate level it is an assumed position.
My idea for the future is small cities maybe of no more than 400k and I'd assumed currencies for them too based on the previous paper Bristol Pound (the idiots have now gone digital, which maybe they always intended to do)