Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

California Doesn't Need to Borrow Billions from Washington -- It Can Create Its Own Money

By Ellen Brown, AlterNet. Posted May 27, 2009.


Gov. Schwarzenegger thinks CA can only get credit from DC, but there's another way of doing it that the prosperous state of North Dakota figured out.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

"I understand that these cuts are very painful and they affect real lives. This is the harsh reality and the reality that we face. Sacramento is not Washington -- we cannot print our own money. We can only spend what we have."

- Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger quoted in Time, May 22, 2009

Christmas comes early, Governor. You can print your own money. Fiscally solvent North Dakota is doing it...and so can California. Now!

In a May 22 article in Time titled "Billions in the Red: Fiscal Reckoning in CA," Juliet Williams reports that since California voters have now vetoed higher taxes and further state government borrowing, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has indicated that he intends to close the budget gap almost entirely through drastic spending cuts. The cutbacks could include laying off thousands of state workers and teachers, ending the state's main welfare program for the poor, eliminating health coverage for about 1.5 million poor children, halting cash grants for about 77,000 college students, slashing money for state parks, and releasing thousands of prisoners before their sentences are finished. Schwarzenegger bemoaned the fact that the state could not print its own money but said it could only spend what it had.

But the state can create its own money. After all, banks do this every day. Certified, card-carrying bankers are allowed to do something nobody else can do: they can create "credit" with accounting entries on their books. As the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas explains on its website:

Banks actually create money when they lend it. Here's how it works: Most of a bank's loans are made to its own customers and are deposited in their checking accounts. Because the loan becomes a new deposit, just like a paycheck does, the bank...holds a small percentage of that new amount in reserve and again lends the remainder to someone else, repeating the money-creation process many times.

President Obama has also acknowledged that banks create money, through what he calls the "multiplier effect." In a speech at Georgetown University on April 14, he said:

[A]lthough there are a lot of Americans who understandably think that government money would be better spent going directly to families and businesses instead of banks -- "where's our bailout?" they ask -- the truth is that a dollar of capital in a bank can actually result in eight or ten dollars of loans to families and businesses, a multiplier effect that can ultimately lead to a faster pace of economic growth.

Money in a government-owned bank could give us the best of both worlds. We could have all the credit-generating advantages of private banks, without the baggage cluttering up the books of the Wall Street giants, including bad derivatives bets, unmarketable collateralized debt obligations, mark to market accounting issues, oversized CEO salaries and bonuses, and shareholders expecting a sizeable cut of the profits. A state could deposit its vast revenues in its own state-owned bank and proceed to fan them into eight to 10 times their face value in loans. Not only would it have its own credit machine, but it would control the loan terms. The state could lend at ½% interest to itself and to municipal governments, rolling the loans over as needed until the revenues had been generated to pay them off. According to Professor Margrit Kennedy in her 1995 book Interest and Inflation-free Money, interest composes, on average, fully half the cost of every public project. Cutting costs by 50% could make currently-unsustainable projects such as low-cost housing, alternative energy development, and infrastructure construction not only sustainable but actually profitable for the government.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: schwarzenegger, california, credit, money, printing, state bank

Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and "the money trust."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
A question Ellen
Posted by: we_need_Abe on May 27, 2009 6:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why do we not hear of the North Dakota approach in the mainstream media? I've known about what they're doing for more than a year now, your book has sold alot of copies (can you give me an updated estimated?) yet even so-called progressive shows like Bill Maher's Real Time don't talk about it. What gives?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Media for sale Posted by: chrysalis124812
Painting a target
Posted by: luther6 on May 27, 2009 6:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Well now you've done it. All that money in a bank in North Dakota? Wall Street is now zeroing in. And Geithner and Obama will help them (Wall Street, I mean of course, not the people of North Dakota.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What an Incredibly Bad Idea
Posted by: KerriKnox,RN on May 27, 2009 6:59 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't believe that this is being proposed as a GOOD idea. Lets see, if a government IS their own bank and lends money to themselves, then you now OWE money to yourself that you have to pay interest on where you DIDN'T have interest before. And we all know how well we pay back debt to ourselves.

