|
Message 2664
|
|
< Previous | Next >
|
|
|
| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] distribution, magnitude of discount, and a note on Wal-Mart | | Date: | Wednesday, August 31, 2005 20:57:45 (-0400) | | From: | Keith Wilde <keithwilde @.........ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 2647 (written by Triumphofthepast) |
|
OK, duly noted and ingested. I will have to
scratch my head a while on the question of what it means for contemporary
application.
Keith
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2005 9:13
AM
Subject: [socialcredit] distribution,
magnitude of discount, and a note on Wal-Mart
"Do you not think that the compensated price
should reflect productivity improvements on the physical side of
distribution?" (Keith)
Yes. As Keith says, they are
PRODUCTIVITY improvements; i.e., physical distribution is just the end-stage
of production.
". . . very large estimate of the retail discount . . .
25%. . . . Major increments to 'productivity' have occurred in [physical
distribution] over the past half century and might therefore mitigate the
warranted amount of money distribution via the retail discount."
(Keith)
No. Colburne gives many examples of major increments to
productivity, including an estimate of the increase of horsepower over
time. Considering the size of these increments, what we have to show for
them is pitiful. Poverty should be a thing of the past, economic
insecurity is obsolete. Instead, we offset these increments with
increasing amounts of waste with the result that we get no more than a tiny
fraction of the benefit, IF THAT. Major increments to productivity do
not mitigate the warranted discount, they increase it.
Based on the
U.S. statistics I published in Triumph of the Past for May 2005, Prices
increased from 1998 to 2001 by $875 billion, and the gap between Prices and
Purchasing-Power increased by $196.9 billion. That would warrant a
discount/dividend of 22%.
"By taking advantage I suppose you mean that
[Wal-Mart] makes money out of advancing credit?" (Keith)
No, I
mean that it offers a WORSE BARGAIN, but people on limited funds are obliged
to accept a bad bargain because a walking community, beauty, human-scale
architecture, personal attention, etc. are unaffordable
luxuries.
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email keithwilde@sympatico.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
|
Reply to this message