Yet america and China did the 2020 plandemic hand in hand. Perfect coordination.
About the Reich's federal bank, it always amaze me how when Nixon ended Convertibility of U.S. Dollars to Gold in 1971, thus starting an era of money printing and inflation, it was considered a treason by many sovereignists.
However, Hitler did basically the same with the Reichsbank, but he is hailed as a genius.
Quote from The Banking System in the Nazi Military and War Economy:
"There were thus no legal limits whatsoever to the powers of credit creation of the Reichsbank. It could go so far as to issue currency for the purchase of commercial and Treasury bills and securities, and then treat the bills and securities as cover against the notes with which they had been bought; and there was no limit to its doing so. Nor was there any limit to the amount of working credit that could be granted to the Reich, or to the amount of Treasury bills that could be purchased. "The maximum amount will be determined by the Führer and Chancellor of the Reich," said the Act. As for gold and foreign exchange, their function was completely changed inasmuch as they no longer acted as legal reserves. They could still be "admitted as note cover in addition to the cover mentioned above" and the Reichsbank was to keep its holdings "at such a level as it deemed necessary in order to settle balances with foreign Countries and maintain the value of the currency."
Indeed, the third Reich was ahead of it's time in terms of money creation.
1 direct reply
He's rarely hailed as a genius, but rather a non-monarchical ruler who implemented MMT at scale for the first time.
I think the argument is that MMT when combined with a autocracy and public-private partnerships can lead to a country that best supports its national and racial identity while guarding against old money oligarchs or new money who seek a departure from that nationalism or racial identity.
Also, Germany's local savings banks (Sparkassen) and credit cooperatives (Genossenschaftsbanken) differed from Nixon's small banks in their number and structure, meaning the former state had a healthier middle economy, and over the longer term, would have created a healthier middle class. This is compared to "democratic", pseudo free market MMT in America which leads to growing wealth inequality. Is that true? There is some merit to it.
The argument goes that MMT isn't inherently wrong, but must be paired with a disciplined governance, public-private partnerships and racial nationalisism for maximum utility.