And, the idea of ANY person or agency 'becoming a bank' in order to 'create' money because they are now bankrupt, but have a steady stream of income and don't want to become more fiscally responsible will NOT make one more prosperous.


Remember the old adage of "Just because you can doesn't mean that you should."


Kerri Knox, RN
http://www.easy-immune-health.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What an Incredibly Bad Idea Posted by: leafsong1
» Was this tongue-in-cheek? Posted by: SpiderWoman
» RE: Was this tongue-in-cheek? Posted by: leafsong1
Creating money out of thin air is a terrible and stupid idea.
Posted by: rafaeltoral on May 27, 2009 7:21 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The idea that you can just print more money whenever you need it is so stupid even a toddler would call you a moron.

Look at the terrible disaster that is our monetary system today. It is partly because banks(including the federal reserve) have been printing money without creating anything of value to back the money created.

When you print money without creating value you are devaluing the money already in circulation. This leads to inflation. In essence you are stealing money from anyone who holds dollars.

See money is just paper. It used to be backed by gold. You could take your dollar bill to the bank and exchange it for a dollar worth of gold.

Money has to have something of value behind it to be truly be worth anything.

I dont have the time or power of pen to explain all of this to you. There are loads and loads of information on the internet.

To sum it up our current monetary system is a total and absolute scam.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Fiat money can work Posted by: leafsong1
» Call a spade a spade Posted by: truthlover
I'm not very smart about such things...
Posted by: clvngodess on May 27, 2009 7:24 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... However, this proposal smells of more fiat money. And isn't that exactly how all of us got into the bankster mess we are already in?

Besides, since I live in CA and voted against any more taxes (they're wiping some of us out), there are better solutions. The state and it's spending should be audited for where the hemorrhages actually are, then those hemorrhages must be stopped. The governator and his team are acting like babies, crying because the people told them "No. No more bleeding of our turnip. Ain't no blood there." So now they have to actually think and come up with real solutions. In the meantime, all this whining about cuts and job losses is merely a political temper tantrum. I dare say the same thing holds for Los Angeles, too. Find the oversight, find where the moolah is being mismanaged and fix the real problems. Then, get rid of obsolete programs or things that are not working.

But they don't get this, do they?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A great idea BUT...
Posted by: fearn on May 27, 2009 7:39 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
North Dakota has its own bank because North Dakota is small. The bankster gangs would not allow 40 million Californians to do the same thing. Just think, letting billions revert to the people of California instead of the big banks, preposterous! Who do you think runs America? The citizens or the corporations?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» billions of what? paper? Posted by: rafaeltoral
» RE: billions of what? paper? Posted by: mollymorph
I'm suspicious.
Posted by: tjg1984 on May 27, 2009 8:39 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I don't know for sure, but I'm guessing that the Bank of North Dakota thing works because it was started at a time when the state didn't have huge budget deficits, and because there are many years when that state does not spend itself into a deficit.

To think that the government of California can spend itself into a hole until nobody wants to lend it money anymore, and then set up its own bank for the purpose of lending itself money, is silly.

Perhaps this proposal could be considered again once California has drastically cut its spending, but not before.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Amazing. No Sarcasm, no humor--She's actually serious
Posted by: leafsong1 on May 27, 2009 9:05 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You deserve the day's cluelessness award, lady. What do you think is at the root of the current global financial crisis? Financial giants printing their own fiat money in the form of derivatives. Why has the price level gone through the roof in the last thirty years? The Federal government has been printing money in the form of bonds for the last thirty years. The Federal Reserve bank helps out by printing more money by borrowing against it's assets, which consist mostly of IOU's from the government. The entire system is poised to burst into flames, and you want us to dump more fuel on it? We're hurtlinig towards a cliff, and you want more pressure on the accelerator? You do realize that this is pretty much the same sort of solution as privatizing Social Security, don't you? You want us to pump up the bubble to keep it from bursting. Seriously, get a clue.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» thank you!!!! Posted by: rafaeltoral
RISDIC
Posted by: PaulK on May 27, 2009 9:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
RISDIC was the Rhode Island Share and Deposit Indemnity Corporation. It insured bank deposits at Rhode Island credit unions.

