| Subject: | [socialcredit] Re: COGEXEC: capitalism v socialism v just third way v interindependence | | Date: | , September 4, 2005 01:46:57 (+0200) | | From: | cymric <cymric @.......nz>
|
| In reply to: | Message 2688 (written by Norman Kurland) |
Howdy Norman,
Firstly its is ambiguous to say "closed" their minds to the Just Third Way
(apart from indicating you are at least as narrow minded as you claim Ryan is by
not being interested in what anyone who doesnt support your Just Third Way has to
say) because it seems to me that you are the one closed to its limits.
Given the context of the Iraqi operation and that of central-Asia, in particular
the restructuring of the Balkins and eastern Europe, partly by war and partly by
buying democractic revolutions or should one call it renting them by money power,
I have no enthusiasm regards the same kind of propoganda words about democrcay as
we had had in the so called Free Market revolution.
In fact it appears a natural extention of the same. AFter all one cant keep
building the Supply side on deminishing Demand side and as a result we have seen
exploitation by the corporate world of public (sector) funds and savings etc to
prop them up and now this of buying the grass roots by offering them soemthing of
what they should not only own but control merely shows the Time of the Dividend
has come, but mot to give the people real power.
There is nothing what so ever that indicates the Chalabri is closing down the
games of the elite and in fact this new consttituional initiative will ensure
they are ensured a permanent place of privalege. Lets face it who is going to
gain from interest free monetarising of capital credits. The avergae man in the
street? The rebuilding of the economy will by by those already well ensconsed in
the corruption. Chalabri is there for that reason, he would be carried out in a
thousand pieces if he didnt.
The picture is that of building on debt money from abroad which effectively
becomes the fractional reserve of the private banking system - I noticed this
area has been left out of public sight, the key one and you expect social
crediter to be blind and stupid? The cartels in London and NY still control the
price of oil and gas not the Iraqi people to whom the people and govt will look
to for security. If Peak Oil is true this is a short term base to build Iraq on.
Secondly the Iraqis will not live as long as their oil will flow because they
are the victims of nuclear war ( depleted uranium).
We know all about the seperation of control from ownership. It stinks!
The govt is in control, their costs which will incude their relationship with
the corporates are taken out first, then the capital reserve which benefits whom?
We can guess, and lastly a dividend which will be taxed.
"...and governments will have to vote and take it away" by taxes while it is
intended to make it look like some onerous task, in fact its one of their
greatest proficiencies.
The growth of the reserve and the growth of the debt will see todays debts paid
by the returns tomorrow theory etc.- nothing new here, the world is already
groaning under its irrationality.
I got news for you Norman, when they privatised govt operations under free
market reforms in New Zealand they didnt reduce taxes! Govt bureaucracy actually
has grown in size, tax take, and power over people- all driven initially by big
business! That is what Chalabri represents. He was selected by the Oil cabal
around Bush. There simply no vacuum there for goodnes to thrive in.
Peter H
Norman Kurland <thirdway@cesj.org> wrote:
>
> Normally I don't respond to anything Ryan contributes, because he
> doesn't understand binary economics or make any serious attempt to. He
> also doesn't understand property or its political significance, is
> therefore totally oblivious of the systemic causes of extreme
> concentration of capital ownership and the ever-widening economic power
> gap in the world. He spends most of his time trying to attack the
> motives of others who don't see the world his way. I don't have time
> for him or others who have closed their mind to the Just Third Way.
>
> However, Ryan demonstrates that he has a hard time reading closely,
> especially ideas outside of his narrow box. His posting contradicted
> his support of the trickle-down Alaskan Dividend Plan as an alternative
> for Iraq. His quoted source, without realizing it contained this
passage:
>
> Ahmed Chalabi, a highly controversial figure in Iraqi
> politics, believes the government should create a
> national oil company that collects revenue from the
> development and sale of the country's oil and gas.
> Every citizen would own one non-transferable share in
> the company. The shares would pay dividends to
> citizens, who in turn would pay taxes to the
> government. "We would make the government reliant on
> the people for its revenue, rather than having an
> independent stream of revenue from the oil," says
> Sethna, Chalabi's energy policy adviser. "The
> government will be more responsive to the people, and
> the people will feel that they have a stake in their
> governance."
