5 ms·

Can you name a country that has a strong, fair, and just judicial system without having complete control of their monetary policy? I can’t even begin to imagin

by tw04 5y ago

Can you name a country that has a strong, fair, and just judicial system without having complete control of their monetary policy? I can’t even begin to imagine how that country would continue to exist. A government that doesn’t control its own monetary policy isn’t a government at all.

paxys 5y ago
Yes, the USA for most of its existence.
- cortesoft 5y ago
  Wait, when was the US not in charge of its monetary policy?
  - brian_cloutier 5y ago
    Bretton Woods is one notable example, it was in effect for the US from 1945 until 1971.
    - meepmorp 5y ago
      Wasn't Bretton Woods a voluntary agreement? Did the US lack the ability to withdraw from the agreement unilaterally?
      - cortesoft 5y ago
        They obviously didn't lack the ability to withdraw unilaterally, because that is exactly what they did.
      - brian_cloutier 5y ago
        Yes, Bretton Woods isn't a good example of a time where the US literally lacked control over monetary policy. However, the GP stated that countries without control of monetary policy cease to exist. For the purposes of addressing that statement a period of >30 years where the US decided not to exercise any control seems nearly as good of a counter-example as a period where they literally had no control.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - paxys 5y ago
    "In charge of its monetary policy" can mean a hundred different things, so that is impossible to answer directly. While a centralized (and government controlled, regardless of what it would have you believe) banking system seems as obvious today as a national military, it is a relatively modern invention. The Fed itself didn't exist until 1913. USA was on the gold standard until 1933. The US dollar wasn't a fiat currency until 1971. Some of this country's greatest achievements have come in a system where the government still had full legislative, executive and judicial powers but had to operate under basic rules like not being able to print money for themselves whenever they felt like it.
    - cortesoft 5y ago
      Ok, that is different though... you are arguing the US CHANGED their policy, and you don't like the way they changed it. That is different than saying they were not in control of their monetary policy... they have always been in control, you just liked the old monetary policy better
      - brian_cloutier 5y ago
        Have they always been in control? Yes, for the entire existence of the US it has been legally capable of creating a US Dollar and of turning it into a fiat currency. However, for large swaths of the time the US has been around that has not been politically feasible, and I'm not sure it would have been economically feasible, fiat currencies seem to have taken a while to gain stability and acceptance. For a large period of time the US was on a gold standard and de facto did not have control over monetary policy. It doesn't matter much that they technically had power if they didn't use it.
brian_cloutier 5y ago
> Can you name a country that has a strong, fair, and just judicial system without having complete control of their monetary policy? This description seems to apply to most European countries, who have explicitly given up some control of their monetary policies. So, Germany, for example, seems to contradict your thesis that any such country would quickly cease to exist.
- tw04 5y ago
  I think you know on its face that’s not even remotely equivalent to what we’re talking about here. Each country you’re referring to is a part of the EU and as a member still has control of the overall policy. Just because they agree to making it democratic doesn’t somehow mean that private individuals now operate outside the scope of their collective control.
  - brian_cloutier 5y ago
    > I think you know on its face that’s not even remotely equivalent to what we’re talking about here I did not know. The phrase "complete control over monetary policy" has a very specific meaning and I stand by my response as a counterexample to that meaning. And I don't think this is an unreasonable misunderstanding! People do worry about Bitcoin w.r.t monetary policy, a future of "hyperbitcoinization" where the world runs off a deflationary currency seems undesirable, to say the least. If that is not what you intended then even given your clarification here I'm still not sure what you meant to say with that phrase.
  - pdpi 5y ago
    Is it that far from being equivalent though? Greece's financial crisis shows you exactly how far they were from controlling monetary policy.
- qsort 5y ago
  The European Parliament has regulatory powers over the ECB that are almost exactly the same as the Congress' powers over the Fed, even down to the numbers. So yeah, Germany does have control over its own monetary policy, they just made a political choice to share that power with France, Italy, Spain, etc.
meowface 5y ago
I'm not a Randian or whatever, but it doesn't seem that inconceivable to imagine a hypothetical government which provides security/military/justice services without enforcing a monetary policy. I can think of many potential difficulties running and funding such a government, but it's not like the concept is so absurd that such a government can't ever possibly exist sometime within the next tens of thousands of years.
darawk 5y ago
The judicial system has basically nothing to do with monetary policy.
dane-pgp 5y ago
Do none of these examples count? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_substitution#US_dollar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_substitution#US_dolla...
zmk_ 5y ago
In the countries that you think of as having 'strong, fair, and just judicial systems' governments typically control only the fiscal policy. Monetary policy is left to some independent entity. For countries with fixed exchange rates it is also impossible to have autonomous monetary policy without imposing restrictions on capital mobility. This also applies to blocks of countries, e.g., none of the individual governments of euro countries have control over the bloc's monetary policy.
thaumasiotes 5y ago
> A government that doesn’t control its own monetary policy isn’t a government at all. This statement is best characterized as "not historically aware".
menzoic 5y ago
Why are you correlating the judicial system with monetary policy? I don't see the relation you're trying to make.

