I've been trying to condense the argument for why we need more money circulating, not less. This is my latest iteration.
The alternative to debt is theft. And every dollar is, in fact, a certified IOU. While it is obviously possible to incur debts without dollars, just as it is possible to enter a marriage without a certificate, since we incur debts with many more people, the certificates/tokens/memoranda make our obligations easier to remember and we can even pass them around. A civilized culture, one which does not rely on predatory theft, needs money (which we invented about 5000 years ago) and, as the network of relationships increases, it needs more. Putting artificial restrictions on how much money there is in circulation, whether by official rationing or private hoarding, is, when you come right down to it, anti-social behavior.
Why the Republican party in the U.S. has become anti-social is anybody's guess. Perhaps crooks are like birds of a feather and, ever since Nixon, they've been flocking to the banner of the 'rex.' The culture of obedience relies on "doing what the boss wants" to get away with mischief and worse.
Leadership, it would seem, is like ownership. Not up to good.
Leadership and ownership and citizenship -- each represents an obligatory relationship. Are they mutually excluding? If so, then to be civilized we must eschew leaders.
Eschew--what a lovely word! It means shun. But, look at it. Literally, it says to chew and spit out; the opposite of chow down.
Republicans bearing austerity must be eschewed.
P.S. Why does the circulation rate of money keep dropping?
http://research.stlouisfed.org/...
Because of rationing and hoarding.