For a few days, je m’interroge sur un fait assez étonnant : pourquoi aucun média ne parle du mécanisme de création monétaire ?

C’est un sujet tabou qui n’apparaît ni dans la presse économique, ni dans les journaux généralistes, aussi populaires soit-il. Parce que la lutte contre l’inflation (à cause de l’usage immodéré de la planche à billet) est devenue un dogme. Or, c’est un point capital pour comprendre la crise, mais aussi pour comprendre l’augmentation permanente de l’impôt qui grève le pouvoir d’achat des ménages mais aussi qui étouffe la liberté d’entreprendre par des taxes excessives (PME, artisans, professions, etc. )
Since the years 1970, France has abandoned the right to create money, it must now borrow on the markets, So from banks. Result, State borrows and pays interest to the private sector.

Maastricht drives the point :

Maastricht Treaty – Article 104

It prohibits the ECB and the central banks of the Member States, hereinafter “national central banks”, providing overdraft facilities or any other type of credit to Community institutions or bodies, central governments,regional or local authorities, other public authorities, other public bodies or enterprises of the Member States; direct acquisition, auprès d’eux, par la BCE ou les banques centrales nationales, des instruments de leur dette est également interdite.’

Ce qui signifie en clair que les Etats sont obliger de financer leurs investissements sur les marchés financiers, en augmentant leur dette et particulièrement celle due aux intérêts qu’ils ont à payer

Le ministre du Budget, Eric Woerth, a reconnu lundi 13 October 2008 que le plan de recapitalisation des banques “augmentera la dette” de l’Etat s’il est utilisé. L’Etat a décidé de consacrer jusqu’à 40 milliards d’euros à la recapitalisation des banques en difficulté, en créant une société publique. “Ca augmente la dette, c’est de la dette publique”, Has he admitted at a press conference. Even before the announcement of the bank rescue plan, the public debt of France was expected to 65,3% of GDP at end 2008, beyond the ceiling 60% authorized by the European Stability Pact.

For what purpose this device he was set up?

This question bothers, André-jacques Holbecq, “citizen economist” as it appears (his writings on the site that it manages with the “GRESSO” (Economic Research Group for societal system) , on the page http://wiki.societal.org/tiki-index.php?page=UserPageAJH

He therefore raises Valery d'Estaing Giscart (then the president of the republic, also author of the European constitution-treaty), on his blog :

“The 3 January 1973, under the presidency of Georges Pompidou, while you were Minister of Finance, came into effect a major reform of the Statute of the Bank of France, in which we find this very short article 25 ; "The Treasury can not be presenter of his own effects discount of the Bank of France", ie was blocked at that time the possibility of credit from the Bank of France to the Treasury, and here is the origin of government debt in our country which now reaches more than 1200 billion (in one direction of Maastricht), and we collectively punctures over 40 billion in interest per year, paid to “already richer. I would like you to explain, without jargon, what was, at the time, the justification for this shift that binds us under the control of private banks”.
ANSWER :

“The reform of the statutes of the Bank of France, adopted under President Georges Pompidou and when I was Minister of Finance, is a modern reform which transposed in France in the practice in all major countries : it was at the time to be a genuine market for short titles, medium and long term, it is issued by a private or public entity. La possibilité du prêt direct de la Banque de France au Trésor public a généré partout où il fut appliqué une situation d’inflation monétaire permanente. Votre remarque sur l’endettement public est inexacte et révélatrice : vous semblez penser qu’une dette du Trésor public envers la Banque de France ne serait pas décomptée comme faisant partie de la dette de l’administration publique. As a matter of fact, il y a dans ce domaine des règles bien connues qui définissent le montant des avances et prêts de l’institut d’émission en faveur du Trésor public, advances and loans that have obviously intended to be repaid and thus contained in the amount of public debt. Do you suppose is to say that we could have replaced one visible and structured debt by simply issuing currency. But it would open its arms to return to the inflation of the 1950s.”

” thank you for your reply, but I'm obviously not at all agree with your arguments. He has had the monetary émsion (by the “credit” private banks (increase in M1 on a slope of 10% annual, without inflation), so that lenders can lend to the French State. La grosse différence avec un prêt direct de la Banque Centrale aux collectivités, est simplement que dans ce dernier cas les intérêts seraient revenus à la Banque Centrale (et donc, in fine, à la collectivité).
J’ai calculé (mon dernier livre ” La dette pubique, une affaire rentable”) qu’entre 1980 and 2006, c’est plus de 1100 billion (valeur 2006) d’INTERETS que nous avons payés aux déjà plus riches…
Je trouve que votre décision de 1973 a été une trahison – voulue ou non – envers les français… pas tous, it is true.

Voilà donc le débat ! à suivre par ailleurs sur quelques sites vraiment pas très instutitionnels… is this mean that we must be wary as the plague and they are directed by dangerous disinformation, dévoyeurs of the single thought so beneficial to our comfort ? certainly not, they are made in line with the thinking of Nobel 1988 economy, Maurice Allais : http://allais.maurice.free.fr/monde01.htm

Off the beaten track of the news “conventional”, if not conformist, here are some links that will help you understand the current monetary system.
In my humble opinion, the global economic structure is completely biased (This does not mean that a bad thing mondialisatin), it is still and toujous our taxes will bear the losses of the financial system. the financial system is now bailed out by European states that do so by creating money, nor can they borrow from their European bank, but will borrow on the markets for… supporting markets… who will take interest in passing. A real virtuous circle of high finance!

http://vge-europe.eu/index.php?post / 2008/07/25 / Answer-to-VGE # comments

http://www.fauxmonnayeurs.org/

– http://www.chomage-et-monnaie.org/

– http://wiki.societal.org/

– The Association for Democratic and Economic Rights

– money as debt, Paul Grignon

– http://www.liberonslamonnaie.fr/

– Public debt, une affaire rentable

– http://bankster.tv/

Currently, circulating a petition to request the resumption of the money creation law by States.

http://www.public-debt.org/index.php

EXTRACT /

That is the estimate of what we, Français, Paid for 1973,
under the sole interests on public debt *,

1 300 billion

En effet, depuis 1973, the State has voluntarily deprived of its fundamental duty to issue the relevant currency to citizens, money that our economy needs, and state borrows to private banks, which he then poured huge interest. At the time of ” tottering purchasing power ” And some ” empty boxes “, it is not acceptable that our money, from our work, does not belong to us. Nous subissons chaque jour les conséquences de cette trahison : dégradation de l’emploi et des services publics, course sans fin à la croissance, destruction de l’environnement, etc.,.

Nous vous proposons donc d’agir par une
mobilisation citoyenne, par voie postale et pétition électronique,
pour restaurer le droit légitime des Nations
à émettre leur propre monnaie.

Related Articles

Keywords: crise, dette publique, Economie