Re: Putting Chartalism In Its Place?

["James R. Olson, jr." <jhavok@xxxxxxxx>]

At 05:05 PM 9/15/03 +0100, Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>
>> From: "Forstater, Mathew" <ForstaterM@xxxxxxxx>
>> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2003 14:41:40 -0500
>> To: rosserjb@xxxxxxx, William F Hummel <wfhummel@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Cc: pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: Re: Putting Chartalism In Its Place?
>> payment in settlement of taxes, taxpayers will be willing to accept this
>> means of payment because they can use it to pay taxes.  Everyone else
>> will then be willing to accept it because they can use it to buy things
>> from the taxpayers, or to pay debts to them, or to make payments to
>> others who have to make payments to the taxpayers, and so on."  (p. 693)
>>
>
>
>This implies that if I don't pay taxes to a particular authority,
>I will never accept that authority's currency.

You do not need to pay taxes to value a currency, you merely need some
access, even if it is indirect, to people who do pay taxes and will value
the currency for that reason.

Can you name a currency which is not used to pay taxes, and yet retains
value?
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

  Warning!  This communication monitored by the Federal Office of Total
  Information   Awareness.  All statements deemed disloyal or dangerous
  will be logged for appropriate action.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx