That doesn't make any sense to me.kurczak 说:Not sure what you mean or how exactly it would work, but government directly defining the money supply is a bad idea. The reason why there are private banks as the middle man is the ban on direct "printing" money by the government, because that results or at least carries a huge risk of the government just printing all troubles away aka Weimar style hyperinflation.
It was my understanding that the debt owed by the German government caused the inflation, as they were insolvent, and the marks which they issued meant nothing because of that. The value of that type of currency is based on the government's ability to pay it back, which they could not.
Hitler did exactly as I just described to end the hyperinflation, and subsequently created the strongest economy in Europe within a few years.
The Autobahn was the project, if I recall, and the Nazi government fixed the price of it, then paid the workers with what was essentially paper recognition of their work, which were then used by the workers to do things like buy food. Suddenly the currency was not based on the Government's ability to pay debt to banks or foreign nations, but based on the value of the project.
I'll put it another way.
You could say that working on the project earned you a kind of stock on the project, and people used those little stocks to trade for things. The people own the labour, and they trade their labour for the products of others.
The government defining the money supply is not a bad idea at all, if they don't try to print away their problems.






