Comment: If the government should not control exchanges.....

(See in situ)


If the government should not control exchanges.....

...then the government should not control the medium of exchange either. Money is too important to be entrusted to government. I am a localist as described http://www.amazon.com/Localism-A-Philosophy-Government-ebook...

It explains why money should be private, with the government only there to enforce contracts (as in, when a private mint holds its coins out as containing one tenth of an ounce of .999 fine gold then it allows prosecution if they violate the contract to keep their product to that standard). History shows us that government REPEATEDLY infringes on the implied contract of upholding the value of money. When they are one of the parties to the contract, you can't trust them with the power to enforce that contract. The light went on for me, and so much else makes sense now. Money is too important to be left to government. Its function should be decentralized because ANY kind of centralized power opens the door to tyranny.

Localism is for people who can still sleep at night even though somebody they don't know in a city they have never been is doing things differently. ("Localism, A Philosophy of Government" on Amazon for Kindle or Barnes and Noble ebook websites)