|
The compensated price principle is probably the
most important aspect of Douglas' economic analysis. The replacement of
the wage with a dividend is secondary. I find it odd that any "Social
Credit" Party would focus on the latter, but ignore the former, when Douglas
spent most of his time explaining the former.
Jim
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 2:01
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Replying to
John Rawson 1
Sorry, Joe, not biting. All I was doing was stating fact. It
seems nobody has ever convinced the Party of the practicability of the price
discount in action, and that includes me.
Regards. John R.
From: Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject:
Re: [socialcredit] Replying to John Rawson 1
Date: Sat, 05 Nov
2005 08:49:18 -0800
Without trying to bring down any 'new
controversy', or add to any old ones, how in the world can the NZ Democrats
be ''bound by constitution to the Douglas analysis and the National
dividend" WITHOUT also having a 'compensated price discount'?
Is that analysis not primarily concerned with
'consumer' incomes and their relationship with 'consumer' prices, or
am I missing something in my reading of Douglas and others on here and
elsewhere who've been interpreting him?
Seems to me you're not trying to "build up,
from the individual", but rather "down, from the State". Why not look
at and offer what the man originally proposed? If you're
determined to go the 'politcal party' route could you do any worse with
the electorate by that than in going the way you've gone? Why do
you people so 'fear' the empowerment of 'consumers', and yet profess to
believe that 'democracy' is the ability of the individual to "choose or
refuse one thing at a time"? Or is that 'one thing at a time' as
envisioned by the Democrats drawn from a list of things only
pre-selected by the annointed?
And where is the difference between the
'government' using the central bank to finance some of its expenditure, and
private industry borrowing from private banks to finance theirs? Do
not both 'inflate' the money supply and dilute the general purchasing
power by raising prices of 'consumer' goods almost exactly the same
way? Oh, I know, you're going to save "all that awful interest", and
that just makes it so worthwhile. But can't you see you're
trading a smaller problem for a bigger one? How long will it
be after the 'infrastructure' that might be necessary and desirable to
have is completed before the purpose of that 'infrastructure' will be
perverted into the all-too-familiar, "Now if we only financed another hydro
scheme, port facility, railway, whatever, the same way, just look at
the potential for 'capturing' new 'export' markets and all the 'jobs' we
could create. Not to mention how much 'easier' it will be to pay for
what we've already done"? Where does that ever end? Are you not
right back to 'guns before butter'? Where is the "Douglas
analysis'' you're ''constitutionally bound to" in that
regard?
And what difference does it make how much of
the money supply is in 'notes and coins' versus electronic blips that
transfer figures from one account to another everytime someone uses a debit
card or receives their income by direct deposit? The 'money' in your
account and accessible to you that way is no different than coin or cash in
your pocket providing it will be accepted as effective demand for goods and
services. And is it not that 'effective demand' we should be concerned
with? And does not that 'effective demand' have as much to do with
CONSUMER PRICES as it does with distributing incomes?
Regards,
Joe
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, November 04, 2005 9:16
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Replying
to John Rawson 1
Thanks Martin. And also thanks (belatedly) for the material in
your submissions which I consider brilliant.
Our NZ Democrats are bound by constitution to the Douglas analysis and
the national dividend concept, but have never really adopted the
price discount one. And contrary to Douglas, we consider that so
little modern money is notes and coins (M0) that it is the government's
duty to use central bank credit for some of its expenditure, if only to
restore a past status quo. As was done very successfully by our 1935
Labour govt. before that Party lost its principles.
I am not seeking to bring a whole new controversy down on my head
(again) by noting this; just stating our current thinking for your
information.
Regards. John R.
From: Martin Hattersley
<hattersleyjm@interbaun.com>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re: [socialcredit]
Replying to John Rawson 1
Date: Fri, 04 Nov 2005 16:21:21
-0700
>I think you are right, that "100% money" doesn't really
provide a
>practical way of making the economy work in an optimum
way.
>
>The problem is that "The cunning device That all
costs enter price
>Ensures that the price can't be
paid".
>
>That is the argument for a Just Price discount,
paid for from an
>external source, such as newly created "fiat"
money.
