What if the national fiscal deficit were fully repaid and the country became tax-free? The WLFI distributes USD 40 trillion (USD 1 per unit × 40 trillion) directly to the people. The government borrows the entire amount from the people and fully repays the Federal Reserve. It then repays the people through a Sovereign Universal Basic Income.
9 Likes
Your proposal stinks of the most putrid socialism 
6 Likes
So the government takes all the money and then rations it out to the people as it sees fit? Uh, hard pass.
5 Likes
That’s because you’re a flat-earth person. This is nothing more than a paraphrasing the theory of celestial motion into the theory of geodynamics. The “FRB” is owned by the people, and the government creates credit from the people, and the fiscal deficit disappears and becomes tax-free.
3 Likes
The central bank is owned by the people, and the government borrows the full amount from the people and repays it in a lump sum. Repayment to the public is repaid through social security such as basic income and infrastructure development such as disaster measures.
4 Likes
I respect your opinion, but I must say that anyone who indulges a belief in fiscally responsible governments should think pretty hard before mocking the beliefs of anyone else.
4 Likes
That fiscal responsibility is the responsibility to manage the budget rigorously and maintain a surplus. Who is this responsibility to, and who is this strictness directed at? Since that responsibility is the obligation to repay the debt to the Federal Reserve, all we need to do is fulfill that responsibility. Unfortunately, that strictness is the strictness that leads to recession and poverty through taxation of the people. I believe that this strictness should be a contract between the government and the people. By shifting the debt to the Federal Reserve to the people and having them shoulder the government’s debt, it creates a form of mutual trust between the people and the government. However, since the government’s fiscal responsibility does not need to change, it can continue to collect taxes as before without borrowing from the people. Which do you prefer: the government continuing to repay its debt to the people, or the people continuing to pay taxes to the government? I prefer the people to have more freedom.
2 Likes
I understand that, but in application that is just not the way things actually turn out. Greed and corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency enter and the government does not faithfully execute its obligations to the people. The only way to control greed and corruption and bureaucratic inefficiency in government is to limit the governments access to the people’s resources as well as the peoples dependence upon the government. Individual liberty and personal accountability are, to me, the foundation of a strong society, and any policy requiring the government to harvest the resources of its people to then ration it back out to those same people (for instance “The government borrows the entire amount from the people and fully repays the Federal Reserve. It then repays the people through a Sovereign Universal Basic Income”) erodes both by robbing the people of the freedom to make their own choices and requiring them to depend on the government for a handout of what they would already have if only the government hadn’t stolen it in the first place. This includes Social Security as you mention, which is a terrible and perfect example of exactly how anything of the sort actually plays out: I am required by law to give the government my resource for my whole life until finally, when I retire, they will (maybe) give back to me a small pittance of what I could have had if left to manage my own affairs. I kind of think trusting the government with the people’s wealth and making the people look to the government for financial support is the opposite of WLFi.
8 Likes
Then, what if debt redemption costs were paid not through taxation, but by borrowing directly from the people? Taxes currently underpin the government’s credit, but what if, instead, the government trusted its citizens and borrowed from them?What I am constantly thinking about is how to take back the government from the control of the central bank and return it to the people.
2 Likes
Do the people have the right to decide at an individual level whether or not they agree to “loan” their money to the government? Would each citizen decide for themselves regarding each expense? If not, it is all just a euphemism for the same extortion. Once the government borrows away all the peoples wealth and gives it to the bankers to cover its own debts, what funds does it use to repay its debt to the people? As I see it, the only way to return control of the government to the people is to decrease the people’s dependence upon the government. Get the government out of individual finances, not make it a bigger part of them. You can’t possibly expect to control a thing when you depend on it for your existence, and when it is in the position of determining the nature of that existence. Individual liberty and personal accountability are the antithesis of tyrannical government.
6 Likes
Currently, we have not asked for the consent of each citizen to borrow from the FRB.Therefore, we will create a national participating financial institution like WLFI, and it will change to the FRB. The government borrows from the entire nation’s wallet, not from the Fed, by creating credit, and the government distributes USD1 instead of government bonds.It seems that the right to issue banknotes is passed to the people, but in the first place, the right to issue banknotes of the Fed is a entrustment of the rights of the people, and it does not mean that it is okay to issue as much as you want, so I think there is no problem.
2 Likes
Se nos ha colado un comunista de cojones, que tiene que ver WLFI con el Estado americano, que yo sepa Wlfi es una empresa privada, y con tal tiene sus propios intereses, no no son precisamente la deuda pública, ni gestión dinero privado para levantar una deuda pública ni nada por el estilo. Propuesta fuera de lugar a mi humilde entender.
A communist of balls has slipped into us, that WLFI has to do with the American State, as far as I know Wlfi is a private company, and as long as it has its own interests, they are not exactly the public debt, nor private money management to raise a public debt or anything like that. Proposal out of place to my humble understanding.
4 Likes
Everyone seems to have forgotten, but President Trump established WLFI as a place to freely discuss the future of global finance. The tokens that are said to be worth 1,000 times more and USD1 are just camouflage. He created a forum for us to have this discussion—not for members of Congress, high-roller investors, or Wall Street. That’s why I’m speaking about a great future. This is a discussion that only the private sector can have.I consider myself the ultimate liberal democrat.
In reality, communism is not so different from capitalism when it comes to controlling the people—both are systems designed to strip economic sovereignty away from the hands of the public.
This forum is the exact opposite of the Davos meetings—it’s a fully private, council for world liberty financial .
1 Like
The above sentence is utopian. Where have you seen similar examples in history? There is no doubt that the government will be able to try to “borrow” (or better yet, forcibly confiscate under good intentions) money from the population. But what about returning something to these people later?
2 Likes
It does not mean drawing from the people’s deposits. Instead of creating credit at the central bank, credit creation is done through the collective of citizens’ wallets, from which the government borrows.
1 Like
Are you a communist?
2 Likes
“True communism has never been tried” in 3… 2… 1…
1 Like
And thank God!
But the very ideas of the communist infection are alive and mimic any other form.
2 Likes
That’s right. They claim it’s communism, but in reality, it’s a socialist dictatorship.
Yeah,I think so too. It’s insanely hard to get rid of. This is the World Liberty Financsl Forum, but since communists are hiding somewhere, even when I express liberal views, I get called a communist on this forum. It’s really frustrating.