Aldan

16. Your claim that a tethered regional money regime that could exist independently of global manipulators, speculators and bank failures could be subjected to “an enormous internal financial crisis” is not supported by any analysis to consider. You accuse me of being concerned by “imaginary problems” but even the Basle Committee admits it cannot guarantee stability.

I will excuse you describing my proposals as “pathetic” as your views were formulated in ignorance of your wrong headed thinking identified above.

Shann, your objection to my statement "The government does create money and loan it to the banks" demonstrates that you don't understand it's both ways round.

As for your responses to my points:
1. You did not raise that point in your article. And it's a very dubious claim anyway. The USA benefits from the current system, and replacing it with your scheme would cost them far more.
2. Tying the value of money to specific goods or services distorts the economy to unduly favour those goods and services, and also requires governments to waste resources defending the currency's value.
3&4. The obvious alternative is to instruct them to give greater priority to maintaining full employment and not be so paranoid about inflation.
5. That's a strawman. Central planning does not work when used as a substitute for markets, but that says nothing about its effectiveness or otherwise in a broader context.
6. Any tethering is a bad idea – see 2. There's no good reason why we can't promote sustainable resources without wrecking the economy.
7. Far from being inconsistent, money's effectiveness as a medium of exchange requires it to be at least a reasonable store of value. No economy has ever thrived under hyperinflation.
8. Assets with a high long term value are far more sensitive to interest rates than those with no long term value, because higher interest rates strengthen the inherent short term bias.
9. And what do you think would happen when the value of those natural resources crashes relative to the value of goods and services? Or worse still, when they rise too much?
10. Are you even aware that the reserves are not what limits lending in the fractional reserve banking system?

(TBC)

(continued)

11. Your system would greatly increase the incentive to participate in the black economy.
12. Over 95%?!?!? That contradicts what I've seen elsewhere. What is the source of your figure?
13. People like the convenience which you wish to eliminate. Foreign notes and coins would take over.
14. Although Bitcoin is technically traceable, actually doing so is very difficult.
15. You don't think money should be a store of value? So you want hyperinflation?!?!? In that case there's probably no point arguing with you, as your plans would achieve that objective. But for those who don't want hyperinflation, there is a need, at least in some parts of the economic cycle, to curtail spending. Government borrowing is a way of doing this, as when banks lend money to the government they're unable to lend the same money to anyone else.
16. Tethering money introduces risks, as it is then unable to respond to market conditions. Tethered money is something we're far better off without.