So I've read over my previous post three times now and I can't say that I agree with this particular "Anti-Federalist. He states "How are the Dutch? We owe them money, it is true; and are they not willing that we should owe them more? Mr. [John] Adams applied to them for a new loan to the poor, despised Confederation. They readily granted it. The Dutch have a fellow-feeling for us. They were in the same situation with ourselves.
I believe that the money which the Dutch borrowed of Henry IV is not yet paid. How did they pass Queen Elizabeth's loan? At a very considerable discount. They took advantage of the weakness and necessities of James I, and made their own terms with that contemptible monarch. Loans from nations are not like loans from private men. Nations lend money, and grant assistance, to one another, from views of national interest - France was willing to pluck the fairest feather out of the British crown. This was her object in aiding us. She will not quarrel with us on pecuniary considerations."
Am I understanding this correctly. Is he saying that not paying our debts is ok? I realize the ability to pay debts was a particular weakness of the Confederacy, prior to when the Constitution was passed. I'm prepared to like these guys because they were for small government, but did this person really believe that we should leave debts to other countries lingering.
I agree with him regarding the Federalist using fear of war with other nations as a bully stick to herd our fledgling nation toward ratifying the Constitution. It was a means to gain power and is still used today, but even the Bible tells us to stay out of debt if at all possible. Isn't it bad now that our debt to China is creating such chaos within our country?
No comments:
Post a Comment