World Financial System Not Sustainable
October 12, 2010"No sovereign government should ever, under any circumstances, give over democratic control of its money supply to bankers."
-Prof John Hotson, University of Waterloo
(While in Toronto recently, I met Sydney White who told me about Prof. John Hotson who was a leading Canadian exponent of banking reform. He died under suspicious circumstances during an operation in 1996. This is an excerpt from an article entitled "Understanding Money" which he wrote shortly before his murder. Needless to say, he has no Wikipedia entry.)
by John H. Hotson
(EXCERPT BY HENRYMAKOW.COM)
The financial system the world has evolved on the Bank of England model is not sustainable. It creates nearly all money as debt. Such money only exists as long as someone is willing and able to pay interest on it. It disappears, wholly or partially, in recurring financial crises. Such a system requires that new debt must be created faster than principal and interest payments fall due on old debt.
A sustainable financial system would enable the real economy to be maintained decade after decade and century after century at its full employment potential without recurring inflation and recession. By this standard, a financial system that creates money only through the creation of debt is inherently unsustainable.
When a bank makes a loan, the principal amount of the loan is added to the
borrower's bank balance. The borrower, however, has promised to repay the loan
plus interest even though the loan has created only the amount of money required
to repay the principal-but not the amount of the interest.
Therefore unless indebtedness continually grows it is impossible for all loans to be repaid as they come due. Furthermore, during the life of a loan some of the money will be saved and re-lent by individual bond purchasers, by savings banks, insurance companies etc. These loans do not create new money, but they do create debt.
While we use only one mechanism - bank loans - to create money, we use several mechanisms to create debt, thus making it inevitable that debt will grow faster than the money with which to pay it. Recurring cycles of inflation, recession, and depression are a nearly inevitable consequence.
If, in the attempt to arrest the price inflation resulting from an excessive
rate of debt formation, the monetary authorities raise the rate of interest, the
result is likely to be a financial panic. This in turn may result in a sharp
cutback in borrowing.
Monetary authorities respond to bail out the system by increasing bank reserves. Governments may also respond by increasing the public debt- risking both inflation and growing government deficits.
FOUR COMMON SENSE RULES
Governments got into this mess by violating four common sense rules regarding their fiscal and monetary policies. These rules are:
1. No sovereign government should ever, under any circumstances, give over democratic control of its money supply to bankers.
2. No sovereign government should ever, under any circumstances, borrow any money from any private bank.
3. No national, provincial, or local government should borrow foreign money to increase purchases abroad when there is excessive domestic unemployment.
4. Governments, like businesses, should distinguish between "capital" and "current" expenditures, and when it is prudent to do so, finance capital improvements with money the government has created for itself.
A few words about the first two of these rules...
1. There is persistent pressure from central bankers and academic economists
to free central banks from the obligation to consider the effects of their
actions upon employment and output levels so that they can concentrate on price
This is a very bad idea indeed. Dominated by bankers and economists, central banks are entirely too prone to give exclusive attention to creditor interests to the exclusion of worker interests. Amending central bank charters to give them independence from democratic oversight, or to set up "price stability" as their only goal would complete their subjection to banker interests. Canada's own Mackenzie King said it all, "Without Government creation of money, talk of sovereignty and democracy is futile."
2. Anyone who understands that banks create the money they lend can see that
it makes no sense for a sovereign government, which can create money at near
zero cost, to borrow money at high cost from a private bank.
The fact that most governments do borrow from private banks is one of the greatest errors of our times. If a government needs money created to pay for public spending it should create the money itself through its own bank; or spend the money debt and interest free as the United States did during the Revolution and again during the Civil War. If a government does not wish to "monetize" its deficits during periods of unusual need such as wartime, it should either make up the deficit with higher taxes or borrow only from the non-bank public-which cannot create the money it lends to the government....
When the Bank of Canada encourages the Canadian government, provinces, and
municipalities to borrow in New York and Tokyo, it is a betrayal of Canada. Where
should they borrow when new money is needed for government spending? They should
borrow at the government owned Bank of Canada, paying near zero interest
rates-just sufficient to cover the Bank's running expenses.
Related: 420 Banks "Demand" World Currency
John H. Hotson was professor emeritus of economics University of Waterloo and executive director of the Committee on Monetary and Economic Reform (COMER), a Canadian based network of economists working for economic and monetary reform. This article is based on a series he published in the October 1994, November 1994, and January 1995 issues of Economic Reform, the COMER newsletter, Comer Publications, 3284 Yonge St., Suite 500, Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M7, fax (416) 486-4674. He gave the PCDForum permission to use this material only five days before his untimely death on January 21, 1996 following heart surgery.