While monetary policy certainly affects inflation, the role of productivity deserves greater consideration. Environmental regulations, excessive taxation, bureaucratic red tape all increase manufacturing cost, reduce productivity and drive manufacturing offshore. All this reduces productivity, increases cost and reduces supply. All inflationary.
There are a few things that you left out and I believe are misled on.
You need to look a little higher up in the chain to see where the real power is. The real power is in the banking system. SWIFT came about because America was becoming too powerful in the global banking system. FNCB was the issue. Decent article, but it misses the forest for the trees and gets some fundamentals backwards.
You're right to focus on government spending and the dollar system, but you need to look higher up the chain. The real power isn't in Washington—it's in the global banking infrastructure. SWIFT exists precisely because America was becoming too dominant in international banking through FNCB and similar institutions. SWIFT, headquartered in Belgium, was meant to distribute control. Yet despite this nominal internationalization, the US still effectively controls SWIFT—which is exactly why BRICS nations are working to build alternatives.
Here's what you're missing: undermining SWIFT wouldn't just hurt the US economy—it would collapse the entire power structure that allows dollar hegemony. This is the real game, not your neighbor's credit card debt.
Your debt analogy fundamentally misunderstands how sovereign debt and productive borrowing work. The old banking joke goes: if you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $1 billion, that's their problem. The US currently owes tens of trillions, which makes it the world's problem—and paradoxically, the world's investment opportunity.
Foreign investment in US Treasuries doesn't just "keep us afloat"—it's a mutual dependency. China, Japan, and other major holders need a stable dollar as much as we need their capital. This isn't weakness; it's structural power. When everyone needs your system to work, you control the system.
Not all debt is created equal. A family going into debt for designer clothes is wasteful. A business borrowing to expand capacity is investment. A nation borrowing to build infrastructure, fund research, or stabilize during crisis is strategic. Your article conflates consumer debt with sovereign debt, which is like confusing a home mortgage with a payday loan.
Senator Kennedy's quote—"Washington doesn't make money. It takes it, and borrows the rest"—is catchy but misleading. Washington doesn't need to "make" money in the production sense. It creates the framework, infrastructure, legal system, and stability that allows everyone else to make money.
Does Washington "make" the internet? No—but DARPA funded its development. Does Washington "make" pharmaceutical innovations? No—but NIH grants fund the basic research. Does Washington "make" the GPS satellites that enable billions in commerce? Actually, yes—but private industry couldn't have done it alone.
The government's role isn't to compete with private enterprise in making widgets. It's to provide the foundation that makes private wealth creation possible. Roads, courts, patent systems, national defense, basic research—these aren't "taking" money, they're investing in the infrastructure of prosperity.
Your article notes that currency in circulation increased 400% since 1997 while paychecks didn't. But you're comparing apples to oranges. If population grows, if the economy grows, if productivity increases, the money supply must grow proportionally—or you get deflation, which is far worse than moderate inflation.
The real question isn't whether money supply grew, but whether it grew faster than the productive capacity of the economy. Some inflation occurred, yes. But your 400% figure ignores that real GDP roughly doubled in that period, population grew, and global dollar demand increased. The money supply expansion wasn't pure dilution—much of it represented real economic growth requiring more monetary units to facilitate.
Here's what your article gets exactly backwards: a country where everyone saves and nobody spends creates economic stagnation. This is the paradox of thrift. If everyone hoards money, businesses have no customers, workers get laid off, and the economy contracts. Your savings become worthless when the economy collapses around them.
A healthy economy requires money velocity—spending, investing, borrowing, and yes, some inflation to encourage using money rather than burying it. The alternative isn't stability; it's deflation spirals like Japan's lost decades or the Great Depression.
You're free to believe that BRICS should undermine US power, that the petrodollar system is purely extractive, that we should return to gold standard constraints. But understand what you're advocating for: a world where US influence declines, where the dollar loses reserve currency status, where we face the same capital constraints as any other nation.
Maybe that's preferable to you. But it means giving up the "exorbitant privilege" that lets us borrow in our own currency, that keeps US Treasury rates low, that allows us to finance deficits other nations couldn't dream of. It means accepting that when crisis hits, we won't be able to print our way to stability—we'll be subject to the same external constraints as everyone else.
Is the current system perfect? No. Does it create dependencies and distortions? Absolutely. But the alternative isn't some idyllic return to "sound money" and balanced budgets—it's a multipolar world where US power contracts and other nations fill the vacuum.
