Dirty South September Initiatives Thread

[Associate Justice PiT]

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

Oh. My. God.

I'm no banking expert, but I believe most banks have historically kept only between 10 to 20 percent reserves. This drags banking back to literally PRE-19th century standards.I'll consider introducing legislation in the Mideast to prepare for the refugees from DS when your banking system literally collapses overnight dragging down the entire region economy with it.

     I would also like to point out that regulating the activities of banks in such a fashion is really not a libertarian thing to do at all. I don't know why SPC would propose an initiative like that.

Protecting people from fraud is a libertarian thing to do. This would only affect demand despoits; time deposits could have any amount of money in reserve as the bank chooses

     Protecting people from fraud is plenty libertarian, though I am not sure about doing it in this way. Perhaps it would be better to give banks the option to apply for an official "100% demand deposit reserve guaranteed" status, which they could then advertise to prospective customers.

I'm missing the distinction between this proposal and SPC's, PiT. Can you elaborate?

     Well, I am suggesting giving banks the opportunity to be certified as keeping 100% of demand deposits onhand (which they could then advertise to customers) instead of requiring that they do so.

[Bacon King]

XBacon King to Dibble's amendment.

[Bacon King]

Can anyone capable of edit the Wiki help put these on there? No Southeastern initiatives have been put on there in over two years.

[Badger]

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

Oh. My. God.

I'm no banking expert, but I believe most banks have historically kept only between 10 to 20 percent reserves. This drags banking back to literally PRE-19th century standards.I'll consider introducing legislation in the Mideast to prepare for the refugees from DS when your banking system literally collapses overnight dragging down the entire region economy with it.

     I would also like to point out that regulating the activities of banks in such a fashion is really not a libertarian thing to do at all. I don't know why SPC would propose an initiative like that.

Protecting people from fraud is a libertarian thing to do. This would only affect demand despoits; time deposits could have any amount of money in reserve as the bank chooses

     Protecting people from fraud is plenty libertarian, though I am not sure about doing it in this way. Perhaps it would be better to give banks the option to apply for an official "100% demand deposit reserve guaranteed" status, which they could then advertise to prospective customers.

I'm missing the distinction between this proposal and SPC's, PiT. Can you elaborate?

     Well, I am suggesting giving banks the opportunity to be certified as keeping 100% of demand deposits onhand (which they could then advertise to customers) instead of requiring that they do so.

Well, as reserve limits merely state the minimum reserves a bank must have on hand, banks are already free to carry 100% reserves. The fact that none do so should tell us about the lack of wisdom in doing so. The type of people who would demand 100% reserves rather than trust the FDIC to protect their accounts are the type of fringe folks who fundamentally mistrust banks anyway and would be more likely to just stuff their money under the mattress or convert it all to Krugerrands. And that's such a tiny sliver of the population they clearly aren't worth courting if it means reducing the amount of loans your bank can issue and earn interest on by a factor of 4 or 5.

[Badger]

I suggest we look at reactivation of the Southeast Deficit Package Initiative:
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Deficit_Package_Initiative

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

I would suggest changing this to something along the lines of banks shall have 1 year (maybe longer) to come into compliance. Maybe something else like they would have 6 months to be at least 50%. At a minimum specify a time line for them to come into compliance.

If this initiative passed, even with Brandon's amendment, I strongly urge the GM to find multiple persons outside the forum with some familiarity through employment, education, etc with banking, say at least 3, and make sure all are self-professed conservatives to avoid inevitable complaints of liberal bias. Then ask them what the likely outcome of such a law being passed in real life would be, then impose their best case (or rather "least worse") scenario on the Dirty South economy.
Even then with unemployment topping 30% and the regional economy imploding harder than a mine collapse, no one down there would likely change policies one whit.

[Purple State]

I suggest we look at reactivation of the Southeast Deficit Package Initiative:
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Deficit_Package_Initiative

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

I would suggest changing this to something along the lines of banks shall have 1 year (maybe longer) to come into compliance. Maybe something else like they would have 6 months to be at least 50%. At a minimum specify a time line for them to come into compliance.

If this initiative passed, even with Brandon's amendment, I strongly urge the GM to find multiple persons outside the forum with some familiarity through employment, education, etc with banking, say at least 3, and make sure all are self-professed conservatives to avoid inevitable complaints of liberal bias. Then ask them what the likely outcome of such a law being passed in real life would be, then impose their best case (or rather "least worse") scenario on the Dirty South economy.
Even then with unemployment topping 30% and the regional economy imploding harder than a mine collapse, no one down there would likely change policies one whit.

I'm at college so three conservative economics professors wouldn't be hard to come by.

As GM and through my (limited, yet present) knowledge of economics, I can project that such a law would have devastating effects on the regions economy, drastically reducing the supply of money at a rate many times greater than a simple addition equation.

