Who is going to pay is one of the most “politically” debilitating questions Americans and their politicians ask.
By RA Monaco
Who will pay for the “Wall,” is a discussion that was certain to resurface. Hopefully, there will be no Wall. Here are some thoughts about our money system and how this all may, in the end, play out for the taxpayer.
Our money system is based upon the ability of profit-seeking institutions to create money as a by-product of often grotesquely irresponsible lending—a system that is at the very best “unstable.” Ordinary tax payers are being forced to suffer in order to save a banking system that has brought them only excess and ruin.
Some would agree this is intolerable—indeed a form of debt slavery.
No industry should have the capacity to inflict economic costs that may have even surpassed a world war!
Our government, yes Barak Obama too, made potentially unlimited new publicly created money available to the banking sector.
My question is: Why were private financial institutions being supported by public money while public institutions were being starved of funds or privatized? Or, how can one arm of the state have run out of money when another arm appeared to have unlimited amounts?
Who is going to pay is one of the most “politically” debilitating questions Americans and their politicians ask--always within a very narrow and limited range of discussion.
Proposals seeking to achieve environmental sustainability, social justice or other progressive policies are rejected by the implication that money is in short supply. Public expenditure is presented as zero sum—somebody has to pay!
Any public expenditure must therefore be at the expense of the individualized taxpayer or private ‘wealth creator’—who is assumed to be reluctant to part with their money. Public expenditure is then politically problematic—it's the curtain our politicians hide behind while serving their financial supporters.
The outpouring of new money to meet the financial crisis did not have a ‘bottom line.’ How does the banking sector trigger such generosity when the poor and vulnerable and the planet do not?
While people were and are subject to austerity, the financial sector got their bonus culture rolling again. Good journalists and a critical society should be pressing every politician—particularly Barak Obama—on this question!
How has this power been made available to the banks and not to the people? Rather than being grateful for such an extensive public rescue our mainstream economic opinion has turned on the government while austerity was imposed to eliminate the deficits and cut public debt--believe nothing question everything!
--Generously paraphrased from Mary Mellor—Debt or Democracy.