You can't have it both ways: condemning the system that maintains US dominance while presumably wanting America to remain the global superpower. Pick one. SWIFT controls the movement of money between countries and is headquartered in Belgium. BUT SWIFT is still mainly controlled by the US. BRICS looks to undermine SWIFT. Undermining SWIFT would decimate the US economy and its power structure worldwide.
Debt is not always a bad thing. Debt is a bad thing when you can not repay it. The running joke is that if you owe the bank $100, that is your problem. If you owe the bank $1bn, that is their problem. Right now, foreign investment in the US Treasury keeps the US afloat. It also keeps the US in power in the world.
If you do not want the US to be in power in the world, that is your choice. I'd disagree with it.
David: Debt is a bad thing when there’s massive waste and fraud that supports a spoils system and politician enrichment. Our country has major problems. When it cannot print more money — create it— we are increasingly taxed. You address macro big picture economics in your post: global power positions and inter-dependencies. Americans live and vote micro which this article addresses within word count limitations.
What’s troubling voters struggling for answers? Waste, fraud, ever increasing taxation and bond fees, the continued erosion of the standard of living of the majority of American citizens.
Ah yes, the infamous cliché: "waste, fraud, and abuse." When asked to quantify it, people fall silent. So let's get specific—what exactly is this waste, fraud, and abuse? Give me dollar amounts per category.
Let me save you the trouble and address what you're likely to say:
"Waste" is subjective. You might think the military is underfunded and undermanned. I'll point out that the Department of Defense is the largest employer in the world with approximately 3 million people—roughly 1% of the US population. Sound small? Consider this: India employs about 2.5 million in their military with nearly 5 times our population. China has similar numbers with similar population. They're both at roughly 0.15% of their population while we're at 1%. One person's "bloated military budget" is another's "essential deterrent." Waste is in the eye of the beholder.
Fraud is human nature. It exists everywhere, always has, always will. What disturbs me is the misplaced focus. The media loves to spotlight the welfare recipient with six kids from four fathers getting $500 a month—"How dare she!" Over 18 years, that's $108,000. Meanwhile, Senator Rick Scott oversaw fraud at HCA that resulted in a $1.7 billion settlement. Let that sink in: it would take 16,000 welfare recipients defrauding the system for 18 years each to equal what Scott's company paid in one settlement.
We're outraged by someone stealing a bag of chips while someone else robs the bank. The focus is deliberately misdirected.
The US must print more money. This isn't optional; it's mathematical necessity. In 1970, the US population was about 200 million. Let's say hypothetically there were $100 billion in currency. Today there are 350 million people. If you kept that same $100 billion, money becomes scarcer. Scarcity drives up value—that's deflation. Prices would have to fall by 75% for the same economic activity to occur. That's not stability; that's economic collapse.
Money supply must scale with population and economic activity. The alternative is deflationary death spiral.
Americans are taxed because we demand services. We run deficits because the services we demand cost more than the revenue we generate. It's that simple. You want lower taxes? Fine—tell me which services you want eliminated. Social Security? Medicare? Defense? Interstate highways?
We could balance this by raising revenue, but that means higher taxes—which you just complained about. Or we could cut services—which voters consistently reject when specific cuts are proposed.
The deficit isn't a bug; it's a feature. As I said before, that debt structure gives us power in the global system. You can't have it both ways: demanding low taxes, expansive services, and global dominance while complaining about the debt that makes it all possible.
So again: quantify the waste, fraud, and abuse. Give me numbers. Show me what you'd cut. Because vague complaints about "waste" while enjoying the benefits of the system is just intellectual laziness.
THAT was a very informative response, David. You should be teaching at one of our crappy institutes of learning. Maybe then the kids would learn a thing or two. I learned more about world finance in your “semi“ article then I did during four years at university. Well, I agreed with the authors premise that Washington needs more fiscal control, I see that it must be blended with more of a worldwide nuance than I ever imagined. Thank you for the lesson. Happy new year.
For Bergersons comment run though CPTZero I got...
Lightly edited by AI
We are highly confident this text was originally human writtenand polished by AI
Probability breakdown
6% AI generated
94% Mixed
0% Human
For the piece Brain wrote today that Bergerton was commenting on I got -
We are moderately confident this text was AI generated
Probability breakdown
78% AI generated
22% Mixed
0% Human
I think it's the sign of the times (for better or worse) that most folks are running most of the serious stuff they publish through some sort of AI. Aren't spell checks some kind of rudimentary form of AI?
