In search of a publisher: "The Bancor as a Means to Achieve Peace in Ukraine," June 2, 2022
Reviewing my latest paper titled “Concordian economics - An Integration of Theory, Policy, and Practice,” Professor Katz of Harvard on March 24, 2019, wrote: “I have read over your paper with interest. You present some intriguing ideas and make the case for Concordian economics. But I must conclude that your engaging paper is not a good fit for the QJE.”
***
Added to Aristotle and Einstein
Changed Aquinas
Changed Keynes fundamentally
Integrated Descartes: I think AND LOVE, therefore I am
Reconciled Keynes and Hayek through Concordian economics
Resolved conflicts created by Locke, Adam Smith, and Karl Marx
Bridled Cartesian Reason with rules of logic and epistemology
President
The Bancor as a Means to Achieve
Peace in Ukraine
Carmine
Gorga
July
2022
When I recently conceived of the Bancor International
Order (BIO),[1]
I was not aware of President Vladimir Putin's rage against the
"unipolar" world of US dominance of world markets.[2]
President Putin’s words deserve to be known: “When
they won the Cold War, the US declared themselves God's own representatives on
earth, people who have no responsibilities -- only interests. They have
declared those interests sacred. Now it's one-way traffic, which makes the
world unstable."[3]
Now that that rage is in the news, it might be easier
to start an open discussion of these highly interrelated issues. President
Putin is partially right. The United States has achieved dominance in world
markets, but not since 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Union and not
through the presence of military bases that encircle Russia today. The US dominance
of world markets was established in 1944 through the Bretton Woods agreements
to which Stalin was invited to participate and refused; that dominance was
established by the obligation of every nation to carry out international trade
(almost exclusively) in dollars.[4]
If the BIO is established and President Putin accepts
the invitation to participate, peace in Ukraine will be at hand. A stop will be
put to the waste of human, natural, and even military resources worldwide. The
danger of WWIII will be averted.
A hidden benefit will accrue to the United States:
Through the intricacies of international trade, America is gradually losing control
of her physical assets to foreign nations. This surreptitious development
will come to a screeching halt if the BIO is established.
What Is the Bancor?
As I pointed out on December 29, 2019 on TalkMarkets,[5] in 1944, Lord Keynes came
to the Bretton Woods Conference to present his idea of the Bancor, a unit of
account to be created by an International Authority that would keep foreign
exchange accounts always balanced so that trade could prosper among nations.
The co-convenor of the Conference, Harry Dexter White,
had no ear for the Bancor. He was interested only in establishing the Dollar as
the international reserve currency, a proposal that he was certain would be
acceptable to the US Congress.
The idea of the Bancor has been kept in subdued
conversation among economists. Until recently. Currently, that idea appears to
be at the core of a proposal that is presumed to be implemented any time soon
by the International Monetary Fund. Insider consultants and financial writers
have been warning that a "Global Financial Elite" has the support of
the IMF to a plan to replace the US currency with a new "Distributed
Ledger System" using the IMF's "Special Drawing Rights" as a new
"global reserve currency."[6] The infamous New World
Order would thus be established.
This plan is a perversion of Keynes’ thought about the
Bancor.
The Bancor was supposed to be a unit of account, with
no implicit exchange value.
How to Set Things Right
With three clarifications, the spirit of the Bancor
may be revivified.[7]
First, taking a leaf from experience rather than abstract theory, as it was
finally incorporated into the IMF's "Special Drawing Rights" and as
wanted by proponents of the New World Order, the Bancor would have exchange
value, a value ultimately determined by international financial markets.
Second important clarification is that the Bancor
ought to be created not by the International Monetary Fund, but by each
national Central Bank, so that we would have the American Bancor, the Russian
Bancor, the Chinese Bancor, the Swiss Bancor, etc. Let us temporarily call it
the xBancor. Today’s computers’ power will easily let us ascertain the value of
each Bancor at each moment in time.
The third clarification is most important. Each
national Bancor would have to be created and distributed in accordance with
three rules developed within the context of Concordian monetary
policy.[8] The Bancor should be
issued:
- as
a loan, only to create real wealth of tables and chairs, not to purchase
financial instruments;
- as
a loan to individual entrepreneurs, cooperatives, corporations with ESOPs
and/or CSOPs in their constitutions, and public agencies with taxing power
so that the loan can be repaid;
- as
a loan at cost.[9]
When Should xBancors Be Created?
