Our money is created by revaluations of the commercial banks' balance sheets.
And make no mistake. The banks do not grant loans and credits to keep society's wheels turning, or with the aim of supporting good, socially beneficial initiatives. Banks, like all other companies, are set up in the world to make money, and the banks' lending takes place under the simple premise that the money must earn interest; as a first link in the chain of financialization.
I don't have the slightest problem with diligent and persistent people working themselves stinking rich. Not as long as it is done on the basis of activities that benefit society as such. On the other hand, I have a serious problem with people who become ultra-wealthy at the expense of others, whether in the form of speculative enterprise, interest, or inherited privilege.
What makes good sense in terms of money and business therefore does not necessarily make good sense in terms of society. In particular, not in a green and climate perspective.
Shouldn't it be possible to create our money so that it works more for our common good?
The goal must be that money creation correlates with real value creation, so that what is best for the common good and as many people as possible is also obviously the best business.
Just as you mine new bitcoins by actually making a real effort, and sending your supercomputer into overtime—(a not very productive, nor at all sustainable action, by the way)—exactly like this our normal currency should also see the light of day in the moment someone creates something of concrete societal value for others.
I am a strong supporter of a free market and in many ways liberal. But no matter what, I regard our means of payment as critical infrastructure and for the same reason believe that money creation is a public task that should be handled under the auspices of a central bank.
New money should not be sent into circulation as debt to private banks, but instead honor the value creation that public employees and suppliers provide to the community. No one deserves to be rewarded more than the people who choose to spend their working lives serving vital, community-critical functions. Precisely our well-functioning public infrastructure is the prerequisite for us other self-employed and private employees to live a free and relatively privileged life.
I don't have the slightest problem with diligent and persistent people working themselves stinking rich. Not as long as it is done on the basis of activities that benefit society as such. On the other hand, I have a serious problem with people who become ultra-wealthy at the expense of others, whether in the form of speculative enterprise, interest, or inherited privilege.
No one should imagine that financialization is a prerequisite for a modern, developed economy.
No one should imagine that it does anything good for society when ownership of property is significantly more profitable than work.
And no one should imagine that we as a society are heading in the right direction when inequality is rising steadily, and social mobility is not at all as widespread a phenomenon as we are otherwise in the habit of bragging about.
In fact, we can do better.
It is basically about creating an efficient economy; efficient understood as an economy that distributes the benefits and maximizes the opportunities for as many people as possible, without at the same time gambling with either nature, our shared livelihood, or other of our shared resources.
We must forget all about citizen wages, and instead create a modern something-for-something state, where everyone who wants to contribute (in the form of work) can do so. Where money rewards real value creation, and works in the service of the good cause.
After all, we are human.