[Associate Justice PiT]

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

Oh. My. God.

I'm no banking expert, but I believe most banks have historically kept only between 10 to 20 percent reserves. This drags banking back to literally PRE-19th century standards.I'll consider introducing legislation in the Mideast to prepare for the refugees from DS when your banking system literally collapses overnight dragging down the entire region economy with it.

     I would also like to point out that regulating the activities of banks in such a fashion is really not a libertarian thing to do at all. I don't know why SPC would propose an initiative like that.

Protecting people from fraud is a libertarian thing to do. This would only affect demand despoits; time deposits could have any amount of money in reserve as the bank chooses

     Protecting people from fraud is plenty libertarian, though I am not sure about doing it in this way. Perhaps it would be better to give banks the option to apply for an official "100% demand deposit reserve guaranteed" status, which they could then advertise to prospective customers.

I'm missing the distinction between this proposal and SPC's, PiT. Can you elaborate?

     Well, I am suggesting giving banks the opportunity to be certified as keeping 100% of demand deposits onhand (which they could then advertise to customers) instead of requiring that they do so.

Well, as reserve limits merely state the minimum reserves a bank must have on hand, banks are already free to carry 100% reserves. The fact that none do so should tell us about the lack of wisdom in doing so. The type of people who would demand 100% reserves rather than trust the FDIC to protect their accounts are the type of fringe folks who fundamentally mistrust banks anyway and would be more likely to just stuff their money under the mattress or convert it all to Krugerrands. And that's such a tiny sliver of the population they clearly aren't worth courting if it means reducing the amount of loans your bank can issue and earn interest on by a factor of 4 or 5.

     Indeed they are free to do so. My idea would just allow them to get some sort of official recognition if they choose to do so, so that customers afraid of losing their money in a bank run or something can know that they can put it there without any of that risk.

[Marokai Backbeat]

This is a ridiculous requirement that places a burden on Southeast banks and it's not even necessary given the fact that we have the FDIC, and I haven't a clue why anyone thinks this is needed. It's a silly initiative that is designed, like many other things in the South, to obstruct the economy because of some fringe demand.

[SPC]

I suggest we look at reactivation of the Southeast Deficit Package Initiative:
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Deficit_Package_Initiative

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

I would suggest changing this to something along the lines of banks shall have 1 year (maybe longer) to come into compliance. Maybe something else like they would have 6 months to be at least 50%. At a minimum specify a time line for them to come into compliance.

If this initiative passed, even with Brandon's amendment, I strongly urge the GM to find multiple persons outside the forum with some familiarity through employment, education, etc with banking, say at least 3, and make sure all are self-professed conservatives to avoid inevitable complaints of liberal bias. Then ask them what the likely outcome of such a law being passed in real life would be, then impose their best case (or rather "least worse") scenario on the Dirty South economy.
Even then with unemployment topping 30% and the regional economy imploding harder than a mine collapse, no one down there would likely change policies one whit.

I'm at college so three conservative economics professors wouldn't be hard to come by.

As GM and through my (limited, yet present) knowledge of economics, I can project that such a law would have devastating effects on the regions economy, drastically reducing the supply of money at a rate many times greater than a simple addition equation.

Why don't you ask three libertarian economists what the effect would be so your report could be truly unbiased.

[Purple State]

I suggest we look at reactivation of the Southeast Deficit Package Initiative:
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Deficit_Package_Initiative

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

I would suggest changing this to something along the lines of banks shall have 1 year (maybe longer) to come into compliance. Maybe something else like they would have 6 months to be at least 50%. At a minimum specify a time line for them to come into compliance.

If this initiative passed, even with Brandon's amendment, I strongly urge the GM to find multiple persons outside the forum with some familiarity through employment, education, etc with banking, say at least 3, and make sure all are self-professed conservatives to avoid inevitable complaints of liberal bias. Then ask them what the likely outcome of such a law being passed in real life would be, then impose their best case (or rather "least worse") scenario on the Dirty South economy.
Even then with unemployment topping 30% and the regional economy imploding harder than a mine collapse, no one down there would likely change policies one whit.

I'm at college so three conservative economics professors wouldn't be hard to come by.

As GM and through my (limited, yet present) knowledge of economics, I can project that such a law would have devastating effects on the regions economy, drastically reducing the supply of money at a rate many times greater than a simple addition equation.

Why don't you ask three libertarian economists what the effect would be so your report could be truly unbiased.

How exactly are your actions libertarian? You are placing stringent government restrictions and regulations on free-enterprise institutions. If anything libertarian professors would back me up more than their colleagues.