Since you are trying to find out about me, why not check out some of the economics teachers I had? One was David Denslow. I was awake during these classes.
If you cannot control the local government and spending what have you?
The County of Santa Barbara was told it basically is broke in August. To use a phrase it was robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The City of Santa Barbara, City of Goleta and others have been doing this for decades. Spending dependent on beggars handouts. (e.g. pass through from a broken State of Calif. that depended on in-sustainable Federal funding and inflation.)
Think about the increased taxes locally and then contemplate this quote from Mr. Campbell (In 1997 there were about $475 billion in U.S. currency in circulation. Today there are around $2.4 trillion, a 400% increase. ) All political parties own a part of this but which is mostly responsible?
The bike boys stated spending $10 of millions on bike paths would improve and strengthen the economy? Where did that money come from? The anti car Visionless Zero groups said shut down the streets, spend money on failed bulbouts, and make driving miserable, so the economy would flourish? Where did that money come from?
Sacramento stated High Speed Rail is the answer. That was sold by false advertising and dependency on magic tax dollars. You were sold the proverbial bill of goods. The HSRA laughable statement to justify their failure by stating we have more bike paths and side walks now. Huh? That is High Speed Rail. Where did that money come from after the lies about cost and return? The demanded Sacramento Social Programs are decades of failures and spending the people into debt.
Has the Cities and County of Santa Barbara depended and designed projects based upon dollar stability or has it and does it continue to waste your taxes and efforts based upon inflation? Quote Mr. Campbell "Inflation is created in the printing press, not the checkout line."
Faced with deficit the City of Santa Barbara is on a spending frenzy spending for trees, and plants. At a time when it cannot cover its own debt! What makes it so ridiculous, is the reoccurring multi year droughts have proven this one sector of government is basically planting uncontrolled water faucets 24/7. The water table of the area has already shown it is bad planning and long term trees die for lack of ground water.
Focusing on local government and questionable spending makes the point of this article.
I'll finish with this. If you cannot control the local government and spending what have you?
Interesting and thought provoking article Mr. Campbell
Appreciate the reminder Brian that we’re controlled and held captive by our rulers; increasingly taxed to pay for their reckless, self-serving bad behavior. Who can keep up besides those making big money in real estate, tech, finance, or tax payer funded government jobs?
What’s the solution? A mass tax-payer rebellion? Some of us are sinking in quick sand. Don’t we have a right to our money?
Gold is the money of kings, Silver the money of gentlemen, Barter the money of peasants, and Debt the money of slaves…
We are debt slaves, BUT, Team Trump is working on elimination of the Federal Reserve Bank (which is not a bank, has no reserves, and is not part of the federal government), along with the illegal IRS…the plan is to transition to a new money system, with sound money…constitutional dollars, back primarily by gold and silver, plus a basket of other commodities (see BRICS model).
Great article, Brian, you quote: “Washington Doesn’t Make Money. It Takes It, and Borrows the Rest.” Senator John Kennedy (R-LA). I would modify Kennedy's quotes to: "Washington Doesn't Make Money, It Steals It, Prints It and Wastes most of It. The term "borrowing" money is simply a prettier term for stealing. Government steals what they so-call "borrow." Since the Feds "man" the printing presses, they can print all they want and bully their way into raising taxes.
A good example of waste is by the Feds watching over us. I've concluded the Fed's FBI is likely filled with special agents' family members which these relatives in turn are given safe and wasteful work. They watch me, such as in a restaurant and the FBI guy next door hacking into my computer. In the restaurant, a round table sat about six FBI guys about twenty feet from me and my wife. They all sat quietly looking at their cellphones. As I quietly spoke to my wife, I said a word that got the attention of one of the six and he said out loud exactly what I said except he added the word "not" to what I said. We have a local FBI office in town. The FBI now monitors me because they know they did a lot of illegal stuff to me and my wife in Dem SB with a Dem FBI ... in other words, I can get them (City and FBI) into serious legal trouble for big bucks. With all the crime out there, we are paying FBI probably millions of dollars to harass me and others. More tons of money waste of just another dead end trail the FBI created.
Thank you for illuminating this huge problem. I have often mentally debated: Does the American experience really work if it takes massive borrowing and inflation to keep status quo; is the model viable? It could was and could be if restraint was exercised, but it is not.
