Man, Economy, and Liberty | Murray N. Rothbard

Murray Rothbard comments and responds to the speakers and papers at the Mises Institute colloquium, “Man, Economy and Liberty”; March 1, 1986.

Source: Man, Economy, and Liberty | Murray N. Rothbard – YouTube

http://www.readrothbard.com/man-economy-and-liberty-murray-n-rothbard

TRANSCRIPT

00:00
it gives me great pleasure to introduce
00:02
to you now a very wrong card and I’ve
00:06
been doing a little soul-searching and
00:07
thinking this to her like the best
00:09
introduce nori to this and I thought
00:13
they’re really only two ways one is to
00:15
just sort of say Erie is false and the
00:19
other is to give a full introduction of
00:21
the sort that he deserves which would
00:23
take about a half hour
00:24
and since he’s only got a half hour to
00:26
speak to become more lunch I have
00:28
decided to just say he is well
00:53
thank you all very much this is a real
00:55
surprise to me I thought for the secret
00:58
was kept a tight control and grand usual
01:00
movement I was informed on to be here
01:04
coming here this morning
01:05
I’m broadly out of course to comment on
01:08
the Mulder’s paper our fashion observer
01:09
thank you obviously small a lot fight on
01:12
that got some stuff on that day a great
01:15
wing is the seizure they say on Walters
01:22
paper first place the mention about the
01:24
hotel diplomat the first luminary
01:26
installer conference which almost ended
01:28
the disaster and what the activist wing
01:33
of the top of one of those seas Fort Dix
01:37
I argue there’s a little nominee
01:41
irrelevant so comfortable so likely to
01:43
fail
01:46
present here might be right the young I
01:50
looked regular plain what we meant by
01:52
the banking cartel it’s a good point and
01:55
we should think about further I lost
01:58
about the economics of moral argument
01:59
spitting in together so confirm me
02:01
confirming each other checking each
02:03
other there’s a problem with the banana
02:06
his radical capitalist I need to put
02:08
that in government or whatever in
02:11
position for a percent reserve bank and
02:14
first first thing same thing on that is
02:17
that not all most government says
02:22
several people pointing that out and
02:25
Randy Holcomb pointed out the law comes
02:28
before government is government messes
02:30
it up in the minute
02:33
and so we’re talking about a legal
02:36
question another governmental question
02:38
on question agency who should be
02:39
enforcing number two the second aspect
02:44
of that is that they’re libertarians
02:46
always focus on governments that make
02:48
your criminal with your organized
02:50
criminal which it is make your robber of
02:52
nature and sanction robbers work make
02:55
your burger maker kidnapper major
02:57
regulator controller and all that but
03:00
also quickly show
03:01
remember there are private remoteness my
03:05
video game long private people commit
03:11
throw on a separate set I think I’m an
03:15
actual desert front when I would
03:17
emphasize even more than the fact that
03:19
the bank is inherently bankrupt
03:20
pressures our advantage of course it is
03:22
it’s also engaging and Michael implicit
03:25
effects are in puzzlement and so that
03:27
makes it even stronger I think moral
03:29
position even if the Surgeon General has
03:33
a certain general kind of warning at
03:35
least each banknote this this is
03:38
dangerous for your pocketbook as
03:41
ourselves not likely to be a banknote
03:43
bring very much longer also the idea of
03:47
a voluntary fractional involuntary
03:49
fractional reserve banking system seemed
03:52
very bizarre to me it’s very much like
03:53
people claim the state is really
03:55
voluntary because it’s conceivable that
03:57
ten people can get together form a quote
03:59
state on pluggin we quote tax themselves
04:01
unquote and to some merit the key is the
04:05
idea of the state existing all existing
04:07
past and present states are coercive
04:09
that’s evening your relevant existing
04:12
past presence and likely future factors
04:15
are banking as deceptiveness for them I
04:18
also stay on that but it’s not only
04:22
banks
04:23
Dundas no it’s not only a theoretical
04:26
point also a historical point grain a
04:30
little warehousing within a very bad
04:32
shape and was corrected in recent years
04:36
and the point of the seasoning for it
04:39
very clear where the warehouse owner and
04:41
accepts something to be put the positive
04:44
