Comments on: Dick Distelhorst’s Rebuttal of Von Mises Criticisms http://www.economicstability.org/current-events/dick-distelhorsts-rebuttal-of-von-mises-criticisms A Rational Voice for Monetary Reform Fri, 03 Feb 2012 09:14:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Joe http://www.economicstability.org/current-events/dick-distelhorsts-rebuttal-of-von-mises-criticisms/comment-page-1#comment-46 Joe Sat, 10 Apr 2010 14:56:07 +0000 http://www.economicstability.org/?p=1044#comment-46 I'm pleased that Lila Rajiva has posted a lengthy commentary here(*), not so much it turns out in reply to Dick Distlehorst's substantive commentary on the original Kaj Grussner MisesBlog posting, but rather representing her attempt to expand upon Grussner's commentary. There is almost zero repartee to Dick, to whom I would defer for a substantive comment reply. So we again engage the Austrian philosophy of money with a view to furthering the dialogue. I will comment directly on Lila's blog entry that is linked here. But I will also offer a brief comment here in the hope that she will do likewise. One of the premises of the content on this website is the real existence of something called monetary sovereignty. The Austrians for the most part deny the existence of a sovereign nation, republic or democratic or both, having an inherent right from that sovereignty to ESTABLISH a national monetary system, as called for in the Constitution. We should spend some time there, not to definitively decide the matter for ourselves, but for the purpose of educating and informing our readers. Our premise and tenet is not that government is shit. We have some shitty government for sure, and it is our fault that we do. And we have some great governments and government programs, all of which would be enhanced by freeing our national representatives from the present system of money-control over democracy. THAT is our goal here. The Money System Common. So, while we disagree on what the present Fed banking, private debt-creation money system represents, we can agree that it is NOT what we want going forward, and stand at that fork in the road and take a look ahead. We say the government-issuance of debt-free money takes nothing from the savers, who have been fortunate enough to save some of that debt-money. And we say that it is the role of government to provide for economic stability and full employment in using its sovereign monetary powers to enable a free-enterprise economy to flourish. Why not? I’m pleased that Lila Rajiva has posted a lengthy commentary here(*), not so much it turns out in reply to Dick Distlehorst’s substantive commentary on the original Kaj Grussner MisesBlog posting, but rather representing her attempt to expand upon Grussner’s commentary.
There is almost zero repartee to Dick, to whom I would defer for a substantive comment reply. So we again engage the Austrian philosophy of money with a view to furthering the dialogue.
I will comment directly on Lila’s blog entry that is linked here.
But I will also offer a brief comment here in the hope that she will do likewise.

One of the premises of the content on this website is the real existence of something called monetary sovereignty.
The Austrians for the most part deny the existence of a sovereign nation, republic or democratic or both, having an inherent right from that sovereignty to ESTABLISH a national monetary system, as called for in the Constitution.

We should spend some time there, not to definitively decide the matter for ourselves, but for the purpose of educating and informing our readers.

Our premise and tenet is not that government is shit.
We have some shitty government for sure, and it is our fault that we do.
And we have some great governments and government programs, all of which would be enhanced by freeing our national representatives from the present system of money-control over democracy.
THAT is our goal here.
The Money System Common.
So, while we disagree on what the present Fed banking, private debt-creation money system represents, we can agree that it is NOT what we want going forward, and stand at that fork in the road and take a look ahead.
We say the government-issuance of debt-free money takes nothing from the savers, who have been fortunate enough to save some of that debt-money.
And we say that it is the role of government to provide for economic stability and full employment in using its sovereign monetary powers to enable a free-enterprise economy to flourish.
Why not?

]]> By: Refuting Kucinich’s Funny Money Platform | LILA RAJIVA: The Mind-Body Politic http://www.economicstability.org/current-events/dick-distelhorsts-rebuttal-of-von-mises-criticisms/comment-page-1#comment-45 Refuting Kucinich’s Funny Money Platform | LILA RAJIVA: The Mind-Body Politic Fri, 09 Apr 2010 23:23:04 +0000 http://www.economicstability.org/?p=1044#comment-45 [...] posting a response to Grussner I saw  here.  I can’t say I was impressed. The monetarists seem completely mistaken on fundamental [...] [...] posting a response to Grussner I saw  here.  I can’t say I was impressed. The monetarists seem completely mistaken on fundamental [...]

]]>