>
> Establishing a tax system in Iraq would be one way to
> sidestep the contentious debates Alaska has faced
> since it first created the Permanent Fund. Alaskans
> pay no state income tax. Oil royalties fund most of
> the state government; this money, for the most part,
> does not come from the Permanent Fund or its earnings.
> Instead, lawmakers can tap the fund's investment.
> earnings to pay for the business of government.
>
>
>
> Compare the above with our proposal
(http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/paradigmpapers/iraq-nationbuilding.htm) It
has been circulating long before America invaded Iraq in 2003. In a
meeting in his office on July 14, 2005, I asked in Senator George Allen,
who previously supported the Alaska Plan, to send our proposal to top
Iraqi officials he knew, as an alternative to the Alaska Plan, which was
also previously supported by Chalabi. Here's the binary economic
proposal I'm told by the Senator's staff was sent out, before we learned
from the main editorial in the Wall Street Journal of August 17th what
appears to be a policy reversal by Chalabi:
>
>
> Phases of Implementation
>
> PHASE 1: Transfer Free Oil Shares to Every Citizen of Iraq.
> Denationalize the oil fields of Iraq, as a catalyst for building a
> new "Just Third Way" economy. Transfer the ownership and control of
> all oil reserves and natural resources within the borders of Iraq
> from the Iraqi National Oil Company to a newly formed,
> professionally managed, limited liability joint stock corporation.
> All Iraqis would automatically receive free, as a right of
> citizenship from birth to death, an equal number of non-transferable
> shares in the new corporation. All citizens would be guaranteed
> first-class shareholder rights to the profits and voting control
> over the board of directors and management of the new company. All
> profits except for operating reserves would be paid out fully and
> periodically as dividends to each shareholder.
>
> To meet all costs and services of government at the national,
> provincial and local levels, taxes on such dividend incomes would be
> withheld by the corporation before distributing the balance of
> dividends to each citizen. The shares of those who die would be
> retired to the General Fund or redistributed to new-borns, returning
> Iraqi exiles and newly naturalized citizens, who would receive an
> equal number of shares as existing shareholders.
>
> The new corporation would encourage market forces in setting prices
> throughout the economy by offering, through a competitive bidding
> process, concessions and leases for exploration, drilling,
> infrastructural engineering and construction, processing and
> marketing oil and other natural resource activities. Preferential
> treatment would be given to competitive operating companies that are
> broadly owned by Iraqi citizens.
>
> To lay the foundations for Iraq's future economy, new industrial,
> agricultural and commercial demonstration projects (for example,
> using advanced alternative energy technologies that produce power
> and water from sea water and waste), could be launched and financed
> in ways that encourage wider share ownership among Iraqi workers and
> other stakeholders.
>
> Future government revenues would then flow from the bottom-up from
> increasing citizen incomes. This would make government more
> dependent economically on its citizens, rather than perpetuating the
> previous top-down dependency of the people on a political elite. A
> single rate of taxation on all incomes above poverty levels would
> balance government budgets, achieve greater accountability,
> transparency and democratic participation in governance at all
> levels, and radically reduce future risks of public sector
> corruption or future coups.
>
> Personal share accounts (like Individual Retirement Accounts in the
> U.S.) would be set up within local banks for each worker and every
> citizen of Iraq to accumulate income-producing capital assets,
> sheltered from any taxes until assets or income are distributed for
> personal consumption. The equity accumulation accounts would also be
> given the power to borrow interest-free, non-recourse productive
> credit on behalf of the citizen.
>
> This "capital credit" would be used exclusively by citizens to
> purchase new shares issued by new or growing Iraqi enterprises to
> finance the expansion and modernization needs of a growing Iraqi
> economy. The debt for purchasing the newly issued growth shares
> would be secured and repaid by the projected dividends on those
> shares (as with leveraged employee stock ownership plans in the
U.S.).