For those who dismiss the California dumpster fire, losing billions in fraud, waste, corruption and incompetence, blaming “mean ol’ Republicans” and Trump; California’s own Auditor has given FAILING ratings.
Exceptional article, leading us back to the basics of life, history and wise counsel. I opened my bible and reviewed the verses mentioned. Thank you, and bless you for your work and gift of giving.
Brilliant piece on the paycheck-to-paycheck couple masquerading as successful. That parallel to government spending realy cuts through the noise better than any economics textbook I've read. I've seen this firsthand with friends who kept upgrading homes every few years, each time convincing themselves they "needed" the space, until 2008 wiped them out. The printing press observation is spot on becuase it shifts blame away from regular people and puts it exactly where it belongs.
A lot of enduring wisdom in that Good Book. Glad I was raised by God-fearing parents myself, who were hardened by the Great Depression. The values they imparted never let me down.
Thoughtful reply David. Interested in how you feel our system would be affected if the government could no longer devalue the dollar at will as it currently can, and our economy was instead based in part or in whole on a system such as bitcoin where the government can still use that ‘currency’ to spend, lend and borrow, but loses its ability to unilaterally devalue the currency the economy would then be based on?
"Long before money was weaponized, faith was. Rome mastered the art of spiritual control centuries before Washington mastered the art of economic control.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.” — Matthew 7:15
Rome fulfilled that prophecy. It changed God’s times and laws, and the world followed, by force when necessary. The Church claimed authority to alter the calendar of heaven, and the people bowed to tradition instead of truth."
Once again Brian shamelessly slanders the One True Faith, once more it falls to me clean up the mess he leaves behind.
There was never a "calendar of heaven" because God isn't bound by time - but Christ gave his Church authority to loose and bind through the Apostles, the authority even to establish a liturgical calendar.
What you slander as nefarious "control" is protecting the sheep [Christians] from the wolves, i.e, heretics like Seventh Day Adventists or other Sabbatarian innovations.
Theo, why do you keep dodging Canon 29 & the Council of Nicea that changed Gods times and laws.?
This isn’t slander, it’s history.
1. Council of Laodicea, Canon 29 (4th century) explicitly forbade Sabbath observance by name:
“Christians must not Judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, honoring instead the Lord’s Day.”
— Council of Laodicea, Canon 29
That is not “protecting sheep.” The church required people to work not rest on Gods Holy Sabbath.
That is an institutional prohibition of Exodus 20:8.
The church outlawed the very first commandment God spoke at Creation. The only commandment He sanctified. The only one He said to remember. The only one Jesus declared Himself lord of. The Sabbath that Jesus honored in life and death. The one the apostles & the gentiles honored long after Jesus left.
And you refuse to address Jesus statement, “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.”
— Jesus, John 14:15
2. Council of Nicaea (AD 325) did in fact change the observance of Passover (Easter), removing it from the biblical calendar tied to the 14th day of the month of Nisan (a fixed day) detailed in YHWHs feasts in Leviticus and replaced it with a floating day based on the full moon explicitly separating it from YHWHs feasts.
“It was declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews… all our brethren in the East who formerly followed the Jewish custom are henceforth to celebrate the said most holy feast of Easter at the same time as the Romans.”
— Letter of Constantine following the Council of Nicaea
That is a calendar change, documented in the council’s own correspondence.
3. Scripture never grants authority to change God’s appointed times:
“You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it.” (Deut. 4:2)
“He shall think to change times and law.” (Daniel 7:25)
Appealing to bind and loose does not override explicit commandments, nor does it authorize changing what God Himself sanctified.
These are not “innovations.”
They are council decisions, recorded in history.
Disagree if you like, but denying the councils said and did these things is simply not factual.
“Let me control the money of the nation, and I care not who makes the laws.”
-Mayer Amschel Rothchild
While monetary policy certainly affects inflation, the role of productivity deserves greater consideration. Environmental regulations, excessive taxation, bureaucratic red tape all increase manufacturing cost, reduce productivity and drive manufacturing offshore. All this reduces productivity, increases cost and reduces supply. All inflationary.
True. But why did inflation run rampant under Carter & Biden?
Very insightful article
Decent article.
There are a few things that you left out and I believe are misled on.
You need to look a little higher up in the chain to see where the real power is. The real power is in the banking system. SWIFT came about because America was becoming too powerful in the global banking system. FNCB was the issue. Decent article, but it misses the forest for the trees and gets some fundamentals backwards.
