3) all govt. DEFICIT spending should be done via private sector banks/ resources. Possibly with well defined leverage limits? Capital created out of thin air, but not the Treasury printing money. If the deficit amount is not available from the private banks, it does not get spent.
4) this still does not explain why Madison, et al., did no…
3) all govt. DEFICIT spending should be done via private sector banks/ resources. Possibly with well defined leverage limits? Capital created out of thin air, but not the Treasury printing money. If the deficit amount is not available from the private banks, it does not get spent.
4) this still does not explain why Madison, et al., did not provide for more stringent financial guidance or controls -- were their potential fears assuaged with the example of GB?
5) (related to #4): is there an aspect of scale here, where the larger nations are more subject to taking excessive risks since it seems the tax payer base is still "so large" that errors can still be covered? I am reminded about a comment you made some time back (around the 2008 Great Recession?) on your Oz blog, that the Australian central bank had done the best job of responding responsibly, followed by Canada, (and maybe GB?), but much superior to US Fed.
There really hadn’t been a significant case of a Parliamentary state having a bond crisis that it could not handle. Yes, government securities were first developed c.1171 and yes even Venice had had the odd partial default but the history to the 1780s strongly suggested it was an autocracy problem, not a Parliamentary state problem.
3) all govt. DEFICIT spending should be done via private sector banks/ resources. Possibly with well defined leverage limits? Capital created out of thin air, but not the Treasury printing money. If the deficit amount is not available from the private banks, it does not get spent.
4) this still does not explain why Madison, et al., did not provide for more stringent financial guidance or controls -- were their potential fears assuaged with the example of GB?
5) (related to #4): is there an aspect of scale here, where the larger nations are more subject to taking excessive risks since it seems the tax payer base is still "so large" that errors can still be covered? I am reminded about a comment you made some time back (around the 2008 Great Recession?) on your Oz blog, that the Australian central bank had done the best job of responding responsibly, followed by Canada, (and maybe GB?), but much superior to US Fed.
There really hadn’t been a significant case of a Parliamentary state having a bond crisis that it could not handle. Yes, government securities were first developed c.1171 and yes even Venice had had the odd partial default but the history to the 1780s strongly suggested it was an autocracy problem, not a Parliamentary state problem.
https://www.npr.org/transcripts/689769991