[Toddsterpatriot]

If our government needs to buy something it has several choices to raise the funds to pay for it. It may tax us, which is unpopular and can end political careers, it may borrow it, or it may print the money and spend it into ciruclation, which is what Lincoln did to pay for the Civil War.

So what? What does that have to do with your gross misunderstanding of money supply?

Remove the profit motive from loaning governments money and you would quickly see the size and scope of governments stabilize and eventually start to shrink.

Yes, if people didn't earn interest when they lent money to government, they'd stop lending to government. Has nothing to do with the Federal reserve or money supply. Try again?

[iconoclast63]

Yes, if people didn't earn interest when they lent money to government, they'd stop lending to government. Has nothing to do with the Federal reserve or money supply. Try again? How can you say this has nothing to do with the money supply??? It is PRECISELY the money created by the Fed to fund the federal deficits that serves as the foundation of the ENTIRE money supply. Tell me Todd, where do you think money comes from? How can you disconnect it from government debt? You are obviously fine with the arrangement that, while the government CLEARLY has the power to create it's own money, debt free, and use it to pay for the costs of government, instead we should continue BORROWING that money from the privately owned Fed and feeding the banking system with unlimited profits. Should I give you a reading list? What are you defending?