You're right to focus on government spending and the dollar system, but you need to look higher up the chain. The real power isn't in Washington—it's in the global banking infrastructure. SWIFT exists precisely because America was becoming too dominant in international banking through FNCB and similar institutions. SWIFT, headquartered in Belgium, was meant to distribute control. Yet despite this nominal internationalization, the US still effectively controls SWIFT—which is exactly why BRICS nations are working to build alternatives.
Here's what you're missing: undermining SWIFT wouldn't just hurt the US economy—it would collapse the entire power structure that allows dollar hegemony. This is the real game, not your neighbor's credit card debt.
Your debt analogy fundamentally misunderstands how sovereign debt and productive borrowing work. The old banking joke goes: if you owe the bank $100, that's your problem; if you owe the bank $1 billion, that's their problem. The US currently owes tens of trillions, which makes it the world's problem—and paradoxically, the world's investment opportunity.
Foreign investment in US Treasuries doesn't just "keep us afloat"—it's a mutual dependency. China, Japan, and other major holders need a stable dollar as much as we need their capital. This isn't weakness; it's structural power. When everyone needs your system to work, you control the system.
Not all debt is created equal. A family going into debt for designer clothes is wasteful. A business borrowing to expand capacity is investment. A nation borrowing to build infrastructure, fund research, or stabilize during crisis is strategic. Your article conflates consumer debt with sovereign debt, which is like confusing a home mortgage with a payday loan.
Senator Kennedy's quote—"Washington doesn't make money. It takes it, and borrows the rest"—is catchy but misleading. Washington doesn't need to "make" money in the production sense. It creates the framework, infrastructure, legal system, and stability that allows everyone else to make money.
Does Washington "make" the internet? No—but DARPA funded its development. Does Washington "make" pharmaceutical innovations? No—but NIH grants fund the basic research. Does Washington "make" the GPS satellites that enable billions in commerce? Actually, yes—but private industry couldn't have done it alone.
The government's role isn't to compete with private enterprise in making widgets. It's to provide the foundation that makes private wealth creation possible. Roads, courts, patent systems, national defense, basic research—these aren't "taking" money, they're investing in the infrastructure of prosperity.
Your article notes that currency in circulation increased 400% since 1997 while paychecks didn't. But you're comparing apples to oranges. If population grows, if the economy grows, if productivity increases, the money supply must grow proportionally—or you get deflation, which is far worse than moderate inflation.
The real question isn't whether money supply grew, but whether it grew faster than the productive capacity of the economy. Some inflation occurred, yes. But your 400% figure ignores that real GDP roughly doubled in that period, population grew, and global dollar demand increased. The money supply expansion wasn't pure dilution—much of it represented real economic growth requiring more monetary units to facilitate.
Here's what your article gets exactly backwards: a country where everyone saves and nobody spends creates economic stagnation. This is the paradox of thrift. If everyone hoards money, businesses have no customers, workers get laid off, and the economy contracts. Your savings become worthless when the economy collapses around them.
A healthy economy requires money velocity—spending, investing, borrowing, and yes, some inflation to encourage using money rather than burying it. The alternative isn't stability; it's deflation spirals like Japan's lost decades or the Great Depression.
You're free to believe that BRICS should undermine US power, that the petrodollar system is purely extractive, that we should return to gold standard constraints. But understand what you're advocating for: a world where US influence declines, where the dollar loses reserve currency status, where we face the same capital constraints as any other nation.
Maybe that's preferable to you. But it means giving up the "exorbitant privilege" that lets us borrow in our own currency, that keeps US Treasury rates low, that allows us to finance deficits other nations couldn't dream of. It means accepting that when crisis hits, we won't be able to print our way to stability—we'll be subject to the same external constraints as everyone else.
Is the current system perfect? No. Does it create dependencies and distortions? Absolutely. But the alternative isn't some idyllic return to "sound money" and balanced budgets—it's a multipolar world where US power contracts and other nations fill the vacuum.
You can't have it both ways: condemning the system that maintains US dominance while presumably wanting America to remain the global superpower. Pick one. SWIFT controls the movement of money between countries and is headquartered in Belgium. BUT SWIFT is still mainly controlled by the US. BRICS looks to undermine SWIFT. Undermining SWIFT would decimate the US economy and its power structure worldwide.
Debt is not always a bad thing. Debt is a bad thing when you can not repay it. The running joke is that if you owe the bank $100, that is your problem. If you owe the bank $1bn, that is their problem. Right now, foreign investment in the US Treasury keeps the US afloat. It also keeps the US in power in the world.