by tw04 5y ago

paxys 5y ago

Yes, the USA for most of its existence.

cortesoft 5y ago
Wait, when was the US not in charge of its monetary policy?
- brian_cloutier 5y ago
  Bretton Woods is one notable example, it was in effect for the US from 1945 until 1971.
  - meepmorp 5y ago
    Wasn't Bretton Woods a voluntary agreement? Did the US lack the ability to withdraw from the agreement unilaterally?
    - cortesoft 5y ago
      They obviously didn't lack the ability to withdraw unilaterally, because that is exactly what they did.
    - brian_cloutier 5y ago
      Yes, Bretton Woods isn't a good example of a time where the US literally lacked control over monetary policy. However, the GP stated that countries without control of monetary policy cease to exist. For the purposes of addressing that statement a period of >30 years where the US decided not to exercise any control seems nearly as good of a counter-example as a period where they literally had no control.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
- paxys 5y ago
  "In charge of its monetary policy" can mean a hundred different things, so that is impossible to answer directly. While a centralized (and government controlled, regardless of what it would have you believe) banking system seems as obvious today as a national military, it is a relatively modern invention. The Fed itself didn't exist until 1913. USA was on the gold standard until 1933. The US dollar wasn't a fiat currency until 1971. Some of this country's greatest achievements have come in a system where the government still had full legislative, executive and judicial powers but had to operate under basic rules like not being able to print money for themselves whenever they felt like it.
  - cortesoft 5y ago
    Ok, that is different though... you are arguing the US CHANGED their policy, and you don't like the way they changed it. That is different than saying they were not in control of their monetary policy... they have always been in control, you just liked the old monetary policy better
    - brian_cloutier 5y ago
      Have they always been in control? Yes, for the entire existence of the US it has been legally capable of creating a US Dollar and of turning it into a fiat currency. However, for large swaths of the time the US has been around that has not been politically feasible, and I'm not sure it would have been economically feasible, fiat currencies seem to have taken a while to gain stability and acceptance. For a large period of time the US was on a gold standard and de facto did not have control over monetary policy. It doesn't matter much that they technically had power if they didn't use it.

brian_cloutier 5y ago

> Can you name a country that has a strong, fair, and just judicial system without having complete control of their monetary policy? This description seems to apply to most European countries, who have explicitly given up some control of their monetary policies. So, Germany, for example, seems to contradict your thesis that any such country would quickly cease to exist.

tw04 5y ago
I think you know on its face that’s not even remotely equivalent to what we’re talking about here. Each country you’re referring to is a part of the EU and as a member still has control of the overall policy. Just because they agree to making it democratic doesn’t somehow mean that private individuals now operate outside the scope of their collective control.
- brian_cloutier 5y ago
  > I think you know on its face that’s not even remotely equivalent to what we’re talking about here I did not know. The phrase "complete control over monetary policy" has a very specific meaning and I stand by my response as a counterexample to that meaning. And I don't think this is an unreasonable misunderstanding! People do worry about Bitcoin w.r.t monetary policy, a future of "hyperbitcoinization" where the world runs off a deflationary currency seems undesirable, to say the least. If that is not what you intended then even given your clarification here I'm still not sure what you meant to say with that phrase.
- pdpi 5y ago
  Is it that far from being equivalent though? Greece's financial crisis shows you exactly how far they were from controlling monetary policy.
qsort 5y ago
The European Parliament has regulatory powers over the ECB that are almost exactly the same as the Congress' powers over the Fed, even down to the numbers. So yeah, Germany does have control over its own monetary policy, they just made a political choice to share that power with France, Italy, Spain, etc.

meowface 5y ago

I'm not a Randian or whatever, but it doesn't seem that inconceivable to imagine a hypothetical government which provides security/military/justice services without enforcing a monetary policy. I can think of many potential difficulties running and funding such a government, but it's not like the concept is so absurd that such a government can't ever possibly exist sometime within the next tens of thousands of years.

darawk 5y ago

The judicial system has basically nothing to do with monetary policy.

dane-pgp 5y ago

Do none of these examples count? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_substitution#US_dollar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency_substitution#US_dolla...

zmk_ 5y ago

In the countries that you think of as having 'strong, fair, and just judicial systems' governments typically control only the fiscal policy. Monetary policy is left to some independent entity. For countries with fixed exchange rates it is also impossible to have autonomous monetary policy without imposing restrictions on capital mobility. This also applies to blocks of countries, e.g., none of the individual governments of euro countries have control over the bloc's monetary policy.

thaumasiotes 5y ago

> A government that doesn’t control its own monetary policy isn’t a government at all. This statement is best characterized as "not historically aware".

menzoic 5y ago

Why are you correlating the judicial system with monetary policy? I don't see the relation you're trying to make.