Pat, if the federal government paid down all its debt, every dollar in existence would disappear.
If you want that to happen, you have to first eliminate the Fed and convert our money to something a little more stable than pieces of paper and computer bits created as debt.
I hate to keep harping on this, but you have to realize that the federal debt
can't be reduced, as a matter of fact is has to expand or we get a depression.
Great Depression - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaMonetarists, including Milton Friedman and current Federal Reserve System chairman Ben Bernanke, argue that the Great Depression was mainly caused by monetary contraction, the consequence of poor policymaking by the American Federal Reserve System and continued crisis in the banking system.[22][23] In this view, the Federal Reserve, by not acting, allowed the money supply as measured by the M2 to shrink by one-third from 1929-1933, thereby transforming a normal recession into the Great Depression.
Unless people understand the monetary system, they're going to keep tilting at windmills while the real problem gets ignored. And that's just the way the bankers like it, too.
Hey, I found some new quotes to back up my assertion. Two good ones, too. Real heavyweights!
In numerous years following the war, the Federal Government ran a heavy surplus. It could not (however) pay off its debt, retire its securities, because to do so meant there would be no bonds to back the national bank notes.To pay off the debt was to destroy the money supply.
* John Kenneth Galbraith, Money, Whence it Came, Where it Went (1975), p. 90
It is maintained by some that the bank is a means of executing the constitutional power “to coin money and regulate the value thereof.” Congress have established a mint to coin money and passed laws to regulate the value thereof. The money so coined, with its value so regulated, and such foreign coins as Congress may adopt are the only currency known to the Constitution. But if they have other power to regulate the currency, it was conferred to be exercised by themselves, and not to be transferred to a corporation. If the bank be established for that purpose, with a charter unalterable without its consent, Congress have parted with their power for a term of years, during which the Constitution is a dead letter. It is neither necessary nor proper to transfer its legislative power to such a bank, and therefore unconstitutional.
* Andrew Jackson, veto mesage rgarding the Bank of the United States [2] (1832-07-10)
Where does everyone think this money is coming from? There's no magic wand that creates money.
Oh yes there is, Jody. And the banks own it, not us or our government. This is from
Reserve Requirements - Fedpoints - Federal Reserve Bank of New YorkReserve requirements affect the potential of the banking system to create transaction deposits. If the reserve requirement is 10%, for example, a bank that receives a $100 deposit may lend out $90 of that deposit. If the borrower then writes a check to someone who deposits the $90, the bank receiving that deposit can lend out $81. As the process continues, the banking system can expand the initial deposit of $100 into a maximum of $1,000 of money ($100+$90+81+$72.90+...=$1,000). In contrast, with a 20% reserve requirement, the banking system would be able to expand the initial $100 deposit into a maximum of $500 ($100+$80+$64+$51.20+...=$500). Thus, higher reserve requirements should result in reduced money creation and, in turn, in reduced economic activity.
I mean really, when the horse tells you he's cheating the system and
you, why do you ignore it?
Author