If you do not want the US to be in power in the world, that is your choice. I'd disagree with it.
David: Debt is a bad thing when there’s massive waste and fraud that supports a spoils system and politician enrichment. Our country has major problems. When it cannot print more money — create it— we are increasingly taxed. You address macro big picture economics in your post: global power positions and inter-dependencies. Americans live and vote micro which this article addresses within word count limitations.
What’s troubling voters struggling for answers? Waste, fraud, ever increasing taxation and bond fees, the continued erosion of the standard of living of the majority of American citizens.
Ah yes, the infamous cliché: "waste, fraud, and abuse." When asked to quantify it, people fall silent. So let's get specific—what exactly is this waste, fraud, and abuse? Give me dollar amounts per category.
Let me save you the trouble and address what you're likely to say:
"Waste" is subjective. You might think the military is underfunded and undermanned. I'll point out that the Department of Defense is the largest employer in the world with approximately 3 million people—roughly 1% of the US population. Sound small? Consider this: India employs about 2.5 million in their military with nearly 5 times our population. China has similar numbers with similar population. They're both at roughly 0.15% of their population while we're at 1%. One person's "bloated military budget" is another's "essential deterrent." Waste is in the eye of the beholder.
Fraud is human nature. It exists everywhere, always has, always will. What disturbs me is the misplaced focus. The media loves to spotlight the welfare recipient with six kids from four fathers getting $500 a month—"How dare she!" Over 18 years, that's $108,000. Meanwhile, Senator Rick Scott oversaw fraud at HCA that resulted in a $1.7 billion settlement. Let that sink in: it would take 16,000 welfare recipients defrauding the system for 18 years each to equal what Scott's company paid in one settlement.
We're outraged by someone stealing a bag of chips while someone else robs the bank. The focus is deliberately misdirected.
The US must print more money. This isn't optional; it's mathematical necessity. In 1970, the US population was about 200 million. Let's say hypothetically there were $100 billion in currency. Today there are 350 million people. If you kept that same $100 billion, money becomes scarcer. Scarcity drives up value—that's deflation. Prices would have to fall by 75% for the same economic activity to occur. That's not stability; that's economic collapse.
Money supply must scale with population and economic activity. The alternative is deflationary death spiral.
Americans are taxed because we demand services. We run deficits because the services we demand cost more than the revenue we generate. It's that simple. You want lower taxes? Fine—tell me which services you want eliminated. Social Security? Medicare? Defense? Interstate highways?
We could balance this by raising revenue, but that means higher taxes—which you just complained about. Or we could cut services—which voters consistently reject when specific cuts are proposed.
The deficit isn't a bug; it's a feature. As I said before, that debt structure gives us power in the global system. You can't have it both ways: demanding low taxes, expansive services, and global dominance while complaining about the debt that makes it all possible.
So again: quantify the waste, fraud, and abuse. Give me numbers. Show me what you'd cut. Because vague complaints about "waste" while enjoying the benefits of the system is just intellectual laziness.
Great article by Brian, I thank him for expressing his thoughts and the research time and effort that it took to write it.
Most importantly to me, the article promoted a great response from David. Before you tear the system down you need to fully understand how it works.
THAT was a very informative response, David. You should be teaching at one of our crappy institutes of learning. Maybe then the kids would learn a thing or two. I learned more about world finance in your “semi“ article then I did during four years at university. Well, I agreed with the authors premise that Washington needs more fiscal control, I see that it must be blended with more of a worldwide nuance than I ever imagined. Thank you for the lesson. Happy new year.
Hope that you have a happy holiday season as well.
Chance Gardener meets ChatGPT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgGvd1UPZ88
Always a cheap and easy retort... "ChatGPT" Come on, Jeff - you're better than that.
The comment is hilarious if you know who Chance Gardener is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgGvd1UPZ88
Ah, sorry that popular reference was before my time. Or I was probably watching Star Wars... Looks like it's worth a watch.
Try running Bergerstons comment through an AI bullshit detector and see what you come up with.
Yup. You busted me.
Damn MS Word.
How dare it correct my typos and my constant spelling of record as recrod.
Since you keep trying so hard to ignore the message and attack the person, perhaps you should use AI to help you.
For Bergersons comment run though CPTZero I got...
