Skip to main content

How the central bank concentrates wealth in the hands of a few

Let's start with the criminal counterfeiter. A criminal counterfeiter creates new money. He spends that money in his local community. As he does so, the prices of things he buys will tend to go up (because he is increasing the demand for them). Those he buys from will then have the newly counterfeited money and they, in turn, will spend it, driving up the prices of the things they buy. And so on. Over time, the money spreads out through the community and the prices of everything are a bit higher. A fraction of the wealth of the community has been stolen and transferred to the counterfeiter and those who got early use of the new money (before prices rose, generally) by diluting the purchasing power of everyone's savings. To paraphrase Hoppe, inflation (counterfeiting) transfers wealth from the later users of new money to the early users of new money.

Kings and emperors have been doing this through the debasement of coins for millenia. They take in a batch of 10,000 coins of purity X and dilute them and spend back 11,000 coins of some purity less than X but force merchants to sell at the prices that obtained with the older, purer coins (hence, price controls). With the advent of paper money - whether under Kublai Khan in China or John Law in France - a new and easier means of diluting money emerged. Governments found it difficult to restrain themselves in the debasement of paper money and many economies have been crashed by out of control printing-press inflation.

In the central-banking/fractional-reserve model, it is no longer necessary to print physical banknotes to inflate, you just make "loans" on the books of non-existent money or, at least, money that the vast majority of the public believes to be far more liquid than it actually is. Through interbank loans, the money multiplier allows a reserve ratio of X to result in an expansion of the money supply up to 1/X its original size (i.e. 10% reserve ratio allows up to 10x expansion of the money supply).

You can think of the Federal Reserve as a kind of "money fountain" that sucks money out of the hands of the public (and not just the American public, a large part of the world's population is directly plundered by Fed inflation) and pours it out upon the politically-connected in Washington, DC. The wealthy are more politically connected than the poor. So, the poor get regressively taxed by Fed inflation and the politically well-connected rich in Washington, DC make off with the loot. It should be obvious how this concentrates wealth in the hands of the few.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Constitution has gone to the dogs

Actually, it should have gone to the dogs, but didn't. I'm talking about  Leona Helmsley's estate , of course. The contract clause of the Constitution says, "No State shall ... pass any ... Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts..." This means that private contracts cannot be changed by legislative edict. This clause is incredibly important because the willingness of private individuals to engage in profitable enterprise - which is the foundation of social welfare - crucially depends on their belief that they can realize a profit. In turn, their belief that they can realize a profit depends on their belief that they can hold parties to a contract liable to the terms in the contract. For example, lenders must have confidence that they can repossess the collateral for a loan if the loan is defaulted on. Otherwise, they will not take the risk of giving the loan in the first place. When lenders are too scared to lend, everyone is worse off. In the case of Leona Hel...
So, I spent all weekend watching JFK assassination videos and doing armchair JFK assassination research. Here are my notes: 1) Most of the debate seems to rage around trying to get evidence or proof that JFK's assassination was a conspiracy. This is silly because it grants - from the outset - the bizarre assumption made by the official theories that political figures are as likely to die at the hands of "mad attention-seekers" as they are to be assassinated by their enemies who actually stand to benefit. How many people are insane enough to think that the electric chair is a fair trade for "being remembered" by history, even if in infamy? And of those people how many are resourceful enough to pierce the security perimeter of the President of the United States? Kennedy was threatened by Richard Pavlick in 1960 after Nixon lost the election and, by all accounts, Pavlick was a lone nut. But all we know of his "assassination attempts" are his own tall tale...

What Law Is

Law What is law? Frederic Bastiat, in his treatise The Law, defines law as the collective use of force. As much as I love Bastiat’s treatise, I think his definition is not sufficiently analytical. It is certainly the case that the law plays a role in the collective use of force but the law is something more basic than this. We can begin by looking at law as it is today. The website for the Oregon courts has an excellent summary [1] of modern law and courts. I will quote it at length: Throughout history, people have had disputes and have needed some means to settle their disputes. As civil societies develop, they need an orderly system of conflict resolution. One system that developed in "western" cultures is the "law court" or court of law. In England, those early law courts developed a "body of law" called the common law, which defined both the rights of the people and the government and the duties people owe each other and their government. T...