BGE / Unconditional Income / Bedingungsloses Grundeinkommen

develop a positive vision of the future!

after the “great Trump induced divide” the USA need to reform it’s system, but does it need a revolution?

the problem with revolutions often is:

  1. what is for sure: people are angry for a reason (vote does not feel counted, reps in Washington “too far away” = lost connection to the problems of Jill & Joe, many small business had to close down & loads of lives and jobs lost)
    1. the anger at the current system is for real and it “the negative” to stay
  2. what about the positive? what shall be after the revolution? (the far harder question)
    1. define what shall be, before removal of status quo, the “anything is better than that” approach is Hitler-kind-of-dangerous (power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely) there is good reason to divide sate powers into:
      1. legislative (laws) (the gov)
      2. judiciary (judges)
      3. executive (police & military, no, not the president and “executive orders” (this is somewhat defined different in the US and EU))

this gov-by-finance system is broken & unsustainable, anyone agrees on that, how to fix it?

some suggestions: (imho small but very important changes that can have great effect)

  • how to fight corruption: with great power comes great responsibility
    • thus: MAXIMUM transparency for the powerful
      • people have to know what politicians are doing
      • every single dollar they or their family earns need to be transparent to the public
    • privacy for the weak:
      • let’s say that 99% of the population are neither criminals nor terrorists
  • how to fight Corona-crisis induced unemployment:
    • state paid jobs!
    • it was done in the US before and it ain’t socialism! it just tries to fix a broken (private ownership zero responsibility) system and help people step back from violence and revolution. all central bankers should agree on that.
    • after the great depression of 1929 massive amounts of people become unemployed (it was not their fault, rather the system’s fault)
      • the state paid group A to dig holes in the morning
      • the state paid group B to fill the holes again in the evening
      • just this time: maybe the US gov can think of more useful jobs
      • Hoover established the Reconstruction Finance Corporation (RFC) to make emergency loans to businesses in danger of default. At first the RFC lent money only to banks, railroads, and certain agricultural organizations, but the scope of its operations was later expanded, and it proved to be an effective tool for stabilizing business and industry” (source January 22, 1932) (unfortunately the RFC was canceled in 1957, because it was deemed not needed anymore, well guess what, would have been better to keep it in place, more crisis were to come, state-owned European banks for reconstruction created after WW2  LUCKILY STILL EXISTS and they are needed very much to counter all the instabilities of private & reckless banking system, a new RFC would also be essential for financing a desperately needed US “Green New Deal”)

David Graeber is an Intelligent human being – an activist – active in occupy wallstreet and so on.

His book – debt the first 5000 years – is a scientific very detailed 534 pages book – but what he misses – what is wrong with debt?

let me tell you what is wrong – with the interest on debt monetary system:

repaying debt is not so easy, not only because of the interest-on-interest effect but also – the money to pay the interest – IS NEVER CREATED in the first place – the game is rigged. (see another great book: Bernard Lietaer “rethinking money”)

Here comes the (simplified but still true) example:

imagine a world where there is only one bank and two shoe companies:

  • company A shoes
  • company B shoes

Bank X is given a loan from the central bank of $100.000 in cash (the central bank is the only bank allowed to issue cash).

The $100.000 Bank X keeps as reserves (10% in reality this would be only 1%).

This allows Bank X to lend out 100% of the $100.000 meaning $1.000.000 or one million in “book money” (money that only exists in the books or in computers).

So Bank X can gives company A and company B a loan of $450.000 to start their business and wants every year a modest rate of 3% interest.

The problem: the 3% interest ($13.500 in the first year) ARE NEVER GENERATED and thus one of the loans HAS to fail.

So after the first year – already $27.000 of interest would need to be paid to Bank X – but because this money was never created in the first place it can not be paid unless…

Company A needs to “extract” money/steal from company B in order to repay their debt or face bankruptcy.

Eventually one of the companies will have to close down – people lose their jobs – and the other company then has a monopoly on shoes – the prices for shoes skyrocket X-D

Because the interest-money is never created, it is not in the game, one of the competitors has to fail so the other competitor can repay the loan.

This is evil.

It is evil because sets people against each other in very very aggressive and evil way and calls it “normal”.

This will create a society of thieves and robbers and this is exactly what we have today.

did you know the “privatization” comes from the the latin word “privare” which literately means to steal? (deprive, rob)

The Goldman Sachs saying: “it is not enough that you win – others have to lose”

is not exactly correctly, more correct would be:

“in order to win – others will have to lose”

because those are the (current rules) of this catastrophic debt based game.

Here is another piece of wisdom: NEVER lend money to family or friends or you will lose both.

instead: if a friend or family member is in need ask them what they need and buy it for them. (help with material not with money directly)

or: give the money as a gift.

never the less Graeber keep up the good work.

Lietaer has unfortunately passed away.

what does a bank produce? – loans -if a bank does not produce loans – it is essentially defect and may as well be closed

is unconditional basic income aka “free money” for the masses good or bad?

what would be much more important than monetary gifts (see unemployed people in eastern Germany even when given “free money” are unsatisfied because they have no work/no meaning/purpose in life.

What would be important to put in requirements and regulations that say banks must lend 90% of their newly digitally self-generated money and FED/ECB cash 0% (which is essential also “free money” (interest rate = the costs of money/currently: no costs))  to entrepreneurs and self-employed people and people with ideas that want to become entrepreneurs

currently it works like this:

a private bank borrows 1bn Cash from FED or ECB
for 0% or almost 0% and instead of phoning up and investing in ads “have an idea? here is your loan” providing the economy and innovative people with cheap money to turn ideas into reality and create jobs – it is – at least in the EU area largely put back into an ECB accounts even when that means paying “parking fees”.

https://www.merkur.de/wirtschaft/ezb-warum-banken-strafzins-zahlen-6709249.html

“but have to pay ample penalty interest due to high liquidity surpluses”

Wirtschaftsminister kritisiert Banken für zögerliche Kreditvergabe

“they (the banks) said,” We don’t give you credit, because we don’t know how long you can’t produce, how long the corona crisis will last.“

money that is not put to work / does not create jobs is a defective monetary system and needs to be fixed or risk major unrest.

a unconditional basic income (UBI) makes sense at this point in time / in this situation that banks fail at bringing “money to the (real) economy” / banks do not want to bring money into working hands thus the state and the customer must do it.

It would be the best economic program ever.

everyone would get 1000USD or 1000€ a month for a limited time – let’s say one year – then check how the economy performed.

and repeat or stop – but at least try.

then, of course, there is the question of sustainability

of course, it would be great to link a UBI directly with requirements for more sustainability such as:

  • electricity providers must be changed if not 100% of energy comes from renewable sources

there are two reasons why UBI might be prevented:

  1. the banks are convinced, that printing money for themselves is “fine” while printing money for “jill and joe” would lead to Inflation (does not make sense to me)
  2. why is the tax system so complicated? because it creates senseless jobs / so it is simply a job creation measures / a lot of administrative jobs could go away if UBI replaces all the complicated social programs and maybe even pension