Hi Rajiv, Accounts with the Fed are my proposed cash mutual funds. Perfectly fine. But narrow banking would not have stopped Lehman's collapse. We need to get all the leverage and opacity out of the system. Trust you are well. Warm regards, Larry
Hi Rajiv, Accounts with the Fed are my proposed cash mutual funds. Perfectly fine. But narrow banking would not have stopped Lehman's collapse. We need to get all the leverage and opacity out of the system. Trust you are well. Warm regards, Larry
Great item professor!! I watched your interview with Steven Laffey and so naturally I read this. Between the two I am feeling more comfortable with your analysis. I also read Coy and Wolf - great reads!
Groups that have similar ideas seem to propose a monetary authority to determine how much 'new' money can be spent into the economy by the federal government. What is your mechanism to expand the money supply?
Thanks and keep up the great work. I don't know how you find the time to frequently produce such good material!
I've read your tome on LPB. You didn't address the fact that lobbyist from SVB and others were able to get some regulations revoked from Dodd Frank partially deregulating the banks and then signed by Trump in 2018 causing many of the regulations to just go away.
Also my questions to you is this. Are credit unions an example of LBP's. I belong to one that is "owned" by the depositors. Specifically BECU and I live in Washington State in case that makes a difference.
Larry, why not just allow all individuals and organizations to have accounts at the Fed with no balance limits and free transfers between accounts, as proposed here:
Then FDIC insurance could be withdrawn and banks deposits would be risky, much like shares in money market funds? Also, expansionary monetary policy could be conducted without stimulating more borrowing through lower rates, by targeting debtor rather than creditor balance sheets?
G;lass Steagall was not only signed by Clinton, but his Goldman Sachs appointed advisors and cabinet shepherded it through congress.
Then Trump at the behest of the likes of Payday Leonders and financial institutions repealed Dodd Frank
The problemis money in politics. It started with Chief Justice Marhall usurping the powers of congress in Madison v Marbury, in which he claimed SCOTUS had the power of judicial review of congress
Then fast foward to to the 19th Century where, the former CEO of Southern Pacific, acting as clerk of the court, inserted a head note in Southern Pacific RR v Santa Clara County, that corportions were people and entitled to the same rights as real people.
Fast fprward t0 1978 and the Nixon court First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti which defined the free speech right of corporations for the first time. The United States Supreme Court held that corporations have a First Amendment right to make contributions to ballot initiative campaigns
Fast forward to the Bush court and Citizens United that held that Money is speech. And the more money you have the more speech you have.
And there is the problem The courts are now the wholly owned property of corporations.
Hi Joseph, The Fed would inject (withdraw) money into (from) the economy by buying (selling) mutual fund shares. best, Larry
Hi Rajiv, Accounts with the Fed are my proposed cash mutual funds. Perfectly fine. But narrow banking would not have stopped Lehman's collapse. We need to get all the leverage and opacity out of the system. Trust you are well. Warm regards, Larry
Hi Rajiv, Accounts with the Fed are my proposed cash mutual funds. Perfectly fine. But narrow banking would not have stopped Lehman's collapse. We need to get all the leverage and opacity out of the system. Trust you are well. Warm regards, Larry
This means you support Limited Purpose Banking and are sharing the newsletter?
best, William, Larry
Great item professor!! I watched your interview with Steven Laffey and so naturally I read this. Between the two I am feeling more comfortable with your analysis. I also read Coy and Wolf - great reads!
Groups that have similar ideas seem to propose a monetary authority to determine how much 'new' money can be spent into the economy by the federal government. What is your mechanism to expand the money supply?
Thanks and keep up the great work. I don't know how you find the time to frequently produce such good material!
I've read your tome on LPB. You didn't address the fact that lobbyist from SVB and others were able to get some regulations revoked from Dodd Frank partially deregulating the banks and then signed by Trump in 2018 causing many of the regulations to just go away.
Also my questions to you is this. Are credit unions an example of LBP's. I belong to one that is "owned" by the depositors. Specifically BECU and I live in Washington State in case that makes a difference.
The financial system did not “fail”in 2008 and did not fail now. If you have a policy plan, please just propose it without the doomsayer hype.
LPB sounds like a big improvement. What are the first steps?
Larry, why not just allow all individuals and organizations to have accounts at the Fed with no balance limits and free transfers between accounts, as proposed here:
https://rajivsethi.substack.com/p/the-payments-system-and-monetary-13-11-20
Then FDIC insurance could be withdrawn and banks deposits would be risky, much like shares in money market funds? Also, expansionary monetary policy could be conducted without stimulating more borrowing through lower rates, by targeting debtor rather than creditor balance sheets?
The problem is bipartisan
G;lass Steagall was not only signed by Clinton, but his Goldman Sachs appointed advisors and cabinet shepherded it through congress.
Then Trump at the behest of the likes of Payday Leonders and financial institutions repealed Dodd Frank
The problemis money in politics. It started with Chief Justice Marhall usurping the powers of congress in Madison v Marbury, in which he claimed SCOTUS had the power of judicial review of congress
Then fast foward to to the 19th Century where, the former CEO of Southern Pacific, acting as clerk of the court, inserted a head note in Southern Pacific RR v Santa Clara County, that corportions were people and entitled to the same rights as real people.
Fast fprward t0 1978 and the Nixon court First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti which defined the free speech right of corporations for the first time. The United States Supreme Court held that corporations have a First Amendment right to make contributions to ballot initiative campaigns
Fast forward to the Bush court and Citizens United that held that Money is speech. And the more money you have the more speech you have.
And there is the problem The courts are now the wholly owned property of corporations.