>
> I'm not going to bother to follow this link kuntil someone gives a few lines
> of text stating _why_ it is supposedly relevant to something.
It provides a succinct statement of why the financial system should be publicly- rather than privately-owned, that modern finance and production are inseparable, and that the only constraints on the money supply should be an economy operating at full capacity which is utilizing all available labour and other resources. As the article observes:
"In the present economic system, real resources are mobilized only on the say-so of the issuers or possessors of money, and only on their terms. No production, even for profit based on the exploitation of labor, takes place until finance is secured. It makes a great difference whether money is made available on our terms, by a democratically accountable currency-issuing government, or on the basis of private interests motivated narrowly by profit, facilitated by an unaccountable government. The issuers and possessors of money determine what production will and won’t take place, the nature of the production process, the nature of work itself, access to productive resources, distribution of income and leisure, and more. The channel through which money is created (public or private) and the terms on which it is issued (democratic or undemocratic, interest free or rentier friendly) strongly influence whether institutional reforms and regulatory measures contrary to the interests of capitalists, including measures capable of re-shaping the sphere of production, are viable or not viable.”