there st. doesn’t own that property be
04:47
very clear this is a law a bailment
04:49
contract another sale of some sort and
04:53
that the if I if I put a chair and
04:56
warehouse room deposit I have a
04:59
warehouse receipt to Coney Island Quon
05:03
get the chair redeem the chair at any
05:05
time
05:05
I suppose the owner of the shares his
05:08
warehouse none of something guarding it
05:10
and he’s been to safety safety keeper of
05:12
it and he gets Patriot service in the
05:14
morning
05:16
so what’s happen isn’t somewhere account
05:19
question behind a positive chatter and
05:22
we’re have no problem if there’s nothing
05:24
about much there’s not much temptation
05:26
for embezzlement theft because I come
05:29
back and fee weeks later and say I like
05:31
my chair is the positive he said well I
05:32
forgot that chair I got another chair do
05:34
it maybe blue breathe differently of
05:38
course it was ceiling
05:40
and Shawn wasn’t smoking like that by
05:43
the way this this is an argument had
05:44
look at herring circle for many years
05:47
since an existing situation the state
05:49
monopoly protection is absolutely yes
06:01
get your chair back and not the alleged
06:04
equivalent chair somebody else that
06:07
share that trying to waste oil on me
06:09
so the factor but first the problem
06:11
comes with spongeable good for the
06:12
resolute feature which are hain’t
06:14
geniusly you really don’t care or as you
06:16
want think of a bushel wheat that you
06:18
deposited wants the same kind and
06:20
gradients or and so on
06:21
and so the first factor public person
06:24
one of the first passion reserve issuers
06:28
we’re not thanks so much because grain
06:29
elevators rain and rare houses which he
06:32
kept we corner oats and we’re a grating
06:36
system came in number two the spring
06:37
wheat get your hundred bushels you don’t
06:39
care the specific hundred whistles with
06:41
Miramar Playa and so in that situation
06:43
grain elevators were attempted to start
06:45
engaging in puzzler what’s kinda cold
06:48
fraction was there banking in other
06:50
words judiciary with Tony warehouse
06:52
receipts which are not represented by
06:54
the bushel of wheat
06:55
I think we’re about to see over and then
06:58
they moment how to speculate on the
07:00
grain exchanges among the mountain and
07:02
receipt mañana understand
07:06
in Chicago eighteen sixties these were
07:09
about 600 or so grain merchants they
07:12
were using grain elevator to seek
07:14
resistant where money I’m in a changing
07:15
room they were me Amina change for seven
07:18
grain accounts so if they function in my
07:20
limited sense and but the way they think
07:24
the way the great Albert spell elevators
07:27
gonna play whether they kept the whole
07:28
thing very secret they didn’t tell
07:30
anybody
07:31
there was no board of course didn’t
07:32
leave company brain I’m anemic see state
07:34
has it comparison official would rain to
07:36
be really having them whereas and
07:38
finally I think what happened was my
07:43
niece’s and they sit in 1872 of a fire
07:45
on the warehouse
07:46
stream they found out lo and behold the
07:50
three hundred thousand bushels warehouse
07:52
receipts out state and with sixty
07:53
thousand bushels of wheat and the
07:55
warehouse and the first rewriting of the
07:57
ceiling this knowledge came out so good
08:00
right now in grain elevators rain will
08:03
consider this with a friend replied I’m
08:05
legal theorist consider the depositing
08:09
point that we have right now is not
08:11
available in financial sale repurchase
08:13
agreement so the we we elevator personal
08:16
knowledge and buzzer are simply full of
08:19
wheat and so this is a defect in
08:22
warehouse washes which since time does
08:24
take stops of nasty service that you’re
08:26
a speech and I guess have going with
08:29
death if you don’t pay up
08:32
we isn’t very own convenience so
08:34
unfortunately banking even worked out my
08:36
banking for a purely historical reasons
08:40
because the argument was made this is a
08:42
bailment deposit of gold or money in a
08:45
bank judges rule against the majority
08:48
decision come then I’ll incorporate it
08:52
into the law that’s really it’s not a
08:53
bama simply a debt you’re just an
08:55
entrepreneur you have to go bankrupt on
08:56
some wild it’s first not the same thing
08:59
Walter use the argument of parking lots
09:03
I hadn’t heard that one yet the
09:04
traditional argument was a bridge if a
09:07