Implementing these Three Rules each Central Bank
creates and distributes new money. These financial instruments might as
well be called Bancors. Bancors should be created as soon as possible; as soon
as a national—and international—discussion occurs to gain acceptance of this
financial instrument. But not later than a few hours after the next major Wall
Street crash occurs.[10]
What Value Should Be Assigned to the
xBancor?
Each xBancor should be created at par value with each
existing national currency: thus, 1 US Bancor = $1.00; 1 Russian Bancor = 1
Ruble; 1 Chinese Bancor = 1 Renminbi.
Yes, the value of each Bancor would be allowed to
fluctuate as the value of today’ currencies fluctuates.
Yes, we would then have a world currency—but it would
be wholly controlled by each national government.
What Is the Role of the IMF or the World
Bank in a Bancor Regimen?
The Role of the IMF or the World Bank in a Bancor regimen
remains precisely as it is today. Indeed, if the IMF should feel the need to
use its privilege to create Special Drawing Rights, it could continue to do so.
It would appear that there would be no need to even change the name of its
financial operations. The IMF would continue to create SDRs. There might not
even be the need to call these financial instruments IMF Bancors or any other
such denomination.
What Are the Benefits of Creating Bancors?
As pointed out on various occasions, to probe the
value of creating a Bancor regimen we have to determine the timing of its
creation. The major distinction is creation before the next Stock Market crash
or after the Stock Market crash.
Before a crash. If
the Bancor regimen is created before a crash, there would be ample opportunity
to fully explain and to plan ahead each and every detail of this regimen; ample
opportunity to avoid potential pitfalls; ample opportunity to debate pros and
cons.
After a crash. If
the Bancor regimen is established soon after a crash, what
will be avoided is the catastrophic collapse of the value of, likely, all
national currencies—as well as the collapse of the value of all financial
instruments.
Short-term Effects
Short-term effects can be rather easily determined.
The opening of the national credit flow to satisfy the needs of the
agricultural, commercial, and industrial world implies that, provided the
Bancor regimen is established in a truly timely fashion, a collapse of the
financial world will not affect the world of the real economy one iota.[11]
Another Great Depression will be avoided. And this
disaster will be avoided without shifting the burden on to exhausted taxpayers
and/or unexpectant bank depositors. Or more simply, but perhaps more
insidiously, without shifting the burden on the over-inflated accounts of
Central Banks.
Unless a Debt Jubilee is proclaimed in accordance
with Moses’ injunctions,[12] the least damage that we
are inflicting upon the real economy by overburdening the accounts of Central
Banks is an opportunity cost. We have no appetite; we have no resources for
maintaining our public infrastructure in order. Even after the recent $2.9 billion influx
of federal funds[13] and
during the current ravages of inflation, the United States of America is fast
plunging the maintenance of its public infrastructure to a level that used to
be the shame of developing countries.
The avoidance of a collapse of the financial world
would, of course, have some major implications for both the workers within that
world and the stockholders and bondholders depending on that world. These are
people who might otherwise see the value of their portfolios reduced even to
zero.
Long-term Effects
Long-term effects of a Bancor regimen are much more
difficult to pinpoint. Given that the creation of Bancors is
determined in accordance with firm needs of the people requesting
Bancor-denominated loans, the overall economy is set on a steady course.
Given that the distribution of ownership
of real and financial is determined in accordance with the value people
contribute to the creation of wealth, the overall economy is set on a just
course.
Being set on a steady and just base, the overall
economy is set on a lasting course. The country will be unified by pursuing
common goals for the benefit of everyone.[14]
An Overall Evaluation
The overall assessment of creating and distributing
Bancors following rules determined within the context of Concordian monetary
policy is this: We shall pass from a world in which money controls
people to a world in which people control money.[15]
Let a Concordian[16] Bancor
regimen come: The sooner the better. Let the collapse of the modern financial
world come: The sooner the better.
We are tired of waiting for a just and steady world of
economic affairs.
In-depth Function of the Bancor: An Instrument
of National and International Peace
On yet another occasion,[17] I pointed out that the
Bancor can—ought? must?—be used as an instrument of national and international
peace. Peace follows justice, especially economic justice. The Three
Rules for the creation and distribution of money are eminently rules of
economic justice.
Financialization has been the creator of many
injustices. Following the first Rule for the creation of Bancors, i.e.,
“creating and distributing money only for the creation of real wealth,” the Federal
Reserve System (the Fed), our Central Bank, will abate the deficiencies of
financialization: creating money to create money. Wall Street can
continue to thrive borrowing private money, namely by accessing the
private loan market.
