Greenspan and Stagflation

["John Gelles" <johng@xxxxxxxxxx>]

    Two messages yesterday put our need for money
    reform into focus.

    Greenspan worried that inflation may follow the kind
    of spending all of us at VOW know us necessary.

    James Cumes argues that tight money and tight
    budget compliance by Nixon in '68 gave us stag-
    flation--and we have not really recovered from it
    in more than three decades.

    James also insists that his desire to see Marshall
    Plan spending and better governance in nations
    and world authorities with the financial power to
    end want makes his agenda to convene a world
    conference (to hear the voices of dissent) signi-
    ficantly different than those of  "Davos in NYC",
    "Puerto Allegre" and "Johannesburg".

    I for one don't buy James desire as equivalent
    to a line by line agenda, developed on VOW,
    by more than one man, that will sound like ways
    to change what nations have done in the past
    in favor of doing things that will end want.

    The investments Greenspan does not want are
    those VOW must insist will be made. These
    are government investments in water, housing,
    sewage, medical care, medical research, food,
    democratic institution building, and other items
    of a similar type, expensive as they might be.

    These investments can be made with money
    borrowed or money created outside the lending
    cycle. If made outside that cycle they end the
    thorny issue of taxes--which issue keeps Green-
    span and his supporters in power.

    The only argument against my position is that
    hyperinflation will follow. Yet we know hyper-
    inflation can only follow if money is circulated
    faster than the economic output it represents
    can grow.

    We know further that savings can replace both
    taxes and all the time wasted on looking for profits
    from investments to fund pension plans for
    everyone.

    VOW cannot escape its responsibility to
    think beyond solutions that cannot work.

    We cannot wrest control from the rich and
    vest it in the great middle class unless we
    stand for lower --even none at all -- taxes.

    Lower taxes requires lower interest -- and
    one way to get this is to create sovereign
    money that is not gold and is not owed to
    private parties.

    So VOW must embrace debtless taxless
    money or invesnt something similar but more
    likely to gain acceptance by voters.

    While we're at it, we will note that such
    DT money ought to be indexed to hold value
    so that people will not spend what they earn
    ahead of the time it takes to produce its value
    in things to buy. Hence DTIM.

    Now the fact that many people reject these
    notions is no reason for not considering them.

    They are the heart and soul of VOW. You
    cannot end want except with the things that
    money can buy.  So we must concentrate on
    systems to produce these things.

    Money systems are one way. VOW is so far
    dedicated to money systems not to direct labor
    systems like "Habitat for Humanity" (a worthy
    enterprize).

    Money systems to end want are what our
    agenda is all about. Conferences to end want
    are more than we can afford and have in the
    past year proved to be fairly weak tea.

        John Gelles