1.) End Central Bank control of the money supply
Whether this is done through Chartalism, private currencies, or some combination of the two, it must be done. Currency is the lifeblood of any modern economy, and it should not be controlled by a private monopoly. Either a public monopoly or a private free market of competing currencies is preferable to the current arrangement.
A Chartalist system will reduce or perhaps eventually even eliminate the need for governments to collect taxes, allowing business and individual tax rates to be lowered, stimulating the economy. The Money Revolution will be about creating new wealth, not redistributing existing wealth.
At the same time, the existence of competing private currencies will put a check on any excess money-printing by the government that is done for purely short-term political gain, as opposed to sound economic reasons.
2.) Create a robust social safety net, including Universal Health Care and a Basic Income, both as a moral imperative and to improve economic efficiency
Many of the regulations that impose serious dead-weight losses on the economy, for example minimum wage laws and the requirement that companies offer health insurance coverage, are only in place because the State is not fulfilling its duties with respect to the welfare of its citizens.
The American system of having companies act as government-subsidized welfare providers (for example through the tax deduction for offering health insurance) is dishonest and distorts the political dialogue in this country. It has established a “shadow welfare state,” where employed persons believe that they are receiving market goods in exchange for the value of their labor when they are really receiving state benefits in disguise.
Creating a robust social safety net, including a Basic Income, will remove the political pressure that sustains these costly regulations and the shadow welfare state that lurks behind them. Wages should be set by the free market, not government dictat, and requiring employers to offer health coverage places an undue burden on free enterprise.
A Basic Income in place of a minimum wage would dismantle the huge and coercive welfare bureaucracy. It would apply equally to all citizens, removing the disincentive to work which is inherent in the current welfare system.
Once the new system is in place, governments will no longer fear the consequences of allowing large corporations or banks to fold. Unemployment will simply mean the period in which one searches for a new job, rather than being a term of dread. The era of Too Big to Fail in which governments keep “zombie” firms operating for political reasons will be at an end.
3.) Establish a clear delineation between the duties of the private sector and those of the public sector
Markets work best in most sectors of the economy, but not all. Defense, infrastructure, health care and to some extent education are all public-sector duties. Markets have been shown to work poorly or to be extremely corrupting in these sectors.
On the other hand, agriculture, auto manufacturing and mortgages are clearly private-sector duties. The government should exit these sectors of the economy and let private markets function as they should. The massive corporate welfare that exists in these sectors is a drag on the economy and a theft from the taxpayer.
The prices currently seen in the equity and mortgage markets are political prices, not market prices. The destruction of the price discovery mechanism in these markets is incredibly harmful to the efficient functioning of the economy.
4.) Formulate a strong, consistent ideology that can implement and maintain these goals
Thomas Jefferson held that there was a “Wall of Separation” between Church and State in the Constitution, not just to protect the State from the Church, but to protect the Church from the State.
The modern economy needs a new Wall of Separation, this time between Market and State, to protect both entities from each other. Public financing for elections should be a critical part of this New Wall, as well as the development of laws forbidding the “revolving door” between government and the businesses it regulates.
Such radical changes can only gain acceptance if all parts of the political spectrum come to see them as necessary and inevitable. Advocates must present the Money Revolution to Conservatives and Libertarians as a way to preserve and extend the domain of free enterprise (which it is), to Moderates as a way to safeguard social stability (which it is), and to Liberals as a way to strengthen and protect social welfare (which it is.)