1 "The derivatives are toxic because that are not based on real productivty or assets."
Then what is the underlying contract?

"They have no value and many are linked to bad debts created by the GFC."

If they have no value why do people buy them?

Q2 So with your solution, the central banks would be able to inflate at will, it's just that instead of the people being enslaved to banks licensed by the government, they'd be enslaved to a central government bank?

Q3.
" A proper constitution can limit Govt from creating too much money."

Define "proper" constitution. The US constitution makes it illegal more than three times over. Didn't work, did it? I suppose that's not a proper constitution? Well what makes you think *any* constitution can restrain governments from abusing the power to print money, lower interest rates, or put future generations into debt?

"They are an absolute disaster."

Completely agree. But you still want to leave them the power to inflate the money supply at will.

"Our Govts for a long time have been controlled by this Central Banking system."

Well what do you expect when you support a system in which the Central Bank has a licence to print money, which is central to government finance?

"Which would you prefer?"

I would prefer the abolition of government's monopoly control of the money supply, and open competition in the supply of money and credit subject to the law against fraud.

Please consider that there is NO WAY a monopoly power to print money can be entrusted to anyone without being abused.

"Would it not be better that the US govt create this money from nothing and the tax payer suffer a depreciation in their currency but not have debt to private banksters?"

Not really.
a) the banks would still be able to fleece the people just as much, it’s just that instead of being a government-licensed private bank, it would be a … government licensed government bank – big deal!
b) The important point is that the people are being forced or deceived into INVOLUNTARILY paying their toil to parasitic unwanted overlords; paying one group involuntarily rather than another is scarcely an improvement, is it? That’s all your scheme has to offer.
c) It’s the government that’s licensing the private banks anyway, so if you argue that government is more representative of the people well.. .there’s your representation for you!
d) most importantly, the power of inflation to distort the whole structure of production, to suck capital out of productive activities and expend it in capital consumption, producing economic crises and social injustice, would be no less, and the *moral* effects - of robbing workers and savers and self-funded retirees to pay for debtors and consumerism and speculators and the priviligentsia would be no different.

It would leave the main problem untouched.

Furthermore I have already refuted your argument that the money supply should grow in step with productivity (example of farmer increasing his productivity by more economical ploughing of his field). There is NO REASON why everyone else should be able to claim a share in his increased productivity, and no reason why everyone should suffer a politically orchestrated depreciation (stealing) of their money, taken via a sneak attack on the economy's central nervous system, the money supply.

So you have justified your criticism of the whole system, but you haven’t justified your solution, which is only a very similar version of more of the same.

Peter Hume you are obfuscating.Q2 I did not say that at all.You did not even address the reality of my reply.Private Central Banks inflate at will which we are witnessing now.

You are trying to pervert my perceptions with your spin.

The reality is this,private central banks have no right to express our productivity as debt via their counterfeiting of our currencies.

"There is no way monopoly power of printing money won't be abused." This exactly what the US Federal Reserve has Peter Hume.It is unfetted power and is printing $ trillions of it and devaluing the currencies of the planet.Only sovereign elected Govts should have the power to create new currency.

If you have a constitution that states the creation of new money be equal to GDP,then inflation will not exist.The banking system has to create inflation because we are constantly bleeding money to OS Central banks.Has the penny dropped yet Peter?

Our banks and Govt are paying OS central banks interest on money that is really ours.It represents our productivity.

Arjay, can you leave out the personal argument. I'm not obfuscating, perverting, etc.

I have addressed the reality of your proposals, and if I don't understand it, please explain it, not my supposed psychology.

The point is, correct me if I'm wrong, that under the present system, government-licensed private banks, being the Federal Reserve, can print money at will, and the taxpayers have to foot the bill.

But under your proposal, the only difference will be that a government central bank will have exactly the same powers to inflate the money supply.

You have not addressed the reality of my points:
- the government will still be able to inflate at will, only instead of a goverment-licensed bank, it will be a... government-licensed bank
- inflation will still wreak economic destruction and social injustice
- the people will still be forced to pay involuntarily for the privileges of their government-licensed overlords

"private central banks have no right to express our productivity as debt via their counterfeiting of our currencies"

Why not? The government grants them that "right". If it's not right for them, it's not right for the government to do it either. But if the government represents the people, and there's nothing wrong *in principle* with inflating the currency, then there's no reason why government can't license a private person outside the government to do it, as well as a private person inside the government.

Besides, it's you who are in favour of the counterfeiting of currency to express productivity. Aren't you? You think the government central bank should have a license to counterfeit money in step with the rise in productivity. But you have given no reason why everyone else is entitled to a share in one's productivity.

Your solution would not make any substantial difference, has not justified a governmental power to inflate (counterfeit), cannot show how abuse would be prevented, has not justified stealing a share in other people's productivity.

So intead of falling back to childish ad hominem, why don't you RE-THINK your claims and try to UNDERSTAND the arguments?

Let's go back to the basic for you Peter.Why is it necessary to create new money?

Ans.For increases in population and productivity.Those who create this new money to equal it then own it.Is this not correct?

Why should private central banks Peter own your productivity and loan it back to you as debt? If your Govt creates this new money to equal your productivity Peter,this will mean you pay less tax.Why? This means that your Govt won't have to tax you to pay for debt to private banks.Banks will still make profits by loaning out money that already exists but they won't be able to create it from nothing.

There is another insidious side to this Peter.The private banking system is also allowed to create the money to equal our inflation.Inflation depreciates the value of our currency,thus the value of our work.So they are taking wealth from us via inflation and loaning it back to us as debt.

It is like you stealing from your neighbour and loaning this stolen money back as a debt contract.It is theft pure and simple.