Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Fiat Currency

Here's an interesting argument from Web of Debt author Ellen Brown for nationalizing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:


In the article, Brown explains that China gets to buy dollars and Fannie and Freddie mortgages for the price of printing their own fiat currency:
Unlike the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is wholly owned by a consortium of private banks, the People’s Bank of China (PBoC) is actually owned by the Chinese government. When Chinese merchants, awash with U.S. dollars, cash them in for local currency to pay their workers, the PBoC obliges by swapping dollars for government-issued renminbi. The workers get paid in local currency, and the PBoC gets the dollars for the cost of printing the renminbi. The PBoC then uses the dollars to buy either U.S. interest-bearing bonds or Fannie and Freddie securities, which have conveniently opened up U.S. real estate to foreign investment. In effect, American citizens are paying a foreign government to turn U.S. debt into money, using currency the foreign government issued by fiat (Latin for “let it be” or “so be it” – money simply ordered into existence by the sovereign).

Congress has just passed legislation that will give $800 billion to two private companies (Fannie and Freddie) because these two entities are too important to be allowed to fail. Brown starts her final paragraph with, "As for Fannie and Freddie, they are too big to fail; but they aren’t too big to be nationalized. If we the people are paying the bills, we should get the stock."

I spoke with Ellen Brown in episode 102 of the C-Realm Podcast.


( 2 comments — Leave a comment )
Aug. 12th, 2008 07:37 am (UTC)
Aug. 12th, 2008 09:04 pm (UTC)
The Solution is the Problem
I basically agree with Mish in the piece you linked to. Unfortunately, he's all to right in the following:

The only cure for an artificial boom is time and price, in conjunction with sound economic policies.
Changes that lead to real healing will increase pain in the short-term. If an action doesn't reduce pain in the short term then whoever instituted the change will pay for it in the next election cycle. So any elected official who's looking out for number 1 (which is to say any of them who win re-election and retain their place at the table) will initiate and/or support short-term "fixes" that push the inevitable financial reckoning out a bit further into the future (thereby increasing its eventual severity).

Until the electorate understands how we came to this situation, any genuine solution will constitute career suicide for the public official who dares call a spade a spade. If the electorate understood economic cause and effect this world would be transformed beyond recognition.
( 2 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2017


Page Summary

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Ideacodes