Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Buffalo_Ken's avatar

In some place central banking control might be consistent with the historical ideology of the folks living in said places - so if that is the case - then let t he central banks have power over the movement of products and creation of goods. Fine if that is what they desire there and it is consistent with the ideology of folks living there.

In other places, take the us of a for instance - there has been a long-time conflict with the ideology of bankers who think they get to call the shots and run the show. Consider Hamilton - the first banker lover in the new country of the us of a, but consider Jefferson and Madison as well and then later on Jackson who told the bankers to shove it up their a-holes.

So what is good for those in China is good for them, but what is good for them, may not be good for everyone and historically in the us of a - there has been conflict twixt the bankers trying to run the show versus the founders who had ideas otherwise - Hamilton excluded in that regard.

To each their own I reckon - but frankly, if some folks want to be under central control by choice - then god bless em I reckon - but the country I reside within was founded upon the concept of "lack of central control" - makes one wonder - when did everything go wrong in that regard?

Expand full comment
Bert Powers's avatar

Isn't the collateral for any loan considered an asset, or am I missing something here?

How is China going to organize the BRICS when they all have such dissimilar banking methods?

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts