Re: [A-List] New economy bull: productivity miracle explained

["Anne Williamson" <annewilliamson@xxxxxxx>]

Michael writes:

The value of the dollar (and pounds sterling) depend in good part upon the
perceived willingness of the US and British states to resort to the military
option when advancing or protecting perceived interests.

I agree 1000%, dollars and/or soldiers, bribes and/or bombs - US foreign
policy
in a nutshell. ("A carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs," said Bushkin to the
Taliban.)
But how do you pay those soldiers and purchase their equipment
and transport them without a money monopoly?  Only by obtaining the approval
of the electorate in that they agree to be taxed for the effort.  The
American people
have not agreed to a "war" effort for decades.  No has one asked them.  No
one
had to ask them, thanks to the "miracle" of the Federal Reserve.  This is
why Congress
can betray our Constitution and finance military adventures without a
Declaration
of War.  The people lost the power of the purse in 1913, and therefore their
ability
to discipline and hold accountable their government and it is they who shall
pay the
greatest price in time.   -A.

----- Original Message -----
From: Keaney Michael <Michael.Keaney@xxxxxx>
To: <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2002 7:09 AM
Subject: RE: [A-List] New economy bull: productivity miracle explained


Anne writes:

The entire world is getting screwed, and fiat
money is the tool that our magnificent states
employ......without fiat, none of this wholesale
destruction would be possible except on a
military - not a financial - basis. -A.


Pat Buchanan

June 26, 2002

Will Bush follow Bill to bailout city?

=====

It's an achievement of sorts that we should be swapping articles by Paul
Foot and Pat Buchanan on the same list, but I won't crow about it too
publicly.

More to the point, the wholesale destruction is being given military
backing, as with the latest moves to legitimate pre-emptive strikes as a
tool of US foreign policy. This is a logical development of the previous
emphasis on "humanitarian intervention" and both complement one another very
well. The value of the dollar (and pounds sterling) depend in good part upon
the perceived willingness of the US and British states to resort to the
military option when advancing or protecting perceived interests. For the
time being at least, the European single currency has no such military
backing.

Michael Keaney