bridge across the river you know each
09:10
person has an each tax payer or whatever
09:12
citizen has an equal access to the
09:13
bridge it isn’t guaranteed it might be
09:15
you know two thousand people trying to
09:17
get on the bridge and only room for a
09:19
hundred and so nothing wrong with that
09:21
is simply an entrepreneurial decision of
09:22
the bridge owner however of course
09:24
there’s no claim you’re not getting your
09:25
property back when if you want to walk
09:28
or ride on the bridge it’s very
09:29
different situation this is your
09:30
property when a bank and somehow isn’t
09:32
there seen a much different stature
09:35
they’re not being able to get on the
09:37
bridge of course there’s also government
09:39
bridges and maximum price controls of
09:41
zero on driving things like that which
09:43
cause congestion that’s another topic so
09:48
the finally I conclude with one
09:53
gentleman raising questions like Larry
09:55
White’s book on free banking Britain and
09:58
I came armed with that I’ve I’ve won I
10:01
used to accept the the argument of the
10:02
book on free banking in Scotland I since
10:06
then look deeper into it an illusion he
10:08
was all wrong on this the if you look at
10:11
the book he tries to prove the free
10:14
banking Scotland was significantly
10:15
better different and better than free
10:17
banking in England his only proof of
10:21
that is that there were fewer bank
10:22
failures in Scotland doesn’t say
10:24
anything about less inflationary
10:25
anything about sort tip number one I
10:27
have nothing against bank failures my
10:29
fact bank failures usually pretty good
10:31
and the fact that there are few bank
10:33
failures is a cause for suspicion rather
10:34
than the congratulations so looking at
10:37
it more closely I found out that the
10:41
banks in Scotland pyramid on top of the
10:43
bank
10:43
of England just as the English banks did
10:45
they were not free in any sense it would
10:48
be used by any libertarian a free-market
10:51
person they kept almost all their
10:53
reserves such as they were in the Bank
10:55
of England a very small proportion of
10:57
reserve right and the banking would bail
10:59
them out they got into trouble they kept
11:01
very little goal on hand if you tried it
11:02
not only that if you try to get the gold
11:04
you wouldn’t get it in other words it
11:06
was the custom of Scotland you couldn’t
11:07
get the goal if you try to redeem your
11:09
deposit or note and go so free banking
11:13
Scotland was not neither free nor
11:15
legitimate banking in any sense I just
11:18
got one quote on this one pamphlet was
11:20
written in this period of Scotland they
11:21
said any southern fool that means since
11:24
the Scottish of course were clued in on
11:25
this they wouldn’t dare redeem try to
11:26
redeem their their notes and goals and
11:30
know better they knew better any
11:32
southern fooling me south of the
11:33
Scottish English border who had the
11:35
temerity to ask for 100 sovereigns and
11:37
he’s in in gold might have his night of
11:40
his nerves supported him through the
11:41
cross-examination of the bank counter
11:43
might thing himself lucky to be hunted
11:46
only to the border so that’s and I was
11:51
fight familiar with us because in my
11:52
panic of 1819 my first work Ricardo is a
11:56
correspondence between Ricardo and condi
11:58
roger owes everybody bright american
12:01
economist was indeed a favor of hundred
12:03
percent reserve banking Ricardo’s ask
12:05
him how come and and how come in the
12:07
United States you have these banks
12:08
though they don’t pay up and supposed to
12:10
pay up anyone they pay up or else go
12:14
bankrupt Mikado strip reggae is trying
12:15
to explain him story call you seems to
12:17
her cars a little different here your
12:19
run out of town every most people in
12:21
town of either stockholders of a bank or
12:24
depositors of the bank of the old money
12:25
to the bank everybody else is written
12:27
out of town on a rail so that’s that’s
12:29
the sort of gold standard or whatever
12:31
they had a property rights they had in
12:33
Scotland so I think the book is all wet
12:36
to put a very bluntly and pass on a
12:39
Mandy Hopkins paper
12:42
I’m agreement of all the papers
12:46
I should say that right now well papers
12:48
about today it’s unusual situation for
12:50
me to be in I tell you that so all I can
12:52
do is gloss some make some extra points
12:54
from here to there the the problem again