One banker in particular, Joe Mollicone, took lots of money and ran. He came back after a long time spending out the money, and served a good stretch in the state Hilton. However, quite a few credit unions had bad loans and they all collapsed. RISDIC failed too. It took a number of perfectly sound credit unions down with it. Everyone's money was frozen, and most depositors took a "haircut" in the credit union liquidations. No, this didn't happen in a large recession, it happened in 1991, in normal times.

Any state (or the feds) can get into banking. The real question is, how corrupt is the state legislature, and can the state bank be effectively insulated from government corruption? With an excellent insulation system, I'd say go ahead, create a state bank. With a rotten insulation system, I'd say forget it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Banking is OK if bankers are honest and conservative
Posted by: socrates2 on May 27, 2009 10:34 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The nay-sayers at first blush appear to be correct. However, they operate under too many assumptions about fiat/paper money and the creation of loans/credit, and that's where the problem begins.
Currency is a man-made tool. It's medium of exchange. I want to buy your corn. You want to buy my tires. Joe there wants to sell his tomatoes and Sarah wants to sell her embroider and buy tires. What do we do? Barter? Hardly.
As the Italians did a few centuries ago, we circulate paper _IOU's_ that can be exchanged for gold/silver/seashells, etc., at a moment's notice. These IOU's signify the rare commodity stored in someone's basement/safe.
I exchange the IOU's (a paper commodity) for your _commodity_ (tires, tomatoes, embroidery, etc.).
The brilliance of this plan is that the banker--knowing the IOU's are _circulating_ as an independent commodity of exchange and won't be exchanged for the rare commodity in his safe--prints more IOU's than there is commodity to back them up.
This is the modern Fractional Banking System.
ten (10) IOU's _circulate_ for every legitimately-backed one.
Now the credit part:
To top it off, when one borrows money from a creditor/bank, the bank opens a deposit account with fictional IOU's and issues a check. These fictional IOU's are backed by either collateral (real estate/cars/toasters/more IOU's) or one's good credit (i.e future earnings).
As one pays the bank with interest, the IOU's diminish/"vanish" and the deposit account eventually closes. This is moderately inflationary. Where there were once, say 10 dollars, with interest there are now 11.
The problems begin when one's IOU's/interest-earning credit is _sold_ by the bank because the bank needs cash/liquidity now.
Investors like these interest-earning IOU's and buy them up. So these IOU's become a commodity to be sold _for a profit_ by the banks. Recall, so far most of these IOU's have a guarantee of payment because the debtor does not want to lose his _collateral_.
Here's where greed enters the picture. Banks begin lending money (actually they create a credit/deposit account) in exchange for an IOU _secured by worthless collateral_.
Banks know they can sell these IOU's for a profit. In their eyes the IOU becomes the "investors's problem."
Credit rating agencies _for a fee_ go along with the game and give these bank IOU's low-risk rating. As a result trusting investors buy up these interest-bearing IOU's ignorant that little or no security backs the IOU.
There is your paper house of cards perpetrated by Wall Street. (Wall street traders "package" these worthless IOU'S for a commission.)
Money--as credit--is created by banks. And it is worthless money, equivalent to counterfeit money because _nothing of value_ backs this money/commodity.
At least when Uncle Sam prints money based on IOU's to the _very private_ Federal Reserve you and I _guarantee this money's value_ with the sweat of our brows under our quasi-slavery status of the 16th Amendment. If we don't pay taxes to pay off interest on the loan from the Fed, we go to Federal Prison. Ask Al Capone and Wesley Snipes.
It's been fiat money since 1913/14.
And if federal law does not prohibit California from issuing its own medium of exchange currency/commodity, then Arnie and the State should go for it. This California currency will be backed by the threat of prison as well. What better credit is there?
The trick is to limit the creation of worthless credit/money based on inadequate collateral or an individual's inability to repay his loan.
The best part of the plan is that interest on the loans eventually fills the treasury to the point where we won't have to pay income taxes! The state begins to generate money from interest payments on its pefectly legitimate "fiat money." (to be continued)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» aka fractional reserve policy. Posted by: rafaeltoral
North Dakota and good banking principles
Posted by: socrates2 on May 27, 2009 10:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How North Dakota has managed to do it for 90 years is a tribute to good, conservative banking principles and a leadership with integrity.
If this currency/commodity is regulated and monitored, you will have is a modest, predictable inflation. If excess money is "created", you will have runaway inflation. The trick is to have honest bankers who limit credit to the "value" of the collateral commodity. And to beware of bubbles.
The best part is that a state that runs a profit-making bank can eliminate income taxes. What a concept!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Somehow I don't think that more imaginary money is what's needed
Posted by: puf_almighty on May 27, 2009 10:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
to solve the crisis that was caused by people relying on imaginary money.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ellen Brown - interviewed last night on The Jeff Farias Show
Posted by: BlueBerry PickN on May 27, 2009 10:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Jeff Farias Show: Tues.26.May.2009

