Framing Platinum Coin Seigniorage: A Working Document

By Joe Firestone

Jack Foster proposed a framing document for High Value Platinum Coin Seigniorage, in a recent comment he made on one of my posts. In response, I posted a six-part blog series to accommodate readers who prefer the blog format.

Some, however, will want to read or reference a single framing document, rather than six separate posts, and I prefer it in that form myself because it facilitates seeing the whole picture provided by the many and diverse objections to PCS and HVPCS. So I’ve provided one here. I think the full picture provided by the many objections is that of opposition grounded in a fierce unwillingness to change familiar ways of performing Federal deficit spending requiring debt issuance, even though many of those offering objections know very well that the Government is perfectly capable of creating its own high-powered money without selling debt instruments, and even know that all money creation in our financial system is ultimately, if most often indirectly, based on the constitutional authority of the Congress, and its delegation of that authority to other parties.

What can one say about this except that it is mere conservatism and grounded in fear of the unknown at best, or worse, grounded in a desire to continue to benefit from the financial system in one’s own, rather than the public interest? I’m not saying that conservatism is never rational, or that it is unjustified in all cases. But I think my evaluation in the series, and the full framing document indicates that many, and perhaps all of the objections that have been offered to HVPCS reflect a transparent bias to preserve the present system and are relatively easy to turn aside, because they are a stretch reflecting the bias of the people offering the objections.

In any event, that’s my view of the matter, and I leave it to others to read the framing document and to evaluate for themselves, whether the pattern I’m drawing out of the objections makes sense to them. In doing that I hope others will join me in continuing to gather objections to HVPCS I haven’t covered here, and to record these in comments, so that the document may be kept up to date and may become the primary reference for objections and replies to HVPCS. Let’s try to transform this into a crowd-sourced document, so that it becomes a true community document. I’ll be looking forward to your comments and your contributions!

(Cross-posted from Correntewire.)

9 Responses to Framing Platinum Coin Seigniorage: A Working Document

  1. Joe, You might consider pointing out that we actually have a mixed system by intent. In other contexts described as Bastard Keynesianism. This takes away the fear of something new, except as a form of purely inertial guidance. The “change” of the Nixon “Shock” was merely an adjustment of the basis for corporatist conformity. By the dual or duplicitous nature of the existing lack of standards, even to the level of functionality and democracy. The privatized franchise of the FRNs over the USNs is one example of macro-economic usurpation. The crude measure of “success” by inertial guidance is again the proverbial bus absent an apparent driver, though the consistency of priorities remain. Even the gold focused libertarians and fellow travelers lack consistency of principle, other than a social form of libertarianism covertly replacing the individual “good” for a commons based principle. This too brings to mind the inherent commons level functionality of FF/MMT. This seems toward a debunking of ideology as much as anything other additional objective. The posited fictions of neo-classical, re stated as the neo-liberal agenda, are themselves inconsistent with the actual practice, even though posited based upon a presumed functionality. And then there is the diminishing returns of even engaging the baseline irrationality of validation by ideology. This whole exercise seems useful though somewhat of a back door validation of MMT/FF, which is NOT to say that it is pointless at all. At a certain level it is directed not to those already subscribed to MMT/FF, but to the general public. Because of this dynamic a condensed version of the history and argumentation for the PCS/HVPC is a likely piece of functionality. Thanks for your persistence.

    • post hoc for the linear programming of this blogging utility. drat

    • Thanks for the multi-layered comment, Tadit!

    • Anyway you could put that in English?

      • Ok, What I am referring to is that the neo-classical ideology, or in Bill Black’s words “theology,” which posits both money and banking to be neutral, actually operates according to the interests of the private banking sector. In certain context it produces debt free fiat currency units when it serves that agenda and then it acts to restrict the issuance of debt free money when it does not serves its interests. The term “bastard Keynesianism was coined by a colleague of J.M. Keynes, Joan Robinson. What she was describing was a perversion Keynes’s later work and advocacy. It has been used to describe the use of so called defense funding as a bottomless fiscal priority and social infrastructure asserted as inflationary unless it is funded on a debt basis. It places banking as the central beneficiary of the neo-classical economic model, rather than actually any reasonable definition of public good. Generally it is described as “conservatism,” instead of more aptly as “duplicitous.” At one time it was applied primarily during a real military conflict, until post Bretton Woods, when warfare and defense priorities took on a ongoing constancy, and the social side of the public good required a debt based fiscal treatment. The functionality of MMT/FF is democratic at its core, not corporate serving when when it is conveniently not at odds with the interests of the banking sector. This dual treatment of fiscal priorities exposes that we are clearly divided in the application fiat debt free money credits when it produces high levels of profit for corporate interests. The so called “National Debt,” which is more accurately described as as the “net national net contribution” should be parsed into detailing also various corporate subsidies and other corporate entitlements. That entitlements such as social security, national healthcare, and physical infrastructure should be only financed by a debt based process to maximize profits to the banking sector. We already have a post-Keynesian institutional structure, except it has a split personality, and the public is cast as serving the corporate “good,” and the public good as including the public is beggared consistently.

        • Let’s take this a step further the US Postal System has been a target for privatization for a very long time. Recently, there was a complaint by the US Postal Service management about the the US Treasury Department not paying postage on the Soc. Security .checks it sends out. Behind this is the assumption that the US Postal Service has to operate upon the funds it accrues from postal fees and postage. Beyond long evident problems with the management of the US Postal Service, any such limitations upon the US Postal Service is a political choice, and not based upon either the necessity of a well functioning postal service or the actual fiscal capacities of the current fiat currency standard, thanks to Pres. Nixon’s executive order to effectively take the world off of the gold standard. This is economic double speak for the sake of privatization of public infrastructure. Further, as a supposed financial measure the US Postal Service intends to cut saturday service as part of a phony demonstration of fiscal prudence. Complete fraud relative to the actual capacities of fiat, debt free monetary principles. The proposal for the privatization of the postal system is not far behind, perhaps timed to complement the privatization of social security for the benefit of financial fraud. This is shadow puppet politics and “economics.”

  2. Make a board game.

    • Why not instead a community currency/exchange model based upon the UMKC “Buckaroos” and the “Denison Volunteer Dollars.// aka MMT/FF. The educational value in the way of fiscal and monetary/economic literacy, has the potential. Reproducing the original version of what became Parker Brother’s “Monopoly” was named “The Landlord’s Game.” It basically simulated the rent and commons issues of the economics of Henry George, which I believe is consistent with the institutionalist approach to economics.

  3. Thanks Tadit…scary times