13:00
with the Buchanan I view of contract
13:01
contract Arianism one of the problems is
13:03
the idea that agreement I mean you start
13:07
with agreement in continuum of agreement
13:09
the problem with that is of course that
13:10
this is the starting of the seeming the
13:13
justice of the zero point with you
13:14
assuming the justice of the situation
13:16
before you start the agreement my
13:18
favorite example of literature courses
13:20
surd is that as the United States let’s
13:25
say USA we’ve we’ve convinced everybody
13:27
in the government they should the
13:28
government is immoral as separate and
13:29
private property why shouldn’t should
13:31
follow and just about the dissolve and
13:35
the United State government turned all
13:37
the private property all the territory
13:38
New York over to the private property of
13:40
the Rockefeller family which is not too
13:42
absurd a conclusion and then from then
13:46
on we supposed to respect the property
13:47
rights of the Rockefeller family because
13:49
that for was private that’s the sort of
13:50
argument because in other words the
13:52
question is he’s starting with the
13:54
agreement what supposing some guys
13:55
already stolen half the money half the
13:57
property of everybody else why should he
13:58
have to agree to any kind of social
14:00
arrangement why shouldn’t he be forced
14:07
the one one thing on this topic Randy
14:10
talked about taxation is stuff one they
14:11
always make puzzled me about the Randian
14:15
doctrine Randy and doctrine different
14:16
from other mini kissed doctrines
14:18
rantings are against taxes they say
14:20
taxes were theft
14:21
okay that’s excellent however they
14:23
somehow don’t conclude from that and see
14:26
if you agree the taxation as theft one
14:28
concludes right away that about any
14:30
organization which lives off theft
14:31
there’s a criminal organization my name
14:33
he sees me thought was obviously somehow
14:35
they didn’t make that step up those are
14:38
they’re interested in logics and I never
14:39
got to the next logical step on police
14:44
protection of course again Randy made an
14:47
excellent argument one point about
14:48
police protection I’ve always found it
14:50
very easy to argue in Newark in New York
14:52
City for private police because there
14:55
ain’t no government police protection
14:56
here we live in a state of anarchy in
14:58
the rule and the bad sense there are
15:01
police of course but they don’t do much
15:03
they they coupe which is a phrase known
15:07
in New York as sleeping in Riverside
15:09
their cars Riverside Drive and I
15:11
supposed to be on duty they harass of
15:13
course people who wouldn’t have to pay
15:15
them an exaction is like those who want
15:17
to operate gambling parlors and things
15:18
like that and that’s about it if you’re
15:21
a private citizen
15:22
you’re very lucky they’ve got any police
15:24
funding you in New York and also if you
15:26
get robbed traditional thing in police
15:28
they’ve become least serious your house
15:30
has been robbed okay and the next step
15:32
is they fill out the insurance form
15:34
other was the police it was actually
15:35
very expensive form insurance agents
15:37
they say okay you have insurance you
15:39
okay I’ll fill out the form so you can
15:40
collect the insurance if you don’t have
15:42
insurance they say you should have had
15:43
it that said
15:45
the son of the son of this TV stop of a
15:48
fingerprinting worse than nonsense
15:50
that’s it that’s the police protection
15:52
we got for an enormous amount of money
15:54
of course coughed up these bozos and
15:58
with roads again I just want to say that
16:00
about make the point again that not only
16:04
a government roads less efficient they
16:06
also supply you a traffic congestion
16:08
that at rush hours in midtown New York
16:13
that sort of stuff because of course
16:14
that price is effectively zero for
16:16
important service they claim it’s not
16:18
zero because you pay for the roads and
16:20
your gasoline tax but of course there’s
16:22
no there’s no fine-tuning of this thing
16:24
even pay the same gasoline tax for
16:26
riding up there and whatever the route
16:27
is in Westchester over there are no cars
16:29
and magnificent Road by the way I
16:30
recommend everybody an eight-lane
16:32
highway and no cars
16:33
I forget the number of it anyway sort of
16:37
the Pound Ridge area courts again run a
16:41
reinforced Randy’s point but not only
16:44