Hour 2: Charlaine Harris discussing books, Alan Ball's adaptation of her books for HBO's 'True Blood'series, &
...examining societies' treatment of The Dehumanized, through fictional fantasy 'undead' inhumanity's treatment from 'real humans' & their rights.


Charlaine "has been a published novelist for over twenty-five years. A native of the Mississippi Delta, she grew up in the middle of a cotton field. Now she lives in southern Arkansas with her husband, her three children, three dogs, & a duck. The duck stays outside.

In addition to her work as a writer, Charlaine is the past senior warden of St. James Episcopal Church, a board member of Mystery Writers of America, a past board member of Sisters in Crime, a member of the American Crime Writers League, & past president of the Arkansas Mystery Writers Alliance.
http://www.hbo.com/trueblood

Hour 2.5: Ellen Brown - “Web Of Debt” Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In “Web of Debt”, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve & “the money trust.”
This private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back.
Her earlier books focused on the pharmaceutical cartel that gets its power from “the money trust.” Her eleven books include “Forbidden Medicine”, “Nature’s Pharmacy” (co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker), and “The Key to Ultimate Health” (co-authored with Dr. Richard Hansen). Her websites are:
http://www.webofdebt.com
http://www.ellenbrown.com

Hour 3: Edward Hasbrouck, "The Practical Nomad" returns! - discussing American imposition of travel restrictions & surveillance as well as “Computers, Freedom, and Privacy”
I’ve been getting a flood of press releases from travel companies with their predictions for whether people or not people will still be travelling this summer in spite of the economic crisis. I’m not sure if they are trying to persuade potential investors to lend them (more) money to fund their (continuing) losses, persuade themselves that there’s light at the end of the tunnel, or persuade the public not to worry about money, and to take an expensive vacation, because “everyone else is doing it”
Should you believe these press releases? Should you care? Most of the propaganda about, “People are still travelling, and we expect a busy summer,” is wishful thinking on the part of the travel industry
Edward is testifying this week in Sacramento against a harebrained scheme to withhold drivers' licenses & state ID cards if a DMV contractor’s facial recognition robot mistakes your photo for that of anyone else in the state (& thus prevent you from flying or traveling by Amtrak unless you have a passport)
Your freedoms will be 'given' if you're a privately certified American.