Following this Rule, public money will be diverted
from Wall Street to Main Street. All the benefits of decentralization will be
reaped by the country as a whole. Local Banks, being the ultimate originators
and administrators of public money on behalf of their clients, will reacquire
their traditional roles of sensitivity to the local needs of local
entrepreneurs.
In addition, directing public money toward Main Street
immunizes the
country against any calamitous collapse of Wall Street.[18]
Following the second Rule, the Fed will accomplish a
number of goals at the same time. The Fed will favor the creativity and
initiative of the people, all the people of a nation; the Fed will facilitate
the spreading of the currently concentrated ownership of the corporations among
all their workers and employees; spreading the ownership of tools, gadgets, and
robots among the people, the Fed will favor the industrialization, rather than
the financialization of the nation.
Following this Rule, the Fed will consolidate the
power of the ESOP Movement. A few years ago, the number of people
belonging to an ESOP became larger than the number
of people belonging to Labor Unions.[19] Unions should be
encouraged to tie their membership dues, no longer to higher wages, but
to a fair distribution of ownership of the corporation in which their members
work.
The call for higher wages is a self-defeating
strategy. Higher wages are followed by higher prices. Workers do not gain much
in the process; yet people on fixed income are squeezed by inflation. The only
beneficiaries of the policy of higher wages tend to be foreign competitors. Thus,
workers even lose their jobs.
Following the third Rule, the Fed, a public agency,
will reduce the cost of the production of real wealth and thus influence the
inflation of prices of capital and consumer goods.
***
Mirabile dictu,
in 2015 I presented these proposals to
the Fed,[20] and the Fed responded:
“Given your proposal, I suggest that you contact your state and federal
representatives.”[21]
Scarcity of time and financial resources has allowed me to follow this
suggestion only haltingly.
***
The dollar bill created following these Three Rules
can become a digital currency and can properly be called the Bancor.
The Bancor as an Instrument of National
Peace
As an explicit conveyor of economic justice, the
Bancor will instantaneously become an instrument of domestic peace. Much has
been said about inequality and poverty and political instability. A few years
ago, I distilled the issues
in a few paragraphs that I am paraphrasing here.
There is a whole array of injustices that must be
set aright. Set these injustices right and you solve many problems of inequality and
poverty and political instability.
We have to understand that the affections that hold
MAGA (Make America Great Again) People together are the resentments and the
afflictions that society inflicts upon them.
Owners of large tracts of land are strangling the
cities and corralling large masses of (largely MAGA) people into overcrowded
lots.
MAGA People’s lives are being eviscerated when money
is lent to people with money on easy terms and the people without money are
left to pay outrageous interest.
MAGA People’s lives are being eviscerated by robots that
take their jobs, their livelihood, away.
MAGA People’s lives are being eviscerated whenever two
mega corporations are glued together; then the few gain more power and the
people within and without both corporations suffer many afflictions.
The Bancor, created and distributed in accordance with
the Three Rules of Concordian monetary policy, will do much to alleviate
problems of inequality, poverty, and political instability.
Social unrest will gradually become a thing of the
past.
The Bancor as an Instrument of
International Peace
An injection of moral fortitude in our political
discourse will automatically transfer the benefits to be obtained pursuing the
creation and distribution of the Bancor from the national to the international
scene, the area for which the Bancor was originally conceived.
If the institution of the Bancor is indeed going to
create domestic peace in the United States, it is reasonable to expect
similar results when the Bancor is instituted in other
countries of the world.
All that is required is the application by each
National Bank of the Three Rules of Concordian monetary policy for the creation
and distribution of their national currency. Thus, we may have the
Dollar-Bancor, the Yen-Bancor, the Renminbi-Bancor, whose relative values can
be instantaneously discovered at any moment in time thanks to the power of
modern computing technology.
Bancors ought to be free to be exchanged for real
wealth in any part of the world, thus the hegemony of the dollar, which is decreasing
in any case, will come to an end.
And the silent, relentless, often destructive
competition between the Dollar and the Renminbi will be transformed into a
healthy competition along positive paths, with benefits to be enjoyed by all.
Somehow, in response to Sen. Chris Murphy,
we have to wake up to the reality that competition leads to violence; that
self-reliance leads to violence; that Rationalism leads to
violence.
The creation of the Bancor International Order (BIO)
may be institutionalized under the supervision of the International Monetary
Fund, whose function will be limited to certifying that each national Bancor
has indeed been created following the Three Rules of Concordian monetary
policy.
