| Subject: | Re: RE: [socialcredit] Solomon Islands from Electronz - To Peter | | Date: | , August 1, 2005 14:14:37 (+0200) | | From: | cymric <cymric @.......nz>
|
| In reply to: | Message 2334 (written by Daniel Morin) |
Howdy Dan,
Your premises have set me up to concluded:
1, there should only be gold coin,
2, no one is allowed to determine how much.
And you said you were here to learn about S.C. We accept printed legal tender
and you cant accept it as to you all printed legal tender is fraud. Is there
any point in continuing?
I put it to you, you are here to challenge us not to learn. You havent asked for
an explanation you have gone straight to condemnation, which indicates to me you
think you already know enough about SC to have a go.
It's a case of sovereignty of the people v. sovereignty of who controls gold.
And you never commentad about your family tree with its hidden Fabians.
You also didnt answer the inevitable challenge you have to expect from all over
the place you take your preference, which is, where is all the gold going to come
from to provide 100% reserve for the worlds economies? ( NASA is no help there
).
I will provide you with your answer: when the global summit goals have been met
and the world has virtually become post industrial, large areas of continents
banned to humans for wild life and the population reduced by several billions,
there is likely to be enough to run the human chip system.
I have been through this before Dan, there are conceptions we hold the Von Mises
followers cannot compute, although on the surface we appear to have a lot of
common ground.
A previous contestant from your stables arguing gold as the only stable and real
money, anything other than gold wasnt money, I asked how was every nation to get
its supply of real money without the price going through the stratosphere, and
since all non-gold money wasnt money with what could they possible buy it. His
answer was with gold! Later he moved to advocating that the value of gold ( and
platinum etc) could be adjusted up in value to equal the worlds goods and
services, which is two dimensional thinking and although as with you I can see
you cant trust anyone in orthority to judge/estimate/calculate etc anything to do
with value or volumn of money, somehow you guys just think that in relation to
gold volumns or it value its conveniently not an issue, someone somehow makes the
decision regards gold but in regards anything else its such a big issue no one
can satisfy your demands and so the system is dismissed. Reminds me of Marlon
Brandow playing the roll of a gangster, shooting crap with dice with no dots, he
told everyone else what he shot. A kind of fraud is it not?
Peter H.
"Daniel Morin" <dan@danmorin.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Peter,
> [Peter H] If a S.C.er calls fractional reserve banking a curse, how is
that
> promoting Fr.Re. banking?
>
> For me, fractional reserve banking is the ability to print (create)
money
> out of thin air.
>
> [Peter H] If you have no knowledge of SC dont make judgements that
> contradict the truth, as that simply debases your own beliefs when you
try
> to promote them.
>
> Perhaps I don't fully understand Social Credit. This is why I am on
this
> mailing list.
>
> From what Kenneth Palmerton wrote:
> This side of the pond we have an institution called the National
Physical
> Laboratory. This body has been charged by the State for some time to
decide
> the nature and dimensions of our measurements of weight and length. No
one,
> to my knowledge, questions their conclusions.
>
> So why should it be difficult for a similar institution to tell us the
> amount of money we need in circulation at any particular Time ?
>
> Changing the "amount of money in circulation in any particular time" is
the
> ability to print money. This is what I call fraud. Printing money is
> fraud. If I were to print money, I would be put to jail. Having a
group of
> politicians or bankers doing it is no different.
>
> Having a National Physical Laboratory is a good thing to determine
> standards. Let's imagine the National Physical Laboratory would tweak
the
> weight and length by changing the number ounces in a pound or the number
> inches in a foot, or some other clever mechanism. Some individuals
closely
> linked National Physical Laboratory would benefit greatly to have
certain
> values tweaked to their advantages when writing bidding contracts and
other
> business activities.
>
> I am certain the population would question the soundness of the National
> Physical Laboratory in such scenario. Having an institution to
determine
> the amount of money needed in circulation at any particular time is the
same
> thing. Besides, there is already such an intuition: it is called a
Central
> Bank or a Federal Reserve System.
>
> [Peter H] Look at the fruit ( policy) and you see the tree (
philosophy).
>
> I would write: Look at the fruit (end result) and you see the tree
(policy).
> I "policy" is not a fruit, but a tool to produce results and/or products
> (fruits).
>
> Sincerely,
|
Re: RE: [socialcre
Reply to this message