<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Europe up a creek with no central bank</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/2011/10/07/europe-up-a-creek-with-no-central-bank/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/2011/10/07/europe-up-a-creek-with-no-central-bank/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 10:00:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: decentralimprov</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/2011/10/07/europe-up-a-creek-with-no-central-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-953</link>
		<dc:creator>decentralimprov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2011 19:04:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/?p=602#comment-953</guid>
		<description>What you are suggesting in this article is a way to improve the inherently flawed Marxist central-fractional-debt based currency model.  You may be correct in your analysis, but that fix would only work short term and doesn&#039;t address the real problem. 

Governments &amp; central banks do a piss poor job of determining the correct amount of currency needed in the economy.  It was true in the Weimar Republic &amp; tons of others before it. It&#039;s true with the Federal Reserve.  The Federal Reserve Note has depreciated 97% since its introduction via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.  

Politicians, as long as their scope is not limited, have an incentive to hand out government promises, bailouts &amp; legislation, no matter how fundamentally or morally flawed, whether paid for or not.  This preference is inherently inflationary.  

Politicians &amp; central bankers don&#039;t have the knowledge to centrally plan an economy of millions of people of diverse interests, tastes &amp; goals, but are convinced they do.  The result of this is similar to that of any attempts to legislate behavior- it fails miserably and has unintended consequences.

The real solution is to up legal tender laws.  Let the countries print their own currency if they want.  Allow the market to come up with alternative currencies.  In the end, the cream will rise to the top &amp; money can function the way it is supposed to function.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What you are suggesting in this article is a way to improve the inherently flawed Marxist central-fractional-debt based currency model.  You may be correct in your analysis, but that fix would only work short term and doesn&#8217;t address the real problem. </p>
<p>Governments &amp; central banks do a piss poor job of determining the correct amount of currency needed in the economy.  It was true in the Weimar Republic &amp; tons of others before it. It&#8217;s true with the Federal Reserve.  The Federal Reserve Note has depreciated 97% since its introduction via the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.  </p>
<p>Politicians, as long as their scope is not limited, have an incentive to hand out government promises, bailouts &amp; legislation, no matter how fundamentally or morally flawed, whether paid for or not.  This preference is inherently inflationary.  </p>
<p>Politicians &amp; central bankers don&#8217;t have the knowledge to centrally plan an economy of millions of people of diverse interests, tastes &amp; goals, but are convinced they do.  The result of this is similar to that of any attempts to legislate behavior- it fails miserably and has unintended consequences.</p>
<p>The real solution is to up legal tender laws.  Let the countries print their own currency if they want.  Allow the market to come up with alternative currencies.  In the end, the cream will rise to the top &amp; money can function the way it is supposed to function.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laster</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/2011/10/07/europe-up-a-creek-with-no-central-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-952</link>
		<dc:creator>Laster</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Oct 2011 01:48:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/?p=602#comment-952</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve never once missed a James Saft article. I could only add that I&#039;m grateful to Reuters and it&#039;s journalists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve never once missed a James Saft article. I could only add that I&#8217;m grateful to Reuters and it&#8217;s journalists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NukerDoggie</title>
		<link>http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/2011/10/07/europe-up-a-creek-with-no-central-bank/comment-page-1/#comment-951</link>
		<dc:creator>NukerDoggie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Oct 2011 23:43:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.reuters.com/james-saft/?p=602#comment-951</guid>
		<description>James, I&#039;ve never understood why your column gets so few comments, while that of another columnist here - whose name and posts are always rather &#039;fishy&#039;, gets so many comments. Maybe it&#039;s because most people prefer to read fluff and comment likewise.

Your columns are always much deeper, right on target, much more instructive and intuitive and very well worth reading. Please, keep writing here!

This article is yet another example of your worthy insights. It&#039;s absolutely on target!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>James, I&#8217;ve never understood why your column gets so few comments, while that of another columnist here &#8211; whose name and posts are always rather &#8216;fishy&#8217;, gets so many comments. Maybe it&#8217;s because most people prefer to read fluff and comment likewise.</p>
<p>Your columns are always much deeper, right on target, much more instructive and intuitive and very well worth reading. Please, keep writing here!</p>
<p>This article is yet another example of your worthy insights. It&#8217;s absolutely on target!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
