Freedomain Radio

I consider myself a free market anarchist with reservations. That means that Imight change my mind, but for now I'm going with it. I'm in Indiana, and man did we have a lot of snow!  That's why I didn't message this board yesterday.

I'm still in school, and I'm employed through the school.

Here's a question for you Greg.  You stated:

"The beauty of that idea, is that all one need do to promote market anarchy, is to simply live one's life as one chooses, and to reject the use of violence, aggression, or intimidation, in one's dealings with other human beings. That's it."

So, what about the gun in the room?  Should I use non-violent means to limit the scope of this gun? I don't see how living my life the way I choose will bring about a market anarchy system.  I know that Stef states he wants to entertain himself by doing these podcasts.  Isn't he also promoting a system of non-government, and therefore tacitly suggesting political change.

Back to answers:  Yes I have some ideas on how to achieve market anarchy, a new currency, and a significant number of people stop paying taxes.  I think freedom is constrained only by actively doing harm to others, not perceived harm, only actual harm.  If I call you a name that may cause you perceived harm, but does not harm you. Personal Integrity?  I think when people develop their own ethics often they do a good job.  Most pressing issue?  I think poverty and crime are the most pressing issues that market anarchy may be able to help. 

When you say you have ideas about a new currency, are you referring to a gold standard (possibly a privatized currency), or something else?  Also, as to your views about harm, you should never underestimate the untold atrocities that are caused by harmful ideas.  A society is only as healthy as the philosophies that govern the actions of its people.

I think the best would besomething else.  I think free market people should check out Ripple pay. It's a program written by Ryan Fugger.  It could be gold backed or not.  I think that it's best not to have a gold standard, because then the monetary supply can adjust to what it needs to be.  Ripple pay sets up a system where there can be no net currency in circulation.  Everything is on debts and credits.  That gets around the problem of one power printing and printing more money.  I think a true gold standard is flawed because reserve banking will happen and that could lead to harmful defaults of banks.

Thats interesting, I'll be sure to look into that.  It's been so long since the gold standard has existed that its pretty hard to know exactly what it would be like, I'm sure.  However, I have always been of the opinion that gold would be the best system because it (and correct me if I'm wrong) is supposed to represent all the goods and services available in the market at any given time.  For this reason it is impervious to inflation or deflations which (as far as I know) are equally bad for the economy.  I'm not sure what you mean by gold's limitation of not being able to allow the "monetary supply to adjust to what it needs to be," but I'm certainly not an expert on the issue.  Also, I think the idea of having "no net currency in circulation" is interesting.  Also would this Ripple Pay System still be under federal control or in the hands of private bankers?  I like private bankers.  There not as good at killing people.

Oh, nice site.  So. . . the crafty buggers are already in operation, bravo.  It seems that this system is cool (although I still haven't fully checked it out), and I'm really happy about the total lack of green costumes and guns!!  The entire point of privatizing currency (or anything else) is private entities actually care about the success of their endeavors.  One of the biggest gains of privatization is innovation.  That the main reason I support privatization in the monetary system is because I believe the best solution will present itself naturally.  I think in an ideal system gold would still be the generally accepted form of money, but it really doesn't matter.  We are so far from an ideal system I think its hard for any of us to really visualize what if would be like at all.  Stuff like this is pretty encouraging, though.  Thanks for the reference, anyway, I'll be sure to look into it further.

These are really good questions!!!  First you say that gold

"is impervious to inflation or deflation"

 Yes and no.  Gold is impervious from extreme inflation or deflation.  A true gold standard would have moderate deflation as there are more people there is more demand for gold.  I'm assuming that not much gold is found or mined.   What's the chance of being on a true gold standard though.  In the past we have used reserve banking.  This means that banks loan out money that they don't own, they owe to their customers.  With reserve banking there may be some inflation, not as much as we have now though.  This is what I mean by "monetary supply adjusting to what it needs to be."  When people need money than they borrow it.  

You ask the question "would this Ripple Pay System still be under federal control or in the hands of private bankers?"

The answers are 1. Yes and Yes 2. Yes and No 3. No and Yes 4. No and No

 This system is very flexible.  You could keep track of your debt in a government notes.  In which case the federal control would still be there.  On the other hand, it would be easy to make another monetary unit (say the "ripple") and then this could act like an independent currency and float against the dollar, yen, etc.  Now to private banks.  If there was a corperation that built good trust then a lot of people could create accounts with this company and this company would act like a bank.  If you wanted to be more private, you could establish credit with your TRUSTED friends and you wouldn't need a bank at all.  If the private bankers start to scam you then you can start to depend more on your trusted friends.  Also your employer might be able to act like your bank.  You would have to trust your employer though.

Stephen_Garrett:

One of the biggest gains of privatization is innovation.  

This is decentralization, no one private entity would control the monetary system. When the programing is done, then you can set up your own server that could deal with your account and your friend's or even stranger's accounts. 

Stephen_Garrett:

Oh, nice site.  So. . . the crafty buggers are already in operation, bravo.  It seems that this system is cool (although I still haven't fully checked it out), and I'm really happy about the total lack of green costumes and guns!!  The entire point of privatizing currency (or anything else) is private entities actually care about the success of their endeavors.  One of the biggest gains of privatization is innovation.  That the main reason I support privatization in the monetary system is because I believe the best solution will present itself naturally.  I think in an ideal system gold would still be the generally accepted form of money, but it really doesn't matter.  We are so far from an ideal system I think its hard for any of us to really visualize what if would be like at all.  Stuff like this is pretty encouraging, though.  Thanks for the reference, anyway, I'll be sure to look into it further.

Wonder why that site isn't more popular..? 

I not sure, It may be for a good reason, or it may just be new.  Like I said I know almost nothing about it.

Leagal question: does anyone know the laws on banks printing money?  Is it illeagal?  What are the consequences?  Should this be something we should try to change?

Ripple is not more popular because you have to have other people extend you credit before it's useful.  Ryan's goal is to integrate the Ripple pay system into PayPal at some point.  Then it's usefulness would grow. 

The rule is that banks must keep a 10% reserve.  That means if a bank has $1M on deposit then the bank must have $100K on reserve if a deposit is demanded.  Under the FIAT system if the 10% reserve is not enough then the government will print money if need be to bail out the bank (This is what FDIC is about).  Under the gold standard runs on the banks helped fuel the depression.  Should we try to change this?  There are more important issues.  On our FIAT system it is not so important.  In my view if we were on a gold standard then you wouldn't want a bank that used a 10% reserve.  Maybe a 20% or more reserve and you should expect to pay a fee to the bank for the increased security. 

Oh and banks don't print money.  Loaning out money that is in an on demand account has the effect of increasing the monetary supply.

Right, I understand banks don't currently print money.  What I meant was in an ideal system they should.

Hey guys,

 Stef,  

 I tried to send you a pdf file that contained some ideas.  Let me know if you got it.

 Daniel