The Jeff Farias Show: streams FREE & LIVE Mon-Fri, 6-9pmEDT

FREE podcast

"We, two, form a Multitude" ~ Ovid.
"Violence can only be concealed by a Lie, & the Lie can only be maintained by Violence." ... "Any man, who has once proclaimed Violence as his Method, is inevitably forced to take the Lie as his Principle" – Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities." - Voltaire.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The good old days
Posted by: linecrosser on May 27, 2009 11:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What ND did was extremely smart. They more or less out lawed the FEDERAL RESERVE shortly after it was created. Before the federal reserve system was created their wasn't a need for income taxes because when the government needed money they would print it. With the government in charge of it's own money there weren't any over paid CEOs sucking profits away from the public. I'm being vague because of time and space and when I think too much of the biggest theft in history my blood pressure goes crazy. The economy is easy to understand if you start your education about it from the FEDERAL RESERVE creation. To get to a free America you have to do away with the unnecessary, criminal FEDERAL RESERVE. What is even more depressing is that there or to post about the money system and it's problems and solutions, between the two post there is less than 50 comments. One post about gay marriage gets almost 70. Maybe that's part of the problem to much interest in what going on in the bedroom by the government and not enough attention to what's been going on in mine and your wallets.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Maybe it's time to start from scratch
Posted by: willymack on May 27, 2009 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And lose the bank crooks in the process. I don't pretend to know where to start on this, but SOMETHING other than what we've been handed by criminals would be better than what we have now. Maybe we can begin with a true national bank replacing the hopelessly corrupt "fed". This new national bank would operate on a NON-PROFIT basis, charge minimal interest rates on loans and mortgages, and closely resemble credit unions. NO business loans should EVER take place. Commercial banks wouldn't be outlawed, and could serve that purpose. The rules and regulations for the national bank would be the same in every state and territory, and no interference or modifications to them would be tolerated. Maybe this is a half-assed idea, maybe not. What would it hurt to try it on a limited basis for a limited time to see how it works, and if it does, make it permanent?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Addendum to myself ... Posted by: mollymorph
The fascinating history of the Non-Partisan League
Posted by: zooeyhall on May 27, 2009 1:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although I live in Nebraska (where I am a farmer), I have an afinity for North Dakota. And it is so good to read an article like this on something successful in the midwest.

Furthermore, I would urge Alternet's readers to dig further into the fascinating "history behind the history" of this story and check out something called the "Non-Partisan League". A political movement of farmer's in the 20's and 30's that was largely composed of Scandinavian immigrants. As it is today, the Swedes in particular were strong believers in that dreaded Socialism and worked to have a public-owned bank and grain elevators in the state.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT COULD DO THE SAME THING...
Posted by: Dennis St. John on May 27, 2009 3:43 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...and be debt free within a year. Many other governments have done this successfully for decades or centuries. Lincoln created the "green backs" to finance the Civil War. The Federal Reserve is nothing but a scam to put public money in private hands. It is a system of the banking industry, by the banking industry, and for the banking industry.

The federal government could make loans interest free to individuals and businesses.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You're forgetting that Arnold is a Republican
Posted by: d.stefano on May 27, 2009 7:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
People can fall on hard times without the help of the government pushing them down.
I lost all my family, my partner died, even my cat died. I found myself homeless at 58 years old. Having been a typical middle class woman, from a 2 parent family, a great education, etc., stuff still can happen.
I ended up with an abundance of handicaps, including cancer.
After miles of red tape and determination, I finally got government housing, SSI, and Medi-Cal. I'm white and was born in Hollywood, CA.
A huge extended family certainly put in their fair share of taxes over the years, myself included, I feel I should have the benefits now that we all paid dearly for.
It's not a good thing to get $914/mo to live on. But it can get you by with a really strict budget and no entertainment or extras.
ARNIE thought it was a good idea to hit us with a $37/month deduction. If you can't screw over the poor, who can you screw over?
My guestimate is that this brings in about $90 million a year, probably more. A drop in the bucket to help our economy, but a drastic cut in income for people already living under the povery level.
He's rich, why should he care?

Besides cancer, I've had a heart attack and have pumonary disease (no I don't smoke). He's taking adults and some children off of Medi-Cal and cutting all dental.
This will be a serious disaster. I don't want to die a slow painful death because our leaders don't care about anything but their extravagant lifestyles.

I don't mind all the illegals here. If we REALLY didn't want them here, they wouldn't be here. But don't blame them. They didn't ask to go in front of me in line for social services, talk to the government about that.
How much revenue could be raised if all public buildings and services didn't offer free interpreters in 23 languages.