>
> Here's the relevant passage from Wall Street Journal article of August
17th:
>
> The best suggestion we've heard for cutting this Gordian knot comes
> from the much-maligned Ahmed Chalabi, who is now Iraq's deputy prime
> minister with special responsibilities for oil and infrastructure
> and has emerged as a major constitutional broker. He has bucked some
> of his Shiite and Kurdish allies by insisting that ultimate control
> of Iraq's natural wealth must remain in the hands of the central
> government, while also suggesting constitutional language that the
> wealth be owned by all Iraqis in "equal measure." In other words,
> the oil would be managed by the central government in the interests
> of all Iraqis wherever they live, but not owned by it.
>
> Mr. Chalabi hopes that the "equal measure" concept will pave the way
> in practice for the creation of an oil trust, under which Iraqis
> would from birth have accounts established in their name. Iraqis
> would receive their full and equal share of oil revenue and the
> government would have to vote to tax it away. Mr. Chalabi sees this
> as a way of breaking the "oil curse" that has turned so many
> oil-rich nations into corrupt tyrannies.
>
>
>
> What does this prove? It shows that Ryan shoots from the hip and
> doesn't see the confused and contradictory nature of his attempt at
> refuting our initiatiative. I repeat, the Alaska so-called "dividend"
> plan is "a trickle-down socialist approach". It does not give Alaskan
> citizens private ownership of property in the form of individually
> acquired equity shares. Our approach gives economic power to the
> people. The approach Ryan seems to favor keeps the citizens in a
> permanent position of dependency on the generosity and honesty of
> policiticians and bureaucrats, who will do whatever they can to be
> re-elected and that usually means giving money to special interest
> groups they need to stay in power, and giving the people the
> left-overs. That's why socialism eventually gets as corrupt as monopoly
> capitalism.
>
> Ryan doesn't get the point, and until he can refute in a civilized
> maneer the logic of binary economics, I will continue to ignore him, as
> so many others have in the past. You can bet that Ryan will not pass my
> response on to the social credit elist.
>
> Norm Kurland
> William B. Ryan wrote:
>
> >[Kurland in his typical arrogance] Incidentally, do
> >you oppose our Oil-to-People proposal for Iraq
> >(http://www.cesj.org/thirdway/paradigmpapers/iraq-nationbuilding.htm)?
> > A similar proposal was endorsed (without attributing
> >it to us) in the lead editorial of the Wall Street
> >Journal on August 17th.
> >------------------------------------------
> >--------------------------------------------
> >It was not attributed to you for the simple reason it
> >is not original to you, nor is it "similar" to your
> >proposal, but is modeled after the program that was
> >always strongly opposed by the Kelsoists, including
> >yourself: the Alaska Permanent Fund, which you
> >disparaged as being "socialist" on the old Ownership
> >list. I believe it's still in the archives. I alert
> >you it so you might continue your purging.
> >
> >This is from the on line edition of Arabiestrends:-
> >
> >When Saddam Hussein's regime crumbled in 2003, US
> >leaders talked about creating a trust fund that would
> >give Iraqis a share of their country's oil wealth. The
> >concept has proven successful in the state of Alaska,
> >which has paid its residents an annual dividend for
> >more than 20 years now.
> >
> >The $30 billion Alaska Permanent Fund, seeded with oil
> >royalties, is invested in stocks, bonds and real
> >estate worldwide. Some 600,000 Alaska residents
> >receive a portion of the investment earnings each
> >year, making the Alaska Permanent Fund one of the
> >world's most unique state-run oil funds. (Last year,
> >every resident who lived in Alaska for at least a year
> >got a $919 check.) US conservatives and liberals alike
> >believed a similar fund in Iraq was one answer to the
> >war-torn country's problems, a democratic way to share
> >Iraq's oil wealth and pave a brighter future for its
> >citizens. "The [Iraqis], if they had access to that
> >money directly, as is the case in Alaska, could make
> >choices in their own lives," said then-US Secretary of
> >State Colin Powell during a Senate committee hearing
> >in 2003.
> >
> >But two years later, as the Iraq government drafts the
> >country's new constitution, it remains uncertain
> >whether ordinary Iraqis will ever get their share of
> >the wealth. To be sure, the government is enmeshed in
> >the more urgent task of ending a bloody insurgency and
> >heading off civil war. Just protecting the officials
> >who oversee the world's second-largest oil reserves
> >hasn't been easy. In May, for instance, an official
> >from Iraq's oil ministry was gunned down on the
> >streets of Baghdad. The government is also grappling
> >with how to rebuild the country, and that will largely
> >depend on how Iraqi leaders decide to spend the oil
> >revenue. Providing oil dividends to citizens seems far
> >off, yet without a long-range plan for the country's
> >billions of dollars of oil revenue, short-term agendas
> >and corruption could nix the idea before it gets a
> >chance.