Participation in the BIO ought to be automatic, but as
any other organization in the world, BIO might want to establish its own
internal rules. Thus, countries could be invited to participate, provided they
meet certain requirements.
The Soviet Union regretted the decision
not to participate in the Bretton Woods Agreement that established the
International Monetary Fund and the World Bank. Under the guidance of President
Putin, Russia today might not miss a second chance to become a full partner in
international financial agreements.
Stalin might have ultimately
been hampered from participating in the Bretton Woods Agreement by a churlish
Marxist bias against money.
Mr. Putin seems to be free of
such a bias. He clearly loves money for himself and his friends.
But one condition to enter
BIO ought to be imposed on Russia, as on any other belligerent country: Russia
must end the war in Ukraine.
The Bancor International Oder
might then become an instrument of immediate peace, peace where it is most
urgently needed, in Ukraine.
The Bancor International
Order as the End of the Unipolar World
Peace in Ukraine might be achieved because it
satisfies President Putin’s rage about the complexities of unipolar
world of US dominance of
international trade.
When I conceived of the Bancor International Order
(BIO), I was not aware of President Putin's rage against the
"unipolar" world of US dominance of world markets.
Now that that rage is in the news,
it might be easier to start an open discussion of these issues.
For the Bancor International Order (BIO) to become an
instrument of peace in Ukraine, it means that the United States, more
specifically, the US Congress, must make peace with relinquishing the dominance
of world markets that it achieved in 1944.
Before rushing into judgments, the US Congress and the
American people ought to become acquainted with the price of this dominance.
This price, for some obvious but devious reasons, has been carefully kept under
wrap.
An open discussion of this issue might make clear, not
so much the benefits, but the hidden price paid for that dominance. If we
follow some of the intricacies of international trade, we realize that America
is ailing from a dangerous trend: the gradual transfer of the control of her
physical assets to foreign nations.
The Price of US Dominance of World Markets
As I pointed out on
March 25, 2019 also on TalkMarkets, we must talk about two crucial
issues in foreign trade.[22] They are not generally examined
because they do not exist in modern economic theory; they were expunged from
polite discourse in the same year, 1776, one by Adam Smith and the other by
Jefferson.[23]
They are constitutive elements of The Economic Process (2002, 2009,
2016): they concern hoarding and property or ownership of wealth.[24] They are hidden in plain
sight. Until they are settled, all conversations about foreign trade create
heat but not much light.
Much of the conversation about foreign trade is
concentrated on three controversial points: Who pays the tariffs? Who benefits
from foreign trade imbalances? Who cheats?
The last question is most fascinating, but least
relevant.
Apart from concerns about hoarding and ownership, not
much new can be added to the fourth traditional question, “Who benefits from
foreign trade?” In ideal, textbook conditions, if two nations engage in trade,
they both benefit. Empirically, it is even possible to determine whether both
nations benefit equally.
Who Pays for the Tariffs?
It is the citizens of the nation that imposes tariffs
who pay the tariffs. It is they who are penalized. In addition, the goods they
buy are more expensive than they would otherwise be.
Who Benefits?
Who benefits from tariffs? Once one goes beyond the
simple fact that the government that imposes tariffs benefits, at least in the
short run, the answer is complicated.
If national producers of goods imported are capable of
exploiting the rise in prices of foreign products and are capable of producing
goods of the same quality as imported goods, that nation clearly benefits,
because tariffs create income and growth opportunities for locals. Yet, there
are qualifications. If newly employed resources could be more effectively
engaged producing different things, the advantage turns out to be illusory.
The damage inflicted upon the foreign country depends
on the importance that foreign trade has in that nation. It also depends on
their assumed inability to produce at lower cost, so to nullify the benefit to
local nationals of the country imposing tariffs.
Long Run Issues
Long run consequences are hard to identify, because
they depend on various sets of movable parts. If tariffs on our products are
imposed in retaliation, who among our exporters is penalized? Do we grant an
incentive to our foreign competitors to leap-frog current technology—so they
might be encouraged to create entirely new technologies fit for the next stage
of development?
Tariffs, in other words, can produce much churning
within the two nations involved in trade. That is why wise economists have
always opted for free trade: no tariffs; no trade wars.
The remaining issue then is: What are the effects of
tariffs on the balance of payments?
