In response to my article about how the Money Power created Libertarianism and Austrian Economics, the Daily Bell replied.
Here’s Daniel Krynicki’s response to that.
First my Feedback:
“Migchels has explained that his version of social credit is free-market oriented and “private,” but Douglas’s certainly does not seem to be. We can see from this brief description that Douglas apparently intended to use social engineering (government power) to redistribute wealth via a “national dividend” and also via his idea of a “just price” that would fix prices across a given society.
Of course, price fixing via force is likely, in our view, to further distort an economy, not bring it justice. As Adam Smith (and then others) showed, the only methodology of true economic growth resides in the marketplace itself, which can efficiently distribute capital via the Invisible Hand of competition. Without competition, one simply has the hand of man. The “hand of man” (government) murdered some 150 million people in the 20th century.”
Your response to Migchels seems ad hominem as much as it is cursory. You never discuss why there is always a shortage of money, also how it is created and then injected into the currency stream. You write about CH Douglas, but never that he pointed out why there is always a shortage of effective purchasing power among the working class and the apparent reasons for this.
This article by Migchels is a follow up to numerous others which demonstrate that any debt/usury based private creation of money is always destructive of the people’s economic freedom and health. This is where we draw the line with the likes of Lew Rockwell, Gary North and Justin Raimondo. The libertarians refuse to let go of their desire to create the money supply. The reality is that while they demand usury for their created money, they lock their gold up in a vault and never risk anything in the process. At the same time, the borrowers of their created money may risk a home that they paid principle plus interest for twenty years or more because the money creators orchestrate another hiccup in the money supply.
The simple truth is this: Money can be created in more ways than one. It can also be created without usury. We have the power to destroy this Ponzi model foisted upon us by using the finest document ever devised by the minds of men in 1787. But Rothbard and Rockwell insist that they keep this power in private hands with the ability to collect usury for their money creations.
As always, these ‘experts’ always reject the the only means the people have for redress of grievances – the state. The people need to stop listening to these ‘barking dogs’ and use the state in the way that the Unanimous Declaration and Constitution provided us with to promote the general welfare by means of Article 1 Section 8 Line 5. A national dividend to establish a money supply with a compensated price mechanism would certainly keep a free market economy moving briskly.
Daniel S. Krynicki