> >
> >Iraqi leaders understand this and claim that they are
> >considering language for the new constitution that
> >makes it clear that Iraq's natural resources belong to
> >the people, says Zaab Sethna, the energy policy
> >adviser for Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Ahmed Chalabi,
> >the acting oil ministry director. This could pave the
> >way for an oil trust fund, Sethna says, adding that
> >"the question of distribution of oil proceeds to the
> >people would be dealt with by legislation once there
> >is a constitutionally elected parliament."
> >
> >Many countries have instituted funds to invest and
> >preserve revenue from the sale of natural resources.
> >Chile created the Copper Stabilization Fund to help
> >offset the effects of volatile copper prices on the
> >country's currency and budget revenue. Kazakhstan,
> >Azerbaijan and Norway are among a number of oil-rich
> >countries with funds that help cover government
> >shortfalls or serve as rainy-day accounts when their
> >oil reserves run dry. Norway's fund alone is valued at
> >a whopping $170 billion and has proved highly popular
> >among the country's citizens. The Alaska Permanent
> >Fund, however, is unique because it distributes a
> >portion of the state's oil wealth directly to its
> >citizens.
> >
> >For many years, Alaska was viewed among Americans as a
> >backwater territory, a cold and inhospitable place
> >populated solely by bears and moose, Eskimos and
> >Indians, pioneers and social dropouts. The biggest
> >industries in the state were fishing and the military.
> >That all changed in 1967, however, when wildcatters
> >struck oil at Prudhoe Bay, which proved to be North
> >America's most prolific oilfield. Two years later,
> >Alaska raised $900 million from the sale of oil
> >leases, and construction soon started on a
> >1,300-kilometer pipeline to move the crude to market.
> >Meantime, Alaska leaders discussed what to do with the
> >windfall.
> >
> >Many recognized a common dilemma facing all oil-based
> >economies: greed. The sudden realization that the
> >Alaskan Arctic was drenched in oil had already
> >produced greedy ambitions and political pet projects.
> >Prior to the Prudhoe Bay oil discovery, Alaska had its
> >share of booms and busts, and many lawmakers in the
> >1970s agreed the oil boom needed to be managed with a
> >long-term approach. They included the people of Alaska
> >in their decisions.
> >
> >In 1976 voters passed a constitutional amendment to
> >create an oil-wealth savings account, known as the
> >Alaska Permanent Fund. Six years later the state's
> >residents were made Permanent Fund shareholders. Every
> >man, woman and child would receive an annual dividend.
> >Alaskans themselves would keep government in check and
> >prevent politicians from depleting the fund. And the
> >dividend program would inject cash into local
> >economies throughout the state as Alaskans spent their
> >dividends on everything from plane tickets to college
> >tuition to snowmobiles.
> >
> >Operation hope. Fawaz K. Saraf, a structural engineer
> >in the US, has made it his hobby to advocate an Iraq
> >oil fund modeled after the Alaska Permanent Fund. In
> >1970, when he was 12, Saraf and his family left Iraq,
> >fleeing Saddam Hussein's regime. In 2003, he visited
> >the country after the Iraq War, under the US Office of
> >Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance Program. "I
> >saw firsthand how the person on the street felt that
> >oil was not working for them," he says. "The general
> >feeling was that their money was being stolen, that
> >the new people coming over there were taking the money
> >away."
> >
> >Iraq's citizens are accustomed to people in power
> >spending the country's oil wealth. Oil helped build
> >Saddam's military; it paid for boondoggle projects.
> >And it was an ever-present symbol of the disparity
> >between leaders and citizens. Saraf points out that in
> >the 1980s, Iraq oil revenue totaled more than $100
> >billion. Yet, after two wars and economic sanctions,
> >the country has little show for it. All the more
> >reason, Saraf says, to create an oil fund that holds
> >government accountable.
