Banking Reform by Positive Money (video)

Home » Blog » 2013 » February » 19 » Banking Reform by…

Why our monetary system is broken and how it can be fixed?

Positive Money Founder, Ben Dyson, presenting at the 3rd annual Positive Money Conference “Modernising Money” on 26th January 2013 in London, explains the main principles behind the monetary reform proposals which offer one of the few hopes of escaping from our current dysfunctional monetary system:

 

“Our problems are man-made, therefore they can be solved by man. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings.”

John F Kennedy

Screen Shot 2013-01-31 at 17.59.14

The book ‘Modernising Money’ mentioned in the talk can be ordered here.

Download FREE PREVIEW (contains Foreword, Summary of key points, Full introduction & First page of each chapter).

More about the ‘Modernising Money’ conference 2013 here.

 

SUBSCRIBE to Positive Money UK’s videos.

 

 

Stay in touch

Trackback from your site.

  • Al-memani

    The answer is copyright idea on http://www.credit-crunch.synthasite.com al-memani world banking windows

  • Jim Berger

    After a reasonably accurate analysis of how banks create money and the problems that creates, you propose a far too complicated solution. Simply fix the quantity of money. You don’t need a money creation committee. Market prices will take care of resource allocation. You would get the bankers and politicians out of the process entirely.

    • http://twitter.com/EvolveLeadteam Shirley Wardell

      Market forces are not laws of nature. Market forces are not reliable.

      • Peter Hunt

        True. Markets are driven as much by emotion as reality. Additionally under the current system the exponential growth of the money supply is inevitable no matter what constraints are applied simply because of the need to service interest demands on the existing. Positive Money proposes a gradual substitution of interest bearing bonds with debt free money in a thoughtfully worked out programme which should be studied in full and then criticised in detail if possible.

        • Ian Bilik

          Well said Shirley and Peter. Markets are also driven by greed, by the few that can control them with speculation. This is the main problem with free markets and unregulated banks. Like you say, P.M.’s solution is very well thought out and surprisingly simple and should be studied in detail before any criticism. Once that has been done, one tends to realise that everything one hears from politicians and the media, worldwide, is going to do nothing but put a metaphorical plaster on a severed jugular vein.

          • jude harrow

            It is crucial that we learn to stop using the term ‘market’ as a gross generalisation for trade. There are many different forms of trade that take place at different scales of the economy. All involve a degree of human agency that is incentivised in different ways as particular institutional mechanisms interact with human subjectivity in particular trading contexts. One such mechanism is money.

            The function of money as an institutional mechanism is complex and mutable. As a fiat mechanism for trade and exchange money is a physical token of human trust, yet many studies show that it cannot supercede trust itself as the most powerful means of incentivising or sanctioning human behaviour. As societies become less self-sufficient and more interdependent, the more prominent money becomes as a means of placing value on people’s productive activity. Hence, in the developed world, childcare, domestic management and cohesive community relations have to be outsourced beyond the boundaries of family and community. I personally think this is erroneous, and draw reference to the interesting correlations Richard Wilkinson draws between the growing economic inequalities in the most developed liberal market economies and the breakdown of trust and social capital in those very same economies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZ7LzE3u7Bw

            Whilst I applaud positive money for attempting to reform the institutions that govern the creation and trade of money as a trading commodity, I feel we need to go much further in reframing our macroeconomic assumptions about the value and utility of money as mechanism for measuring and incentivising prosperity in society. Understanding ‘The Market’ as being made up of several subtly different institutional environments rather than a single supra-human invisible hand is perhaps one of the first steps we need to take.

    • http://twitter.com/jamesmurraylaw James Murray

      But they have not…

      … and banks are still too big to fail

      …and we still have the ridiculously huge bank-created booms and busts

  • Inma

    I don’t think their hundred percent reserve solution will work.They also think banks should remain private. Public banking is better, as all interest goes to reduce taxes, rather than increase them.

    • http://twitter.com/jamesmurraylaw James Murray

      Thank for your opinion.

      Regretfully, it is not backed up at all by any evidence or argument.

      Merely asserting paranoid socialist “Public Good. Private Bad” thinking does not make it right.

  • Inma

    Alleged “market forces” are mafia forces, the purchase, threatening or blackmail of our politicians (and press) by a few immoral, corrupt and self-serving bankers who must then do their bidding against us all. Voilà. “Market forces have just been easily debunked!

  • mike crees

    But will bankers give up the power to print money..

  • Guido Grossi

    I still believe we miss a point: central banks are run by people who share interest and culture of the private banking system.
    IT is increasingly evident that they simply don’t want to control the money creation by the private banks.
    Who is that has taken the decision to eliminate the reserve requirement ? Ore the liquidity rules?

  • Pingback: The budget - Jim's opinion « Liverpool's favourite solicitorsLiverpool's favourite solicitors()

  • HR

    The system proposed here sounds too good to be true! I hope your proposals for reform come accross the Atlantic to Canada.
    One thing I think would better the reform is the creation of a government owned bank to compete with the private banks after the postive money system is adopted. This would give the government a direct way to ensure there is always enough credit in the economy for real-economy businesses and families. Just a thought.

  • http://www.facebook.com/Nostradurus Nostradurus Zagrebački

    First, it does not explain how to limit multiplication through investment. Second, it does not explain how the state will be able to solve the financing of the budget, if there was a reduction of money. Third, debt reduction diagram is essentially false. No one can so quickly reduce debt because it requires a large emission of money. Fourth, there is no penalty for bank fraud so far – taking away the of banking assets. Fifth, do not see the problem in the accumulation of money for corporations. Sixth, do not say anything about the interest rates banks and depositors interest of investors. Etc.

    • http://bsd.wpengine.com.uk/ Ben Dyson

      We could have mentioned all those, but then it would be a three hour talk! You might find the book has the detail you’re looking for: http://bsd.wpengine.com/shop/modernising-money/

      • http://www.facebook.com/Nostradurus Nostradurus Zagrebački

        Mr. Dayson keywords in your reply as “you might find.” That does not mean it’s written anything about it.

        On all the answers we have an answer. http://www.pokretpatriot.com (Croatia) Thanks

No Announcement posts

back to top