was the common law originally private
16:46
all the good parts of the law merchant
16:48
law merchants was developed by merchants
16:50
courts as the Kings didn’t care about
16:51
trade Admiralty law or the whole law of
16:54
the sea was developed by private
16:55
merchant shippers and so forth only they
16:57
cared about that multi law and all the
16:59
rest of it it’s just really and then of
17:01
course the government nationalized that
17:02
later nationalize legal function but all
17:04
these all these courts originally
17:05
privately worked out and for merchants
17:07
the only ones and know anything about
17:08
merchant law what little King know about
17:11
it so at any rate and also our national
17:13
defense I just want to reinforce the
17:15
only way Britain could have conquered
17:16
India a much larger country for us with
17:19
many more people as this the Conqueror
17:20
of the Maharaja they couldn’t go and
17:22
conquer every individual Indian
17:23
absolutely impossible ok also an azure
17:32
irani also said that by making
17:33
theoretical arguments about Anarchy
17:35
versus menurkey whatever I think just
17:37
look at it this way I like the way I
17:38
like to like to put it supposing we will
17:40
rub down from Mars or something we
17:41
suddenly find ourselves in a society a
17:43
couple of thousand people whatever we’re
17:45
trying to figure out what form of
17:46
government we should have and somebody
17:49
says look here’s what we do let’s give
17:50
all of our guns of the Jones family over
17:52
there because they’re big and tough and
17:54
so forth Jones brothers war guns will
17:56
turn all over
17:57
gun still and we turned over all the
17:59
decision-making power so the Jones
18:00
cotton brothers and they can make all
18:02
the decision who owns watt who rest
18:05
against who and that’s it and that’s the
18:07
person aminika solution if one want a
18:10
monopoly of violence in the hands of one
18:12
institution one of the group sees me
18:14
that nobody could get away with that
18:15
even the Jones brothers could hardly
18:17
have the gut the bald and put forth this
18:19
concept it’s only because we’re stuck in
18:21
our ki nose we’re stuck in a Senate many
18:24
centuries of our key anybody can get
18:25
away with us or habituated the idea of
18:27
government police and government
18:28
decision-making all the rest of it
18:29
nobody get away starting from the zero
18:31
point nobody get away with nonsense
18:34
argument and why just one other point on
18:37
that one of my favorite things about he
18:39
said about it works it would work if it
18:42
people realize could work and we try it
18:45
the thirties used to talk about the
18:46
Soviet Union is great social experiment
18:48
and they talk in terms of scientific
18:50
experiment your laboratory well so my
18:52
answer is about trying anarchism give us
18:54
a state give us New Jersey for example
18:57
try having a totally free New Jersey and
18:59
see what happened at first okay
19:03
the the enterprise zone concept a little
19:05
bit like that of course they only have
19:07
polite they never got applied and since
19:09
free and very limited and crab fashions
19:11
you couldn’t even recognize it but
19:12
basically that’s it you’re all right try
19:14
a free zone and see what happens on
19:18
larger Garrison’s paper I just want to
19:19
say that the mention of the typical
19:22
textbook argument and micro text showing
19:25
that the prices of factors of production
19:27
are determined by marginal productivity
19:29
of the factors they start with wage
19:31
rates and so wage rate have the marginal
19:33
productivity curve wage rates are equal
19:35
to it and then they leap from that on a
19:37
fantastic cosmic leap which is never
19:39
recognised on Amy’s be able to interest
19:41
rights in the same way interest rates on
19:43
the y axis and quantity x axis and so
19:47
and that way interest rate is the term
19:48
of a marginal productivity capital and
19:50
it seems to me if they’re being logical
19:52
they would put not interest but the
19:54
prices of capital goods prices machines
19:56
prices of factories and so for and so on
19:58
they don’t do that somehow interest gets
20:00
shoved in and nobody nobody seems to
20:02
question this hello odd position also I
20:07
would also like to point out the only
20:08
time preference can explain what
20:10
can interest on consumer loans there’s
20:13
no productivity here somebody wants to
20:14
borrow us some things against you can
