As we all know central banks as they are now in almost all countries are not state run (i.e. The Federal Reserve), rather they are privately kike run and this state of affairs cannot continue. However, I have a genuine question for some of the economists out there. If we ever do manage to eliminate these priviate central banks which would be the best course of action: should we either A. Have an actual publicly owned and state run central bank operating in the interest of the nation and its people or should we B. Just eliminate the idea of central banks altogether? Which would be the best option and why? Please forgive me for my retardation on this topic, I'm no economist. Evidence and arguments backing up either choice would be appreciated.
On Central/National Banks
Bump. Please teach your ways shekel shamans!
Have the United States treasury issue regular fiat currency.
Other than forfeiture of monetary policy to the Rothschild cabal the creation of money also requires payment of interest, so the government basically has to pay a fee to the (((banks))) if it wants to send a check to a disabled veteran.
Im trying to figure shit out too, if I had to take a whack at it. It would be hard to get rid of central bank functions without getting rid of some aspects of our current monetary system/currency. From what I have gathered so far is that the central banks in essence regulate the value of the currency so as to further the wishes of the bank and or country. The act of doing so can be beneficial or predatory. Monster from Jekyll Island (is biased) points out that ours was formed from a banking oligopoly. Several sources states that the regulatory function of currency, is debt that is in existence(or created).
It`s a shame to see this anchored. Could have been an interesting topic. But then again, I doubt some of the mods know what a central bank is.
Are the mods actual fucking kikes? Sort it out.
I'm anti-central banks.
I had a long written response but I just lost it, so I'll just summarize it with something partially related I guess.
The concepts that are behind all current central banks (Keynesian school of economics) fails to incorporate the long run market equilibrium. Keynes responded to the critiques by saying "In the long run we are all dead", basically meaning he gave zero shits if a central bank will always fuck its respective country's economy eventually due to its intervention.
Also go read about the Austrian business cycle theory.
A state owned central bank that transfers its profits back to the state while keeping the interest rate either fixed no matter what the circumstances are (e.g. at 5%) or
every year prints exactly the amount of money that equals the additional production of that year (GDP growth) wouldn't be all that bad.
The chief economic problem with central banks is that they create or amplify business cycles. The two solutions above would heal that problem because there would be no room for "educated" central bankers to steer the economy as they see fit. The economy would then regain the ability to self correct.
>>>/liberty/
You can fuse free-market capitalism with fascism you know.