Effects on the Balance of Payments
Effects of tariffs on the balance of payments can be
positive or negative. The most interesting case to analyze is that of negative
effects, because this effect immediately bifurcates—depending on the
international status of currency used. To be specific, is the negative balance
in “dollars”?
This is a crucial question. Most international trade
is carried out in dollars. This is a huge issue. It has nothing to do with
economic science; it is an issue of pure political and military power.
Crudely stated, when people of the world export their
goods to the United States, the creator of dollars, countries of
the world send us real goods produced by the sweat and tears of their
workers—and the exhaustion of their natural resources.
We, in the United States, send them paper money and digital
money.
This is a condition of enormous importance. It clearly
explains the efforts of China trying to have their currency, the renminbi,
accepted in international trade.
Two Crucial, Hidden Issues
There are two crucial issues that are absent from the
current discussion on imbalances in foreign trade. Since we in the United
States exchange paper and digital money for real goods, we are letting our
negative balances grow so large that we periodically have to change the scale
of our graphs to see those imbalances.
Who cares? Let them eat paper and digital money is the
general posture. This is such a natural tendency; we are having such a free
ride. Who would not exchange real goods for pieces of paper? (Let this natural transaction
within nations well alone.)
Those who are concerned about outrageous imbalances in
foreign trade instinctively know that there is something rotten in Denmark.
Here is the rot: Hoarding of money in this country or, worse,
abroad is extremely dangerous because its behavior is unpredictable. One thing
is constant: Hoarding responds to the herd mentality. Once a leader sprouts,
followers follow. Thus, it is just like in snow avalanches. The last snowflake
that turns into ice, an ice crystal, creates an imbalance that sends a mass of
snow downhill.
The second effect is the issue of ownership. When
Americans hear that the Rockefeller Plaza is in foreign hands, they gasp. Many
other properties are in the hands of German, Japanese, and Chinese people. Even
the Italians have acquired control of Chrysler.
That is the issue: control. Control over peoples’
lives—through control of their property. Control can take one hundred subtle
forms that go much beyond the scope of this presentation. This effect ought to
concern each one of us greatly.
The fear of God might finally enter our psyche if we in
America will ever envisage this possibility: Because of their relatively small
military and political power, Chinese people are still reluctant to use their
economic power. They are hoarding dollars and are the major buyers of American
bonds. What happens the day in which they say, “Enough already; either you do
such and such (about foreign trade, for instance), or we demand an immediate
exchange of bonds for dollars and our dollars for real estate and capital
goods.”
Yes, let us trade the existence of the unipolar word
for peace in Ukraine
Louis D. Brandeis on Compromise
Louis D. Brandeis said this on compromise: “I don’t
believe in compromises — but I do believe in the full play of forces and in
giving my opponent what he wants if not inconsistent with what I want, and
particularly if what he wants is something I want to get rid of.”[25]
Let us get peace in Ukraine and let us give President
Putin the end of the unipolar world.
The world will get a fervently desired peace in
Ukraine; the United States will get rid of two hidden, dangerous forces
unleashed by the practices of the unipolar world: great hoards of dollars in
foreign hands and the insidious habit of selling the ownership of our assets to
foreigners.
CARMINE GORGA, PhD, a Fulbright
Scholar, is president of The Somist
Institute.
He is the founder of Concordian
economics,
Somism, Concordianism, and Relationalism. Further
information can be found at Wikipedia, Google
Scholar, ORCID, and Academia.edu. He is a Gravatar, a globally
recognized avatar.
SOURCE
NOTES
1 Gorga, Carmine, “The Bancor as an
Instrument of National and International Peace,” A piece in search of a
publisher, June 2022. Available at Bancor as an Instrumen of National
and International Peace.docx.
[2] Ivana Kottasová, Sugam Pokharel and Radina
Gigova, CNN, “Putin lambasts the West and
declares the end of 'the era of the unipolar world.'” - CNN. June 18, 2022.
[3] Ibid.
[4] See, e.g., Benn Steil, The Battle of Bretton
Woods: John Maynard Keynes, Harry Dexter White, and the Making of a New World
Order. Princeton University Press, 2013.
[5] Gorga, Carmine, “Let Us Not Pervert Keynes’ Thought.”
TalkMarkets, December 29, 2019. Available at https://talkmarkets.com/content/economics--politics/let-us-not-pervert-keynes-thought?post=245291.
[6] See, e.g., Tobias Adrian and
Tommaso Mancini-Griffoli, “Central Bank Digital Currencies: 4 Questions and
Answers.” IMFBlog, December 12, 2019. Available at https://blogs.imf.org/2019/12/12/central-bank-digital-currencies-4-questions-and-answers/.