That's the first place I'd start slicing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Before dismissing this idea, understand how banks work
Posted by: macrumpton on May 28, 2009 6:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This film does a nice job of explaining that:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2550156453790090544

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

U.S. Taxpayers Should Not Be A Pawnshop to Guarantee California Debt
Posted by: Ross Wolf on May 28, 2009 2:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In effect California wants the U.S. Government to indirectly beg China for financial assistance, so the U.S. can guarantee California bonds. China currently holds most of all U.S Debt. It is unlikely U.S. Government could guarantee California bonds without first getting permission from China, America’s number one creditor.

If U.S. Government guarantees California’s bonds for the world’s eighth largest economy, it is foreseeable China could reconsider the risks of future loans to the U.S.; reconsider whether to renew a trillion in outstanding U.S. debt and at the least raise its interest rate charged U.S. Taxpayers via U.S. Government borrowing. Any increase in China’s interest rate charged U.S. Government’s could be devastating to the U.S. annual budget, depleting funds needed for Americans.

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Democratic lawmakers say they are asking for help from the U.S. Government only until the California economy turns around. But if California’s economy does not turn around, U.S. Taxpayers will be even more chained to China and to guaranteeing worthless California bonds.

Yesterday there were two conflicting TV news reports. The first, “The Recession is close to ending”, the second, “ Expect gasoline to go to four or five dollars a gallon.” Obviously if gasoline hits four or five dollars a gallon, many workers in CA and America could not afford to drive to work or buy as many store products or services. Much of America would not recover from the recession.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oh, my, GOD!
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on May 29, 2009 5:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I knew we were in a lot of trouble - I first predicted what's happening now in the seventies (and I not only said it in a speech, I published it) - but this is astonishing.

If they read this, I imagine a lot of people who read heard me explain how an economy works (the Islanders who grew bananas analogy) - one night on KOIA San Antonio are having a rueful laugh.

Damn, but we are spastic mentally, utterly deranged! Look up Ponzi Scheme, then think about it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

An interesting idea
Posted by: Dianne Walter on May 30, 2009 11:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I appreciated several of the thoughtful comments on this article. I am not a financial expert but it sounds like an interesting idea for a State like California to deposit its money into its own bank. Using that money as collateral, the State then loans money to itself for its various programs, a bit like a redevelopment agency sells bonds for specific projects, generating debt with the tax increment as the collateral to pay back the bonded debt. The devil would be in the details of course. We have seen how shrewd, money savvy operators can twist a system to benefit and enrich themselves at the expense of the rest of us. What oversight would there be to ensure that prudent fiscal practices were followed? I am sure there are multitudes of problems that would need to be worked out but when the alternative is for California to either go bankrupt and/or destroy our educational and social service systems I think it is worth thinking about by smart people who understand these things.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Calif. INDEPENDENCE + Calif. NATIONAL Bank = Calif. Solvency
Posted by: zayantemike on Jun 1, 2009 8:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
North Dakota, with its State-owned bank AND State-owned Grain Elevator and Milling operation, is certainly onto the right idea. The only REAL glue holding this motley collection of states together the tattered 'Merican Dollar and the glue is quickly starting to come unstuck. California is a totally viable entity in its own right and stands (or totters these days) among the planet's ten largest economies. California now sends billions more in tax revenues to Washington (which is then passed-through to California-hating Red States) than it receives in return. Put very simply,the billions of dollars inthis tax grab by Washington, left in California, would put California on solid fiscal ground over-night. Result? Over 1.5 million children would not face losing health insurance, old and disabled Californians would not face crushing poverty, hunger, and isolation, single mothers and their children would not face homelessness, and the dismantling of our system of parks and beaches would not even be discussed. I doubt that California would find it necessary to spend in excess of $1 trillion on ill-conceived foreign adventures across the sea. I feel sure that California, loosed from the yoke of corrupt D.C., New York, and corporate interests, would prosper in a storm of innovation and progress. It is LONG PAST TIME for the glue to come un-glued. The California Flag is ready: CALIFORNIA REPUBLIC. The "National Bank of Calfornia" would be one component in a free, independent, prosperous, PEOPLE-BASED Republic. Let the discussion begin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement