| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] the accounting model | | Date: | , September 11, 2005 07:29:36 (+0200) | | From: | cymric <cymric @.......nz>
|
The H.B. Hastings quote is just one more in the growing list of non-S.C. people
I have become amazed at, of how many others who have agreed with Douglas or have
made examinations for the same or similar reasons, well before and after Douglas.
His ( Douglas) uniqueness is obviously his composition ( not the components in
the main) and so it becomes more surprising that he had no close rivals in terms
of a composition to address the numerous problems orthodoxy doesnt want to
acknowledge. It reinforces the obvious that the outcomes and the philosophy are
not desired by the opponents and competitors over reforms/restructuring.
In that chapter (2 of Part2) Douglas went on the make the following points:
- there has to be another source of purchasing power than the current system
allows.
- taking the banking/finance system away from private industry will not address
the real problem. ( it will address others )
- additional purchasing power cant be achieved through the price mechanism
- the ellimination of interest wont address it
- lowering prices has to also be achieved through some extraneous source not by
lowering wages etc.
The dividend cant be based on any notion of 'out of profit' since we effectively
also inherit the debt from previous generations. Then there is the issue as to
whether this debt represent a claim on the inheritance.
The 'out of profit' idea is also useless from the orthodox point of view because
it would then depend on favourable balances of trade or budget, which is already
in the minds of those hypnotised and this can be the reason for a reduction in
taxes. Too bad if they instituted this principle completely as that would means
extra taxes automatically in the years of deficit.
The value of the inheritance is probably more impossible to calculate than the
last 'inth' of the disparity in the A plus B theorem. There could be a further
issue as whether this value compounds or grow exponentially as debt does.
Obviously its the purpose ( social value) to which it is put in the Douglas
dividend that is important not the acumulating ( financial ) value it might have.
And the total value has to be able to expand to conterbalance the reduction in
the need for wages - financially. ( The reduction in working time relates not to
the dividend of course but to the the increasing work of technology and science
which themselves are represented in the heritage principle.)
It seems to me that the background to all this is a conflict between types of
value. To try and balance everything through financial values ( eg monetary
reform) is a trap which only serves those who control the vortex of financial
phenomina.
Douglas relates social values to real values not financial values. Financial
values conform to who ever has the authority to dictate the nature of value
operating in society ( what is physically possible and socially desirabble can
be made financially possible). Therefore any dividend that is controlled or
restrained by financial value just adds to the captive elements.
So taking into consideration the comment by Ken about purists not accepting a
simple answer/composition, it doesnt matter if one is a 'social crediter' or not,
if one tries to sort everything out through financial values ( eg the last inth
in the A plus B and the financial value of the heritance principle or even the
financial value of the energy of the sun since time began to ascertain a rent to
pay for it, etc) cannot succeed.
This is why people want to fiddle around with or cannot accept Douglas'
composition because their conception is limited to financial value which was in
fact was a late arrival in civilisation I believe.
Peter H
"William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> There is no question whatsoever that Douglas was
> developing what he and his colleagues working in a
> similar direction called "an accounting method of
> analysis."
>
> This is from Part II Chapter II of *Social Credit*:-
>
> [Douglas]...It may be noted that both in Europe and
> America, there are numerous endeavours being made, and
> theories propounded, to explain this fact; which was,
> until recently, denied as a fact. The foreword to a
> work by H. B. Hastings,* published in America,
> remarks:
>
> "By an accounting method of analysis, the conclusion
> is reached that the value, at the current retail
> price-level, of goods produced far exceeds the flow of
> purchasing-power from permanent sources. In other
> words, recurring periods of business depression are
> shown to be the result of present financial and
> business policies.
>
> "The importance of this new method of approach to the
> most important of modern economic problems is
> self-evident."
>
> * "Costs and Profits."
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message