Lightly edited by AI
We are highly confident this text was originally human writtenand polished by AI
Probability breakdown
6% AI generated
94% Mixed
0% Human
For the piece Brain wrote today that Bergerton was commenting on I got -
We are moderately confident this text was AI generated
Probability breakdown
78% AI generated
22% Mixed
0% Human
I think it's the sign of the times (for better or worse) that most folks are running most of the serious stuff they publish through some sort of AI. Aren't spell checks some kind of rudimentary form of AI?
Aww. How cute.
Since you are trying to find out about me, why not check out some of the economics teachers I had? One was David Denslow. I was awake during these classes.
You look well rested, very well rested.
If you cannot control the local government and spending what have you?
The County of Santa Barbara was told it basically is broke in August. To use a phrase it was robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The City of Santa Barbara, City of Goleta and others have been doing this for decades. Spending dependent on beggars handouts. (e.g. pass through from a broken State of Calif. that depended on in-sustainable Federal funding and inflation.)
Think about the increased taxes locally and then contemplate this quote from Mr. Campbell (In 1997 there were about $475 billion in U.S. currency in circulation. Today there are around $2.4 trillion, a 400% increase. ) All political parties own a part of this but which is mostly responsible?
The bike boys stated spending $10 of millions on bike paths would improve and strengthen the economy? Where did that money come from? The anti car Visionless Zero groups said shut down the streets, spend money on failed bulbouts, and make driving miserable, so the economy would flourish? Where did that money come from?
Sacramento stated High Speed Rail is the answer. That was sold by false advertising and dependency on magic tax dollars. You were sold the proverbial bill of goods. The HSRA laughable statement to justify their failure by stating we have more bike paths and side walks now. Huh? That is High Speed Rail. Where did that money come from after the lies about cost and return? The demanded Sacramento Social Programs are decades of failures and spending the people into debt.
Has the Cities and County of Santa Barbara depended and designed projects based upon dollar stability or has it and does it continue to waste your taxes and efforts based upon inflation? Quote Mr. Campbell "Inflation is created in the printing press, not the checkout line."
Faced with deficit the City of Santa Barbara is on a spending frenzy spending for trees, and plants. At a time when it cannot cover its own debt! What makes it so ridiculous, is the reoccurring multi year droughts have proven this one sector of government is basically planting uncontrolled water faucets 24/7. The water table of the area has already shown it is bad planning and long term trees die for lack of ground water.
Focusing on local government and questionable spending makes the point of this article.
I'll finish with this. If you cannot control the local government and spending what have you?
Interesting and thought provoking article Mr. Campbell
Appreciate the reminder Brian that we’re controlled and held captive by our rulers; increasingly taxed to pay for their reckless, self-serving bad behavior. Who can keep up besides those making big money in real estate, tech, finance, or tax payer funded government jobs?
What’s the solution? A mass tax-payer rebellion? Some of us are sinking in quick sand. Don’t we have a right to our money?
Good Article…reminds me of an old adage…
Gold is the money of kings, Silver the money of gentlemen, Barter the money of peasants, and Debt the money of slaves…
We are debt slaves, BUT, Team Trump is working on elimination of the Federal Reserve Bank (which is not a bank, has no reserves, and is not part of the federal government), along with the illegal IRS…the plan is to transition to a new money system, with sound money…constitutional dollars, back primarily by gold and silver, plus a basket of other commodities (see BRICS model).
PS…we have the gold…
https://x.com/realdonaldtrump/status/314771578850275329?s=61
https://x.com/fnowisthetime/status/1384879287015182347?s=61
Great article, Brian, you quote: “Washington Doesn’t Make Money. It Takes It, and Borrows the Rest.” Senator John Kennedy (R-LA). I would modify Kennedy's quotes to: "Washington Doesn't Make Money, It Steals It, Prints It and Wastes most of It. The term "borrowing" money is simply a prettier term for stealing. Government steals what they so-call "borrow." Since the Feds "man" the printing presses, they can print all they want and bully their way into raising taxes.
A good example of waste is by the Feds watching over us. I've concluded the Fed's FBI is likely filled with special agents' family members which these relatives in turn are given safe and wasteful work. They watch me, such as in a restaurant and the FBI guy next door hacking into my computer. In the restaurant, a round table sat about six FBI guys about twenty feet from me and my wife. They all sat quietly looking at their cellphones. As I quietly spoke to my wife, I said a word that got the attention of one of the six and he said out loud exactly what I said except he added the word "not" to what I said. We have a local FBI office in town. The FBI now monitors me because they know they did a lot of illegal stuff to me and my wife in Dem SB with a Dem FBI ... in other words, I can get them (City and FBI) into serious legal trouble for big bucks. With all the crime out there, we are paying FBI probably millions of dollars to harass me and others. More tons of money waste of just another dead end trail the FBI created.