[7] See Footnote 5 above.
[8] Brady, Michael Emmett and Gorga,
Carmine, “How To Use Public Policy To Guide Accumulation
Toward Virtuous Ends.” Mother Pelican: A Journal of Solidarity and
Sustainability, Vol. 15, No. 5, May 2019. Available at http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisustv15n05page4.html.
[9] Gorga, Carmine,
“Two Proposals in the Form of Two
Petitions Designed to Stabilize the Monetary System.” The
Somist Institute, December 3, 2015. Available at The Somist Institute: Two Proposals.
[10] Gorga, Carmine, “What To Do If The
Stock Market Crashes?” TalkMarkets, March 14, 2017. Available at https://talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/what-to-do-if-the-stock-market-crashes?post=126594.
[11] Gorga, Carmine, “Three Trillion
Worth Of Zeros.” TalkMarkets, March 2, 2017. Available at https://talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/three-trillion-worth-of-zeros?post=124215.
[12] Gorga, Carmine, “The Economics of
Jubilation - Blinking Adam’s Fallacy Away.” Social Science Research Network
(SSRN), October 15, 2009. Available at The Economics of Jubilation -
Blinking Adam’s Fallacy Away by Carmine Gorga :: SSRN.
[13]
U.S. Department of Transportation, “President Biden, U.S. DOT Announce $2.9
Billion of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding for Major Infrastructure
Projects of Regional or National Significance,” US Department of
Transportation, March 23, 2022. Available at President
Biden, U.S. DOT Announce $2.9 Billion of Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Funding
for Major Infrastructure Projects of Regional or National Significance | US
Department of Transportation.
[14] Gorga, Carmine, “To Unify Our
Country – The Splendor of Interdependence.” EconCurrents, March 21,
2022. WAvailable at https://econcurrents.com/2022/03/21/to-unify-our-country-the-splendor-of-interdependence/.
[15]
Gorga, Carmine, “From Money Controlling People to People
Controlling Money.” EconIntersect, October 22, 2016.
Available at https://econintersect.com/a/blogs/blog1.php/from-money-controlling-people-to.
[16] Gorga, Carmine, “Concordian
Economics: Tools to Return Relevance to Economics.” Forum for Social
Economics, May 2008. Reprinted, with a new Introduction, in Mother Pelican: A Journal of
Solidarity and Sustainability, Vol.
11, No. 2, February 2015. Available at http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisustv11n02page4.html.
[17] Gorga, Carmine, “The Bancor as an
Instrument of National and International Peace,” A piece in search of a
publisher, June 2022. Available at Bancor as an Instrumen of National
and International Peace.docx.
[18] Gorga, Carmine, “What To Do If The
Stock Market Crashes?” TalkMarkets, March 14, 2017. Available at https://talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/what-to-do-if-the-stock-market-crashes?post=126594.
[19] Rodrick, Scott, An Introduction
to ESOPs, NCEO, National Center for Employee Ownership, 19th
Edition, April 2020. Available at An Introduction to ESOPs | NCEO.
[20] Gorga, Carmine,
“Two Proposals in the Form of Two
Petitions Designed to Stabilize the Monetary System.” The
Somist Institute, December 3, 2015. Available at The Somist Institute: Two Proposals.
[21] Durr, Jean, Personal
communication, Public Affairs Office of the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System, September 14, 2016. Available at 2nd Jean Durr, FRS.docx - Microsoft
Word Online (live.com).
[22] Gorga, Carmine, “Two Crucial
Issues In Foreign Trade.” TalkMarkets, March 25, 2019. Available at Carmine Gorga Blog | Two Crucial
Issues In Foreign Trade | Talkmarkets.
[23] Gorga, Carmine, “Some Shortcomings
of the Social Contract.” Mother Pelican: A Journal of Solidarity and
Sustainability, Vol. 14, No. 6, June 2018. Available at http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisustv14n06page5.html.
[24] See, e.g., Gorga, Carmine,
“Concordian Economics: An Overall View.” Mother Pelican: A Journal of
Solidarity and Sustainability, Vol. 13, No. 2, February 2017. Available at http://www.pelicanweb.org/solisustv13n02page4.html.
[25] Lief, Alfred (ed), The Brandeis
Guide to the Modern World. Little Brown, Boston, 1941, p. 211.
No comments:
Post a Comment