> >
> >There is no doubt that many Iraqis would love a cut of
> >the oil wealth. The average working Iraqi earns less
> >than $1,500 a year. Unemployment in some towns stands
> >at more than 70 percent. Some date farmers
> >(agriculture is Iraq's second-largest industry) have
> >said they would use an oil dividend to buy farm
> >equipment and expand production. Other citizens have
> >talked about opening businesses if the country created
> >a dividend program.
> >
> >Saraf believes a dividend would unite the country's
> >diverse population, treating everybody equally and
> >giving them a stake in the oil industry. The
> >democratic approach would also hold government
> >accountable for how it spends the country's oil
> >revenue, and some dividend advocates suggest that
> >could help quell the current violence. "When a
> >terrorist damages a pipeline, the people would realize
> >that it affects them." However, it is unlikely Iraqis
> >will get an oil dividend in the near future; that will
> >be up to a constitutionally elected parliament to sort
> >out.
> >
> >Ahmed Chalabi, a highly controversial figure in Iraqi
> >politics, believes the government should create a
> >national oil company that collects revenue from the
> >development and sale of the country's oil and gas.
> >Every citizen would own one non-transferable share in
> >the company. The shares would pay dividends to
> >citizens, who in turn would pay taxes to the
> >government. "We would make the government reliant on
> >the people for its revenue, rather than having an
> >independent stream of revenue from the oil," says
> >Sethna, Chalabi's energy policy adviser. "The
> >government will be more responsive to the people, and
> >the people will feel that they have a stake in their
> >governance."
> >
> >Establishing a tax system in Iraq would be one way to
> >sidestep the contentious debates Alaska has faced
> >since it first created the Permanent Fund. Alaskans
> >pay no state income tax. Oil royalties fund most of
> >the state government; this money, for the most part,
> >does not come from the Permanent Fund or its earnings.
> >Instead, lawmakers can tap the fund's investment
> >earnings to pay for the business of government.
> >
> >Alaskans have grown accustomed to receiving a dividend
> >every year. To mess with the system or reduce the
> >value of the dividend is viewed as political suicide
> >among many lawmakers. Still, Alaska's oilfields are in
> >decline, and the Permanent Fund may be needed to pay
> >for future budget shortfalls. Some argue that if
> >Alaska had an income tax, the state wouldn't have to
> >draw from the Permanent Fund.
> >
> >Peace dividends. Dave Rose owns an Alaska-based
> >capital management company and is a former director of
> >the Alaska Permanent Fund Corp., the state agency that
> >manages the oil fund. He helped spawn the idea of an
> >Iraq Permanent Fund two years ago when he proposed it
> >to US lawmakers. Now he hopes to get Iraqi leaders
> >interested in the concept. Still, while Rose believes
> >a dividend would be great for Iraqis, he says there
> >are more pressing issues Iraqi leaders must address.
> >"The social and political needs must be solved first
> >to avoid the fund being pillaged," Rose says.
> >
> >He believes leaders should set up government agencies
> >that can provide timely solutions to rebuilding Iraq.
> >Oil revenue could seed the agencies, which in turn
> >could buy bonds and make loans for development
> >projects. Alaska did the same thing around the time it
> >created the Permanent Fund. The state had a laundry
> >list of projects and pressing needs, so it used some
> >oil revenue to create agencies to tackle those issues.
> >The agencies, still operating today, include a housing
> >authority, a government development arm and a bond
> >bank.
> >
> >Rose recently shared his thoughts with the Islamic
> >Center in Virginia. Some Iraqis who attended the
> >meeting were skeptical. They told him they believed
> >the country was too corrupt to manage its enormous oil
> >revenue. "I told them that in Alaska, greed is one of
> >the things we don't like but that we have a lot of,"
> >Rose recalls. "I told them that we played greed to our
> >strength: we gave ourselves a dividend."
> >-
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >--- Norman Kurland <thirdway@cesj.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Dear Ed,
> >>
> >>
> >[snipped]
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________
> >Yahoo! Mail
> >Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the tour:
> >http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
> >
> >To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
> >http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
> >To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
> >with a single line in the body of the message that says:
> >unsubscribe cogexec
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
|
Re: COGEXEC: capit
Reply to this message