20:16
splurge right now and buying yeah buying
20:18
a TV set or something it’s so or
20:20
whatever go join a trip to Europe
20:22
obviously there’s no product Co
20:24
productivity unquote Evolvin listen the
20:27
type of the pure time for our preference
20:28
explanation is the only one that
20:30
integrates provides the same explanation
20:32
for interest on producers Goods interest
20:34
in production as interest on consumer
20:36
loans when Bob request made that point
20:38
then kind of withdrew on it and fuzz it
20:41
up afterward I’m delighted to hear about
20:46
the mr. Sperry and neural physiology
20:50
from Amir in Anders paper I never heard
20:52
of him I think this is great I was I
20:56
just want to point out there that the
20:57
idea of the mind determines itself as a
20:59
standard Thomas position service without
21:02
knowing biology st. Thomas arrived of
21:04
that why whatever inductive deduct or
21:08
whatever insight you want make the yeah
21:16
I very little say on David’s paper
21:17
David Gordon’s paper I think is great
21:19
and the I would say little I would say
21:23
sort of when he said at the end of
21:24
that’s Rollins biographical point if he
21:26
can’t see that slavery is evil I would
21:29
the user California since David comes
21:31
from California Rollins comes from
21:32
California’s a standard California
21:34
jargon which is that’s his problem not
21:35
mine
21:36
that’s the cost that I wasn’t an
21:39
important point the Hans Hoppy’s paper I
21:48
think is absolutely magnificent I saw
21:50
urge you all to read it when it comes
21:51
out because I think it’s good it’s a
21:53
real breakthrough using an essentially a
21:57
tell mystic kind of hours the teen kind
22:00
of self-contradiction argument and was
22:01
showing anybody else that disagrees no
22:02
this is court in the self-contradiction
22:04
even though it doesn’t it’s not a
22:06
natural rights argument it’s a it’s a
22:08
fantastic garment should appeal the
22:09
modern philosophers who book at the idea
22:11
of natural rights also he his idea of
22:15
timing and property etc I reminds me
22:18
Edmund Burke’s Edmund Burke’s famous
22:20
conservative line that all of us have a
22:22
comp
22:22
with the dead and the unborn I also say
22:25
the undead for those of you a vampire
22:26
face and as as Hans points out you have
22:34
a company for the unborn have to agree
22:35
and everything you know nobody can do
22:36
anything we’d all die out there would be
22:38
no one born mean to be bored never get
22:40
born the Jim Sadowski and Justin a cease
22:46
argument about property values fits in
22:47
beautifully with hunters argument about
22:49
you can’t protect property values any
22:51
kind of rational libertarian framework
22:54
or any framework for that matter and the
22:59
also David Gordon mentioned my animal
23:01
rights and has comments and answering
23:06
question and well I share any Grenadiers
23:09
view the animals should not be tortured
23:12
unnecessarily whatever I stole a firm of
23:14
there are no animal rights I think my
23:16
standard equip on that just which i
23:17
think is really true if animals get
23:19
their rights when they petition for them
23:21
and until they petition for them it
23:24
deserve it I also want to point out that
23:29
there’s some extremists on the rights
23:30
front also include vegetable rights and
23:33
if they’re really serious about this
23:35
they kill themselves all very rapidly
23:37
the whole honza’s argument about you
23:39
have to be alive to be participating in
23:41
an argument for ethics worked very well
23:44
if you couldn’t eat animals or eat
23:46
vegetables you’ll be soon dead and I’m
23:49
sort of take care of these rights
23:50
extremists
23:55
I don’t yeah I guess that’s that sums up
24:01
my general react I think this is
24:03
marvelous marvelous gathering as I said
24:05
and nothing about it and I think it’s
24:09
super enough much I can say except thank
24:11
you all it’s great
24:26
in most gatherings of this sort where
24:29
there is one person who is contributed
24:32
so significantly the great man speaks
24:34
and and his followers just sort of bow
24:37
down and and never question but we run
24:39
things a little differently here as you
24:42
well know and and I think one of the
24:43
things that Marie likes even more than
24:45
public speaking is question-and-answer
24:47
periods so I think we’re in store for
24:50
even more of a treat we can have a few
24:52
questions yes sir yeah the evolution of