[Bacon King]

I can see perfectly the logic that would bring a devout small-government advocate to propose an initiative that would literally kill an entire industry from government intervention. (note: sarcasm)

libertarian = things SPC likes, apparently

Kind of like how he holds the Constitution sacred except when he prefers to ignore it! Remember when he defended the constitutionality of the bill that replaced the dollar as Southeastern currency in spite of it, y'know, pretty directly contradicting a quite simply worded part of the federal Constitution?

[Хahar 🤔]

Amendment Recognizing Societal Roles

The Regional Protection Party of the Southeast Region, a follower of libertarianism and of the ideas of AHDuke99, downwithdaleft, PiT (The Physicist), and South Park Conservative, and the organized vanguard of the Southeastern nation, is the highest leading force of society and of the state, which organizes and guides the common effort toward the goals of the protection of regions and the progress toward a libertarian society.

[Bacon King]

LOL

Xahar in the Southeast?

DWTL ain't gonna be happy.

[SPC]

I suggest we look at reactivation of the Southeast Deficit Package Initiative:
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Deficit_Package_Initiative

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

I would suggest changing this to something along the lines of banks shall have 1 year (maybe longer) to come into compliance. Maybe something else like they would have 6 months to be at least 50%. At a minimum specify a time line for them to come into compliance.

If this initiative passed, even with Brandon's amendment, I strongly urge the GM to find multiple persons outside the forum with some familiarity through employment, education, etc with banking, say at least 3, and make sure all are self-professed conservatives to avoid inevitable complaints of liberal bias. Then ask them what the likely outcome of such a law being passed in real life would be, then impose their best case (or rather "least worse") scenario on the Dirty South economy.
Even then with unemployment topping 30% and the regional economy imploding harder than a mine collapse, no one down there would likely change policies one whit.

I'm at college so three conservative economics professors wouldn't be hard to come by.

As GM and through my (limited, yet present) knowledge of economics, I can project that such a law would have devastating effects on the regions economy, drastically reducing the supply of money at a rate many times greater than a simple addition equation.

Why don't you ask three libertarian economists what the effect would be so your report could be truly unbiased.

How exactly are your actions libertarian? You are placing stringent government restrictions and regulations on free-enterprise institutions. If anything libertarian professors would back me up more than their colleagues.

O RLY? http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/frb.html

[Badger]

I suggest we look at reactivation of the Southeast Deficit Package Initiative:
https://uselectionatlas.org/AFEWIKI/index.php/Southeast_Deficit_Package_Initiative

End to Fractional Reserve Banking Act
All banks operating in the Dirty South shall be required to have 100% reserves for all demand deposits

I would suggest changing this to something along the lines of banks shall have 1 year (maybe longer) to come into compliance. Maybe something else like they would have 6 months to be at least 50%. At a minimum specify a time line for them to come into compliance.

If this initiative passed, even with Brandon's amendment, I strongly urge the GM to find multiple persons outside the forum with some familiarity through employment, education, etc with banking, say at least 3, and make sure all are self-professed conservatives to avoid inevitable complaints of liberal bias. Then ask them what the likely outcome of such a law being passed in real life would be, then impose their best case (or rather "least worse") scenario on the Dirty South economy.
Even then with unemployment topping 30% and the regional economy imploding harder than a mine collapse, no one down there would likely change policies one whit.

I'm at college so three conservative economics professors wouldn't be hard to come by.

As GM and through my (limited, yet present) knowledge of economics, I can project that such a law would have devastating effects on the regions economy, drastically reducing the supply of money at a rate many times greater than a simple addition equation.

Why don't you ask three libertarian economists what the effect would be so your report could be truly unbiased.

How exactly are your actions libertarian? You are placing stringent government restrictions and regulations on free-enterprise institutions. If anything libertarian professors would back me up more than their colleagues.

O RLY? http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/frb.html

Ah, a hardcore anarcho-capitalist who is critical of the US's involvement in WWII. He has a degree in English for pete's sake. This guy is an "expert" on fringe liebertarian philosophy, but seems to have no background in economics, let alone banking. Y'know, 3 self-described conservative libertarian economists would probably forcast (quite correctly) an absolute collapse of the regional banking system utterly flushing down the rest of the regional economy as well.

You all are of course free to try any experiment you wish in your region. If nothing else please consider the devestaing ripple effects the collapse of your regional economy will have on the rest of the country.

[Bacon King]

Badger, note that SPC is (IIRC) opposed to US involvement in WW2 as well, so you pointing that out probably isn't going to do much.

[Badger]

Badger, note that SPC is (IIRC) opposed to US involvement in WW2 as well, so you pointing that out probably isn't going to do much.

<whistles> Really? I read his screed on Lincoln and that mean ol' Civil War, but WWII??

'Nuff said.

