Try to catch this radio interview of Stephen Zarlenga of the American Monetary Institute ASAP

[Adele Edisen]

This is playing right now today, Nov. 17, 2012
The broadcast is 90 minutes long.


Dear Friends of the American Monetary Institute,

I'm being interviewed this evening (November 15th) at 11 PM Eastern Time on the internet radio show
Progress Towards Democracy.
It could last for some time.
You can tune in at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/forwardblit...-democracy

Best,
Stephen Zarlenga,
Director, American Monetary Institute

American Monetary Institute, PO BOX 601, Valatie, NY 12184, USA

Adele

[Adele Edisen]

This is playing right now today, Nov. 17, 2012
The broadcast is 90 minutes long.

"Dear Friends of the American Monetary Institute,

I'm being interviewed this evening (November 15th) at 11 PM Eastern Time on the internet radio show
Progress Towards Democracy.
It could last for some time.
You can tune in at http://www.blogtalkradio.com/forwardblit...-democracy

Best,
Stephen Zarlenga,
Director, American Monetary Institute

American Monetary Institute, PO BOX 601, Valatie, NY 12184, USA"

Adele

Stephen Zalenga, Director of the American Monetary Institute, proposes changes to our current monetary system (the Federal Reserve Banking System), two changes which had been originally proposed by economists at the University of Chicago during the early 1930s and have became known as the original "Chicago Plan". These economists were serious in their ideas to reform the system. These proposed plans were to be enacted simultaneously in order to be effective.

The first-mentioned idea was to incorporate the Federal Reserve Banking System into the Federal Government because the Constitution gave the US Government, the Congress, the right to create money (the term "to coin" money is used as a verb in Article !, Section 8 in the Constitution and includes paper money). The government is then in control of the money supply, and it is not left in the hands of privately owned banks, which are the Federal Reserve System Banks and have been since 1913..

The second idea mentioned as part of the original "Chicago Plan" was to remove, by law, the banks' "fractional reserve system" by which banks created money out of thin air to lend and charge interest upon.

The third idea which Zerlanga himself proposed was to counteract the idea that this monetary reform would cause deflation in the economy, as thought by some economists, was to have the government create and support infratructure (public works, roads, bridges, schools, programs in human health, education, etc.). Governmdent could do this by creating money for such, as was done during Colonial times when the colonists created their own script, or during the Civil War when Lioncoln had the US Treasury Department print "greenbacks" as currency when private banks charged extremely high interest rates to lend money to the US Government.

Later in the interview, Zalenga mentioned the name of the economist of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) who used computers to determine what effect the first two reforms alone would have on our current economic system and found that they would not cause deflation/inflation. I did not catch his name but his paper is referenced on the American Monetary Institute's web site and I shall find it.
His name is Dr. Michael Kumhof, Deputy Division Chief of the Research Division of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

http://www.monetary.org/

Adele

[Adele Edisen]

Intro and Abstract) http://www.monetary.org/the-chicago-plan...ed/2012/08

(Full paper) http://www.monetary.org/wp-content/uploa...isited.pdf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From paragraph before Conclusion):

Fisher's claim (1) regarding the advantages of the Chicago Plan can also
be validated, provided policy avails itself of the appropriate tools. What that means is that
policy does not just use a countercyclical policy for the interest rate at which the treasury
makes credit available to lenders, but also direct targets for the quantity of lending, to
prevent excessive volatility in the quantity of investment projects approved by lenders.
http://www.monetary.org/the-chicago-plan...ed/2012/08

VIII. Conclusion

This paper revisits the Chicago Plan, a proposal for fundamental monetary reform that
was put forward by many leading U.S. economists at the height of the Great Depression.
Fisher (1936), in his brilliant summary of the Chicago Plan, claimed that it had four
major advantages, ranging from greater macroeconomic stability to much lower debt levels
throughout the economy. In this paper we are able to rigorously evaluate his claims, by
applying the recommendations of the Chicago Plan to a state-of-the-art monetary DSGE
model that contains a fully microfounded and carefully calibrated model of the current
U.S. financial system. The critical feature of this model is that the economy's money
supply is created by banks, through debt, rather than being created debt-free by the
government.

Our analytical and simulation results fully validate Fisher's (1936) claims. The Chicago
Plan could significantly reduce business cycle volatility caused by rapid changes in banks'
attitudes towards credit risk, it would eliminate bank runs, and it would lead to an
instantaneous and large reduction in the levels of both government and private debt. It
would accomplish the latter by making government-issued money, which represents equity
in the commonwealth rather than debt, the central liquid asset of the economy, while
banks concentrate on their strength, the extension of credit to investment projects that
require monitoring and risk management expertise. We find that the advantages of the

(Footnote Refernce 44)The lending volume of the aforementioned non-bank investment
trusts could also be regulated by countercyclical capital adequacy requirements.

Chicago Plan goes even beyond those claimed by Fisher. One additional advantage is large
steady state output gains due to the removal or reduction of multiple distortions,
including interest rate risk spreads, distortionary taxes, and costly monitoring of
macroeconomically unnecessary credit risks. Another advantage is the ability to drive
steady state inflation to zero in an environment where liquidity traps do not exist, and
where monetarism becomes feasible and desirable because the government does in fact
control broad monetary aggregates. This ability to generate and live with zero steady
state inflation is an important result, because it answers the somewhat confused claim of
opponents of an exclusive government monopoly on money issuance, namely that such a
monetary system would be highly inflationary. There is nothing in our theoretical
framework to support this claim. And as discussed in Section II, there is very little in the
monetary history of ancient societies and Western nations to support it either.

Adele

[Adele Edisen]

http://www.monetary.org/media

Video 42 minutes long

Adele

[Peter Lemkin]

All great ideas, but IMHO and sadly, the very last thing the current Oligarchy would allow [and not until after nuclear war] would be an end to the Fed and changes in the current bankster system. Those who benefit [and the only ones who do] from that horrible system feel they own the Nation and the World. They've killed Presidents and started wars to prevent such things, before.

[Adele Edisen]

All great ideas, but IMHO and sadly, the very last thing the current Oligarchy would allow [and not until after nuclear war] would be an end to the Fed and changes in the current bankster system. Those who benefit [and the only ones who do] from that horrible system feel they own the Nation and the World. They've killed Presidents and started wars to prevent such things, before.

But, Peter, aren't you forgetting something in your pessimism? People power. People all over the world, even in the US, are learning something important about their lives and who rules over them every day. This has happened before in human history and oligarchs have fallen and been killed, even. It may not happen tomorrow or in our lifetimes, but injustice
will not be tolerated forever. The oligarchs are really not that powerful, and their system of rule is already cracking in its very core.

Adele