|
A question for Michael--and anyone else who can
help my feeble grasp on accounting: The process you describe here, of
money values cancelling out, seems to leave a collection of physical assets that
have no common numeraire. That is, no money value. Or is
there a fund of cash 'on the other side', as seems to be suggested at one point?
If there isn't some remnant of money values attached to the physical assets (and
capital), how is the monetary authority to know how many tickets to
print?
Keith Wilde
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:15
AM
Subject: [socialcredit] the accounting
model
Further thoughts on the accounting
model:
Observation 1: A national balance sheet for the nation
would be like combining the balance sheets of all the companies in the
nation. In this process, certain things would change. For example,
one company owes money to another. This normally appears as an asset on
the balance sheets of both companies, a cash asset of the one and an accounts
receivable asset of the other. In a combined balance sheet, we are not
concerned with intercompany debt, and the accounts receivable will disappear,
showing that there is really only one asset. But
Observation
2: Social credit understands money as tickets, an idea that is
completely foreign to generally accepted accounting principles. In
Douglas's national balance sheet, money ("cash" in accountants language) is
not an asset at all, it is on the other side of the equation as a claim
against a (physical) asset. But
Observation 3: The concept
of a balance sheet is that it balances automatically. It is merely a
reflection of the fact that an association is an artificial person that owns
things on behalf of its individual members. So the association owns
assets directly, but the individual members own them indirectly and
ultimately. In a national balance sheet, we will have physical assets,
we will have liabilities to foreign entities (internal liabilities will cancel
out and disappear), and we will have the capital account. The capital
account is a statement that the net assets of the association of the nation
are owned on behalf of, and for the benefit of, us, the citizens.
Capital assets are used by producers, who are always to an extent public
agents, on our behalf; and consumer goods and services are what we actually
take possession of. Therefore, pace Douglas, it seems to me that money
as such should not appear on the balance sheet any more than tickets would
appear on a theater's balance sheet. (A theater would record printing
tickets as an expense but not tickets themselves as an asset.) If money
did appear on the national balance sheet, it would (per the A+B Theorem) not
balance.
The national balance sheet is not an accounting of
money. It's an accounting of things, and then money is merely a device
by which the members of the association take physical possession. In
conventional accounting a dividend is really a dividend in money. In
social credit accounting a dividend is really a dividend in things, and money
is just a mechanism.
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 nschwartz@cogeco.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
