Al-Jazeerah: Cross-Cultural Understanding
www.ccun.org www.aljazeerah.info |
Opinion Editorials, February 2013 |
||||||||||||||||||
Archives Mission & Name Conflict Terminology Editorials Gaza Holocaust Gulf War Isdood Islam News News Photos Opinion Editorials US Foreign Policy (Dr. El-Najjar's Articles) www.aljazeerah.info
|
The Trillion Dollar Coin: A Joke or Game Changer? By Ellen Brown Al-Jazeerah, CCUN, February 4, 2013
The
trillion dollar coin actually
represents one of the most important principles of
popular prosperity ever conceived: the creation of money by sovereign
governments, debt-free.
Last week
on "The Daily Show,” Jon Stewart characterized the proposal that the White
House circumvent the debt ceiling by minting a trillion dollar coin as an
attempt to "just make shit up."
Economist
and NY Times columnist Paul Krugman responded with a
critical blog post
accusing
Stuart of a "lack of professionalism" for not taking the trillion dollar
coin seriously. However, Krugman himself had called the idea
“silly.” He thought it was just less silly --
and less dangerous -- than playing with the debt
ceiling, which was itself an unconstitutional shackle on the Treasury’s
ability to pay debts already incurred by Congress.
Stewart responded
on January 15 that he stood by his “ignorant conclusion that a trillion
dollar coin minted to allow the president to circumvent the debt ceiling,
however arbitrary that may be, is a stupid f*cking idea.” It’s all good fun – or is it? Most commentators have
missed the real significance of the trillion
dollar coin. It is not just about political gamesmanship.
For centuries, a secret battle has raged over who
should create the nation’s money supply – governments or banks.
Today, all that is left of the US Treasury’s money-creating power is the
ability to mint coins. If we the people want to reclaim that power so that
we can pay our obligations when due, the Treasury
will need to mint more than nickels and dimes. It
will need to create some coins with very large numbers on them. To bail
out the banks, the Federal Reserve, as head of the private banking system,
issued over $2 trillion as “quantitative easing,” simply by creating the
money on a computer screen. Congress, the White House, and the Treasury all
rolled over and acquiesced. When it was proposed that the government bail
itself out of its budget woes by minting a $1 trillion coin, the Federal
Reserve said it would not accept the Treasury’s legal tender. And
the White House again acquiesced, evidently
embarrassed to have entertained this “ludicrous” alternative. Somehow we have come to accept that it is less silly
for the central bank to create money out of thin air and lend it at near
zero interest to private commercial banks, to be re-lent to the public and
the government at market interest rates, than for the government to simply
create the money itself, debt- and interest-free. The
banks obviously have the upper hand in this game; and they’ve had it for the
last 2-1/2 centuries, making us forget that any other option exists.
We have forgotten our historical roots.
The American colonists did not think it was silly when they escaped a
grinding debt to British bankers and a chronically short money supply by
printing their own paper scrip, an innovative solution that allowed the
colonies to thrive. In fact, the trillion
dollar coin represents one of the most important principles of
popular prosperity ever conceived: national debt-free money creation.
Some of our greatest leaders, including Benjamin Franklin, Thomas
Jefferson, and Abraham Lincoln, promoted the essential strategy behind it:
that debt-free money offers a way to break the shackles of debt and free the
nation to realize its full potential. We have lost not only the power to create our own
money but the memory that we once had that power. With the help of such
campaigns as Occupy Wall Street, Strike Debt, and the Free University,
however, we are starting to re-learn the great secret of money: that how it
gets created determines who has the power in society -- we the people, or
they the bankers. It is no secret who has that power today.
In the great bailout of 2008, banks were rewarded for
making irresponsible and fraudulent
gambles in the subprime mortgage scandal, with no one serving time in jail.
Then there was the robosigning scandal, in which banks committed
criminal fraud and came away with a slap on the wrist.
Now we are seeing the LIBOR scandal unfold.
While a commoner might get 10-20 years for robbing a bank,
bank executives get huge bonuses for
robbing us. We may rail against the banks
and demand change, but nothing will change until we grasp their fundamental
secret, the foundation of their power: that those who create the nation’s
money control the nation. By
mechanisms
explained elsewhere, nearly the
entire money supply today is created by banks.
Remembering Our Roots: A Refresher Course Benjamin Franklin was called called “the Father of
Paper Money.” He argued before the British Parliament that government-issued
money had allowed the colonies to escape the yoke of debt, to thrive and
grow. The king, urged by the Bank of England, responded by forbidding all
new issues of paper scrip. The colonial economy then sank into a depression,
and the colonists rebelled.
They won the revolution, but the power to create money was lost to a private
banking oligarchy modeled on the one dominated by the Bank of England. Fourscore and six years later, President Abraham
Lincoln boldly took back the money power during the Civil War. To avoid
exorbitant interest rates of 24% to 36%, he decided to print money directly
from the US Treasury as US Notes or “greenbacks.” The issuance of $450
million in greenbacks was key to funding not only the North’s victory in the
war but an array of pivotal infrastructure projects, including a
transcontinental railway system.