>
>The essence of the problem identified in the A+B
theorem is that
>capital spending, if fiinanced by borrowing new
bank credit, leads
>to the community paying, through inflation,
for the privately owned
>asset so created. A Just Price discount,
which can be administered
>with no more difficulty than existing
sales taxes, would repay the
>community for this sacrifice when
new production comes on the
>market, and correct any inflation of
prices that has taken place.
>
>As I see the present
situation, monetary policy of providing very
>low rates to
borrowers to encourage investment, is promoting
>excessive
capital development at the expense of the ecology, also
>speculation and continuous inflation. This distributes incomes
>through employment on capital projects, but leave a trail of
debt, a
>concentration of economic power, and a growing gap
between the
>"haves" and the "have nots" both domestically and
between nations.
>
>Not good.
>
>Martin
Hattersley
>1970-10123-99 St. Edmonton AB Canada
>Phone
(780)423-2081; Fax (780)425-5247
>e-mail:
jmartinh@shaw.ca;
>hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
>
>
>-----
Original Message ----- From: "William B. Ryan"
><w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
>To:
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
>Sent: Monday, October 24, 2005
3:48 PM
>Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Replying to John Rawson
1
>
>
>>Hatterley's proposal was based on Frederick
Soddy's
>>one hundred percent reserve proposal, called
"pound
>>for pound" in Britain and "dollar for dollar"
in
>>America. It was also called the "Chicago Plan."
It
>>was precisely this proposal that Douglas was
correctly
>>arguing against in his 1933 letter to Denis
Byrne
>>previously
cited:
>>http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium/douglas-byrne-1933.txt
>>
>>In
a true one hundred percent reserve system there
>>could be no
loans.
>>
>>What is usually called one hundred percent
is a legal
>>fiction where one hundred percent reserves
are
>>required against "checking" deposits, and
something
>>less than one hundred percent are required
against
>>"saving" deposits, or some variation
thereof.
>>
>>So something less than one hundred
percent is required
>>against the totality of
deposits.
>>
>>The difference between the quantity of
reserves and
>>the quantity of deposits is inevitably bank
created
>>credit, whatever you want to call
it.
>>
>>Loans create deposits; there's no getting
around it.
>>
>>Period.
>>
>>What
you would have in reality is a system perhaps
>>more tightly
regulated that the one we have today, but
>>still very much
fractional reserve.
>>
>>Otherwise, no modern economy
could function.
>>
>>
>>
>>--- John
G Rawson <johngrawson@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>>
>>Joe, surely you know the "line" of the
orthodox
>>economists as well as I do. "All inflation is
a
>>result of too much money ....". They admit to
the
>>phenomenon of cost push inflation, but then proceed
to
>>ignore it. Even now, when we have inflated
prices
>>caused by high oil costs, our RB (and I think
others)
>>are considering the ridiculous remedy of
raising
>>interest rates to control the volume of money
in
>>crculation. But, of course, increased interest
rates
>>tend to increase bank earnings, and the central
banks
>>tend to serve the banks, not the
nations.
>>
>>But apart from all these asides, what I
am looking
>>for, IF we decide to take away from the banks
the
>>right to create our money, (as the Movement
has
>>preached loudly in this country from when I was
a
>>child), HOW can we do it?
>>
>>And
despite some opinions, obviously it CAN NOT be
>>done by
manipulating reserve ratios, which, when
>>applied, relate to
deposits, not advances. (For once
>>I am trying to be very
precise, for the benefit of
>>those who persist in avoiding the
main point and
>>picking up side issues.) I still think the
Hattersley
>>(apologies for previous mis-spelling) approach is
the
>>only reasonable one I have encountered
yet.
>>
>>Regards, John
R.
>>
>>
>>
>>__________________________________
>>Yahoo!
FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one
click.
>>http://farechase.yahoo.com
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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
>>hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
>>For more information,
visit
>>http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>
>>
>>--
>>No
virus found in this incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG
Anti-Virus.
>>Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.12.4/146 -
Release Date:
>>10/21/2005
>>
>>
>
>
>
>--
>No
virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free
Edition.
>Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.12.8/161 -
Release Date:
>11/3/2005
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
>johngrawson@hotmail.com
>For more information, visit
http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Read the latest Hollywood gossip at XtraMSN Entertainment
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Need a new job? Check out XtraMSN Careers
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 jschroeder@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