[Brandon H]

In the article, Rothbard mentions something like "Suppose I have my own bank" instead of the federal reserve. We had an initiative that was ruled unconstitutional that would have had the Southeast using its own currency. As long as the region has to operate using federal reserve notes, I'm not sure we could eliminate FRB without putting us at a disadvantage compared to other regions.

I do have a contact that's an economics professor at Loyola. I'm tempted to ask him what he thinks would happen if this were done.

[SPC]

In the article, Rothbard mentions something like "Suppose I have my own bank" instead of the federal reserve. We had an initiative that was ruled unconstitutional that would have had the Southeast using its own currency. As long as the region has to operate using federal reserve notes, I'm not sure we could eliminate FRB without putting us at a disadvantage compared to other regions.

I do have a contact that's an economics professor at Loyola. I'm tempted to ask him what he thinks would happen if this were done.

I suspect that economist would agree that fractional reserve banking is bad
http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block110.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block111.html

[SPC]

O RLY? http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/frb.html

Ah, a hardcore anarcho-capitalist who is critical of the US's involvement in WWII. He has a degree in English for pete's sake. This guy is an "expert" on fringe liebertarian philosophy, but seems to have no background in economics, let alone banking. Y'know, 3 self-described conservative libertarian economists would probably forcast (quite correctly) an absolute collapse of the regional banking system utterly flushing down the rest of the regional economy as well.

You all are of course free to try any experiment you wish in your region. If nothing else please consider the devestaing ripple effects the collapse of your regional economy will have on the rest of the country.

Maybe you would like to back up your claims before you make them:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard

[Badger]

O RLY? http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/frb.html

Ah, a hardcore anarcho-capitalist who is critical of the US's involvement in WWII. He has a degree in English for pete's sake. This guy is an "expert" on fringe liebertarian philosophy, but seems to have no background in economics, let alone banking. Y'know, 3 self-described conservative libertarian economists would probably forcast (quite correctly) an absolute collapse of the regional banking system utterly flushing down the rest of the regional economy as well.

You all are of course free to try any experiment you wish in your region. If nothing else please consider the devestaing ripple effects the collapse of your regional economy will have on the rest of the country.

Maybe you would like to back up your claims before you make them:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard

Sorry, I was referring to Lew Rockwell.

I read Rothbard's paper and, with deference to the degrees he's attained, his premise is that the Fed Reserve is basically a giant ponzi scheme which is more a philisophical/politcal assessment of the federal government than economic analysis.

The end result would still be utter ruination. Not nearly as bad as the federal government offering a public option for health insurance, of course, but still really really really bad.

[SPC]

O RLY? http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/frb.html

Ah, a hardcore anarcho-capitalist who is critical of the US's involvement in WWII. He has a degree in English for pete's sake. This guy is an "expert" on fringe liebertarian philosophy, but seems to have no background in economics, let alone banking. Y'know, 3 self-described conservative libertarian economists would probably forcast (quite correctly) an absolute collapse of the regional banking system utterly flushing down the rest of the regional economy as well.

You all are of course free to try any experiment you wish in your region. If nothing else please consider the devestaing ripple effects the collapse of your regional economy will have on the rest of the country.

Maybe you would like to back up your claims before you make them:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Rothbard

Sorry, I was referring to Lew Rockwell.

I read Rothbard's paper and, with deference to the degrees he's attained, his premise is that the Fed Reserve is basically a giant ponzi scheme which is more a philisophical/politcal assessment of the federal government than economic analysis.

The end result would still be utter ruination. Not nearly as bad as the federal government offering a public option for health insurance, of course, but still really really really bad.

Well, obviously Ponzi schemes do not have a positive effect on the economy, so our effort in the Dirty South to end this Ponzi scheme should help the economy in the long run, even if is had bad effects in the short term.

[Brandon H]

In the article, Rothbard mentions something like "Suppose I have my own bank" instead of the federal reserve. We had an initiative that was ruled unconstitutional that would have had the Southeast using its own currency. As long as the region has to operate using federal reserve notes, I'm not sure we could eliminate FRB without putting us at a disadvantage compared to other regions.

I do have a contact that's an economics professor at Loyola. I'm tempted to ask him what he thinks would happen if this were done.

I suspect that economist would agree that fractional reserve banking is bad
http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block110.html
http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block111.html

I have no doubt FRC is bad or that Dr. Block would say it's bad. What would happen if only banks in one state could not use FRC while the others could. Not to mention if anything bad happens to the banks as a result of it, the federal government would just bail them out anyway. If we are going to end FRC, it would have to be done at the federal rather than regional level.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Ah, to be young again and the copy and paste my arguments from other people because I can't make them myself.

Those were the days.

[SPC]

Ah, to be young again and the copy and paste my arguments from other people because I can't make them myself.

Those were the days.

I only did that because Badger suggested that Purple State get an opinion from an economist, so I provided some.