25:06
fractional reserve banking bases if you
25:11
want to give by your money to a bank
25:13
that makes it clear to you that there
25:15
80% of it come back down for that reason
25:18
they don’t have to charge you for
25:19
parking your money there they might be
25:21
able to pay you something wouldn’t you
25:24
have a right to do so yeah I think what
25:28
would happen is I mean that seems to me
25:30
the public was trying to make it clear
25:31
in other words I think one of the best
25:33
healthiest developments in banking in
25:35
last 20 years or so is the CD you know
25:36
the consumers difficut of deposit when
25:38
you buy a CD you know that’s it’s not
25:40
there for six months or a year or
25:42
something you know that they’re the bank
25:43
is going to take it and lend it out and
25:45
and pay it back
25:47
it seems to me them to be to be clear
25:50
about the whole thing be much better to
25:51
have a CD arrangement you know the
25:52
money’s not there’s no confusion you
25:54
think the money is there they think it’s
25:56
not there whatever and I think these CDs
25:58
were developed as the standard kind of
26:00
quote savings on quotient in bank
26:03
deposits and I don’t I just don’t think
26:05
what happened see one of the things is I
26:07
think it’s water I mentioned there’s an
26:08
aunt there’s there are laws against
26:09
calling banks of the question I think
26:12
the laws the first law was passed 1932
26:15
1932 a middle of them magnificently
26:17
healthy bank collapses bank runs of the
26:20
Great Depression which by the way we
26:23
almost had a chance to establish under
26:24
percent reserve banking right bank the
26:26
whole fractional reserve banking system
26:27
was going down the tubes
26:28
magnificent depositors are finally
26:30
rising up the Republican Party felt was
26:32
all big plot was they call in
26:34
those days and the Communists were
26:36
spreading rumors of banks or unsound so
26:39
they passed the law saying making it
26:40
illegal to pass the spread rumor to
26:42
spread untrue rumors that Bank was
26:44
unsound what do you mean by untruths up
26:46
to the government of the side well is
26:47
untrue or not and now you could make
26:50
statements like I do the old banks are
26:52
unsound they don’t mind that’s so much a
26:53
specific statement they don’t like for
26:56
example the sort of society I would like
26:59
to see is one way you can have to take
27:01
out full-page ads we have remember
27:03
Leland Yeager was quite charmed with us
27:04
and I wrote what about this in his book
27:06
that he had other years ago you have
27:08
anti Bank vigilante leagues and the anti
27:10
Bank region I think we take out ads
27:12
saying look Chase Bank is bankrupt get
27:14
your money out now that’s illegal now in
27:17
a world where that would be legal we’re
27:19
probably you know what probably wouldn’t
27:20
it wouldn’t need these specific
27:21
enforcement hundred percent back in the
27:23
market and that sense would take care of
27:24
it
27:26
dawn-marie do you see any significant
27:31
difference between fractional banking
27:32
notes that so about here and commodity
27:35
futures contracts it seems to me that
27:37
both represent non-existent wealth both
27:40
represent an entitlement to ownership
27:42
not just usage and both also represent
27:45
future debt to the holder alright Mike
27:48
my guess is it’s not the same thing
27:50
because one is the future commodity
27:51
futures contracts are a few future
27:53
contracts for the future which are not
27:55
irrelevant on the present although there
27:57
is a wing of the movement mother white
27:59
Cheka I don’t understand about futures
28:00
contract any detail and as a wing of the
28:04
movement there’s a gentleman here in New
28:05
York was it was organized the American
28:07
Board of Trade and America on a
28:09
commodity forward exchange who claims
28:11
the futures quantity futures agreements
28:13
are evil and fractional reserve banking
28:14
and he subsidy any substance forward
28:16
forward agreements I don’t understand a
28:18
different thing future than forwards I’m
28:19
sort of out of that argument but I often
28:22
viewers that would not be the same at
28:23
all because a future precisely because
28:25
the futures contract not a knot at any
28:27
time of them you know any demand at any
28:29
moment contract thanks Marie for for
28:38
indulging our questions and thanks for
28:40
your talk

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *