Very interesting discussion of a moral, anarchistic order. Paul Rosenberg argues that the basis of morality is the Golden Rule: Never do to others that which you would not have done to you. He concludes that since government can only exist via taxation and since taxation is the coercion of money from the populace under the threat of punishment for non-compliance, government is inherently immoral. If the problem of taxation could be surmounted, would such a government be moral? If, lets say, government were to issue scrip to fund specific, voter-approved infrastructure projects, for example, the public could use that scrip as currency. In this scenario there would be no taxation. I believe this was actually tried with great success in Germany in the 1930s after Hitler seized power and the Germans were able to pull out of the Great Depression by 1936 as a result. The scrip was issued without any burden of interest. This process goes against my principle of currency as commodity money only, but it is a very interesting idea nevertheless. The paper scrip would have to be strictly associated with a valid, approved infrastructure project, and the scrip would have to be very difficult to counterfeit. Some natural method of limiting the amount of circulating scrip would have to be devised. Such a system would involve another concept alien to me, that of centralized control. Any thoughts?
Posted on: Sun, 24 Aug 2014 07:06:44 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015