Lincoln was assassinated,
however and,the greenback program was quickly discontinued. Repeated popular
attempts to revive it failed. In 1872, according to
Lynn Wheeler in
Triumphant
Plutocracy: The Story of American Public Life from 1870 to 1920,
New York bankers sent a letter to every
bank in the United States, urging them to fund newspapers that opposed
government-issued money. The letter
read in part:
Dear Sir: It is advisable to do all in your power to sustain such prominent
daily and weekly newspapers . . . as will oppose the issuing of greenback
paper money, and that you also withhold patronage or favors from all
applicants who are not willing to oppose the Government issue of money.
Let the Government issue the coin and the banks issue the paper money of
the country. . . . [T]o restore to circulation the Government issue of
money, will be to provide the people with money, and will therefore
seriously affect your individual profit as bankers and lenders. Bank-created money (which now includes electronic
money) could be rented at a profit to the people.
The “people’s money” was limited to coin, which today composes less
than one ten-thousandth of M3, the broadest measure of the money supply. Lincoln’s assassination and the abandonment of
debt-free greenbacks effectively marked the exchange of one type of slavery
(race-based) for another (wage- and debt-based). As a result, the American
government and American people are so heavily mired in debt today that only
a radical overhaul of the monetary system can free us. Gimmick or
Game-Changer? That is the real context and backstory of the
trillion dollar coin. The
stakes are much higher today than just fending off the debt ceiling. We the
people need to take back the power to issue our own money, and coins are the
only means left to us to do it. The idea of minting large denomination coins to solve
economic problems was evidently first suggested by a chairman of the Coinage
Subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives in the early 1980s. He
pointed out that the government could pay off its entire debt with some
billion-dollar coins. The
Constitution gives Congress the power to coin money and regulate its value,
and no limit is put on the value of the coins it creates. In
Web of Debt (2007), I suggested
that to solve the government’s debt problems today these would need to be
trillion dollar coins.
In
legislation
initiated in 1982,
however, Congress chose to impose limits on the amounts and denominations of
most coins. The one exception was the platinum coin, which a special
provision allowed to be minted in any amount for commemorative purposes.
An attorney named Carlos Mucha, blogging under the pseudonym Beowulf,
proposed issuing a platinum coin
to capitalize on this loophole, after hearing me mention the trillion dollar
coin in
a Thom Hartmann interview. At first it was just an amusing exercise.
But with the endless gridlock in Congress over the debt ceiling, it
got picked up by serious economists as a way to checkmate the deficit hawks.
Philip Diehl,
former head of the US Mint and co-author of the platinum coin law, confirmed
that the coin would be legal tender:
In minting the $1 trillion platinum coin, the Treasury Secretary would be
exercising authority which Congress has granted routinely for more than 220
years . . . under power expressly granted to Congress in the Constitution
(Article 1, Section 8). Warren Mosler, one of the
founders of Modern Monetary Theory,
reviewed the idea and concluded it would work
operationally. The
funds would simply be new reserve balances at the Fed rather than new
Treasury securities.
Joe Firestone pointed out that the trillion
dollar coin could solve the government’s debt problems once and for all,
putting was in its grasp the power to replace austerity with the abundance
enjoyed by our forefathers. The trillion dollar coin can
raise cries of “hyperinflation!” It evokes images
of million-mark notes filling wheelbarrows. But
as economist
Michael Hudson observes: Every
hyperinflation in history has been caused by foreign debt service collapsing
the exchange rate. The problem almost always has resulted from wartime
foreign currency strains, not domestic spending.
Prof. Randall Wray explains that the
coin would not circulate but would be deposited in the government’s account
at the Fed, so it could not inflate the circulating money supply.
The budget would still
need Congressional approval. To keep a lid on spending, Congress would just
need to abide by some basic rules of economics. It
could spend on goods and services up to full employment without creating
price inflation (since supply an d demand would rise together). After
that, it would need to tax — not to fund the budget, but to shrink the
circulating money supply and avoid driving up prices with excess demand.
Time to Take Back the Money
Power The current economic crisis cannot be solved with the
thinking that created it. There
is simply not enough money in the system to fund the services we desperately
need, pay down the debt, and keep taxes affordable.
The money supply has
shrunk by
$4 trillion since 2008, according to the Fed’s own website.
The only solution is to add more money to the real, producing
economy; And that means some congressionally-mandated entity needs to create
it, either the Fed or the Treasury. The Fed has declined. In flatly rejecting the
Treasury’s legal tender, the
Fed as representative of the banks is asserting itself as outranking the
elected representatives of the people.
If the Fed won’t acknowledge the coins created by the
government, perhaps the government needs to charter a publicly-owned bank
that will. We have a chance today to end the charade of big
money gridlock politics, as well as the reign of the big banks. We have the
power to choose prosperity over austerity. But to do it, we must first
restore the power to create money to the people. ________________ Ellen Brown is an attorney and president of the
Public Banking Institute. In
Web of Debt, her latest of eleven
books, she shows how a private banking oligarchy has usurped the power to
create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it
back. Her book The Buck Starts Here:
Restoring Prosperity with Publicly-owned Banks will be released this
spring. Her websites are http://WebofDebt.com,
http://EllenBrown.com, and
http://PublicBankingInstitute.org.
|
|
Opinions expressed in various sections are the sole responsibility of their authors and they may not represent Al-Jazeerah & ccun.org. editor@aljazeerah.info & editor@ccun.org |