Thank you for illuminating this huge problem. I have often mentally debated: Does the American experience really work if it takes massive borrowing and inflation to keep status quo; is the model viable? It could was and could be if restraint was exercised, but it is not.
For those who dismiss the California dumpster fire, losing billions in fraud, waste, corruption and incompetence, blaming “mean ol’ Republicans” and Trump; California’s own Auditor has given FAILING ratings.
https://nypost.com/2025/12/22/opinion/newsoms-california-and-the-failing-eight/
Exceptional article, leading us back to the basics of life, history and wise counsel. I opened my bible and reviewed the verses mentioned. Thank you, and bless you for your work and gift of giving.
Brilliant piece on the paycheck-to-paycheck couple masquerading as successful. That parallel to government spending realy cuts through the noise better than any economics textbook I've read. I've seen this firsthand with friends who kept upgrading homes every few years, each time convincing themselves they "needed" the space, until 2008 wiped them out. The printing press observation is spot on becuase it shifts blame away from regular people and puts it exactly where it belongs.
A lot of enduring wisdom in that Good Book. Glad I was raised by God-fearing parents myself, who were hardened by the Great Depression. The values they imparted never let me down.
Thoughtful reply David. Interested in how you feel our system would be affected if the government could no longer devalue the dollar at will as it currently can, and our economy was instead based in part or in whole on a system such as bitcoin where the government can still use that ‘currency’ to spend, lend and borrow, but loses its ability to unilaterally devalue the currency the economy would then be based on?
"Long before money was weaponized, faith was. Rome mastered the art of spiritual control centuries before Washington mastered the art of economic control.
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravenous wolves.” — Matthew 7:15
Rome fulfilled that prophecy. It changed God’s times and laws, and the world followed, by force when necessary. The Church claimed authority to alter the calendar of heaven, and the people bowed to tradition instead of truth."
Once again Brian shamelessly slanders the One True Faith, once more it falls to me clean up the mess he leaves behind.
There was never a "calendar of heaven" because God isn't bound by time - but Christ gave his Church authority to loose and bind through the Apostles, the authority even to establish a liturgical calendar.
What you slander as nefarious "control" is protecting the sheep [Christians] from the wolves, i.e, heretics like Seventh Day Adventists or other Sabbatarian innovations.
Theo, why do you keep dodging Canon 29 & the Council of Nicea that changed Gods times and laws.?
This isn’t slander, it’s history.
1. Council of Laodicea, Canon 29 (4th century) explicitly forbade Sabbath observance by name:
“Christians must not Judaize by resting on the Sabbath, but must work on that day, honoring instead the Lord’s Day.”
— Council of Laodicea, Canon 29
That is not “protecting sheep.” The church required people to work not rest on Gods Holy Sabbath.
That is an institutional prohibition of Exodus 20:8.
The church outlawed the very first commandment God spoke at Creation. The only commandment He sanctified. The only one He said to remember. The only one Jesus declared Himself lord of. The Sabbath that Jesus honored in life and death. The one the apostles & the gentiles honored long after Jesus left.
And you refuse to address Jesus statement, “If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.”
— Jesus, John 14:15
2. Council of Nicaea (AD 325) did in fact change the observance of Passover (Easter), removing it from the biblical calendar tied to the 14th day of the month of Nisan (a fixed day) detailed in YHWHs feasts in Leviticus and replaced it with a floating day based on the full moon explicitly separating it from YHWHs feasts.
“It was declared improper to follow the custom of the Jews… all our brethren in the East who formerly followed the Jewish custom are henceforth to celebrate the said most holy feast of Easter at the same time as the Romans.”
— Letter of Constantine following the Council of Nicaea
That is a calendar change, documented in the council’s own correspondence.
3. Scripture never grants authority to change God’s appointed times:
“You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take from it.” (Deut. 4:2)
“He shall think to change times and law.” (Daniel 7:25)
Appealing to bind and loose does not override explicit commandments, nor does it authorize changing what God Himself sanctified.
These are not “innovations.”
They are council decisions, recorded in history.
Disagree if you like, but denying the councils said and did these things is simply not factual.