| Subject: | [socialcredit] Re: Swanwick Principles | | Date: | Thursday, December 9, 2004 15:12:42 (-0800) | | From: | william_b_ryan <william_b_ryan @.....com>
|
| In reply to: | Message 336 (written by Timothy Carpenter) |
Unfortunately "Beckham's rule"^ will almost certainly
kick in and render large sections of the workforce
not only idle, restless and frustrated but demanding
ever greater 'social dividend'. Once they become a
sizable majority then a government could get in who
will create more dividend than practicable and
bankrupt the nation while the strivers will abandon
the country.
--------------------------------
-----------------------------
What a callous opinion you have of your fellow man,
Timothy. If this is not an elitist position, I don't
know what possibly could be. Do you realize what you
are saying? You are essentially saying that the poor
are poor because they are subhuman compared to you.
The only way you can justify their existence is to
make them work so they produce at least the
equivalent to what they eat. If they produce more
than what they eat, you--being kind hearted and
liberal spirited--will allocate some of the surplus
to them in such a way they do not lose the motivation
to work. The portion of the surplus you retain is
remuneration for keeping them in existence. If there
is a flaw in this logic, please tell me what it is.
It is the logic of regarding the mass of humanity as
barnyard animals. It benefits them and you that you
control them as barnyard animals. How is this not
the rationale for slavery?
The Social Credit dividend is justified on several
levels, not the least of which being fundamental
equity. There is an unearned increment of
association that everyone deserves a share of. Our
barnyard animals don't deserve a share of it, but our
fellow humans most certainly do.
Furthermore, if the financial theory regarding labor
displacement (A + B) is correct, the increment
increases for everyone if everyone is paid a
dividend, because it helps close the cycle of
production, enabling it to proceed. The assumption
is that the costs of production equal the incomes of
the public. The dividend is the accounting
adjustment that makes the assumption the reality.
-
--- Timothy Carpenter <timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Bill.
>
> 1. Although I have seen discussions wishing to
> discount the influence of
> consumer credit, if (as) people were paid before
> goods were sold right down
> the line would this not close the gap significantly?
> Would it not be
> possible to use credit at zero interest to bridge
> the gap even further at
> point of sale?
>
> I raise this as...
>
> 3. Unfortunately ³Beckhamıs rule²^ will almost
> certainly kick in and render
> large sections of the workforce not only idle,
> restless and frustrated but
> demanding ever greater social dividendı . Once they
> become a sizable
> majority then a government could get in who will
> create more dividend than
> practicable and bankrupt the nation while the
> strivers will abandon the
> country. Is there some other way to inject liquidity
> into the market without
> giving away moneyı which will almost certainly be
> resented and taken for
> granted?
>
> I can see that exporting has been used to find a
> home for output and I agree
> with you that this cannot be relied upon if one
> considers the global
> village.
>
> ^ = Beckhamıs rule is when rules and systems
> introduced to control behaviour
> alter it so that the original purpose of the system
> is distorted, bypassed
> or neutralised or it encourages the wrong sort of
> behaviour, e.g. High
> charges and low fines encourage non-compliance.
> Payments and fast-track
> housing to unmarried mothers increases the number of
> unmarried mothers.
>
> Rgds
> Tim
>
>
> On 6/12/04 7:57 pm, "william_b_ryan@yahoo.com"
> <william_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> > 1. That the cash credits of the population of any
> > country shall at any moment be collectively equal
> to
> > the collective cash prices for consumable goods
> for
> > sale in that country, and such cash credits shall
> be
> > cancelled on the purchase of goods for
> consumption.
> > ----------------------------------
> > --------------------------------
> > The key phrase here that alerts us to the proper
> > interpretation is "at any moment." It is from
> > calculus and refers to the instantaneous
> measurement
> > of rates of flow. The context is retail sales.
> > Prices (in the way that Douglas uses the term) do
> not
> > mean actual sale prices but the flow of accounted
> for
> > costs of the totality of production to the point
> of
> > retail. Cash credits (in this context) refer to
> > effective demand concurrently flowing to the point
> of
> > retail from consumers. He is saying that the flow
> of
> > costs and the reciprocal effective demand shall be
> > equal. Contrary to the orthodox assumption (Say's
> > Law) they do not automatically equal now. They
> are
> > consciously made equal in the Social Credit
> program
> > through the consumer dividend and retail discount
> > paid to the credit of consumers. Remember, that
> > without the consciously applied Social Credit
> > adjustments, effective demand tends to fall in
> > respect to the costs of production for two
> reasons:
> > 1. With labor displacement (an increasing ratio of
> B
> > to A) purchasing power (in the form of salaries,
> > wages and dividends) is tending to fall in respect
> to
> > the costs of production being impressed to the
> point
> > of retail; and 2. Spending from consumer income
> for
> > retail goods and services is tending to fall in
> > respect to consumer income with increasing wealth
> > (decreasing "propensity" to consume). The first
> is
> > addressed through the consumer dividend. The
> second
> > is addressed through the retail discount. These
> > should be thought of as macroeconomic accounting
> > adjustments rather than "funny money" schemes.
> > -
> > 2. That the credits required to finance production
> > shall be supplied, not from savings, but be new
> > credits relating to new production.
> > ----------------------------------
> > --------------------------------
> > He is referring to saving from income that has
> been
> > costed into production. New production means
> > increase to the flow of production. A constant
> flow
> > of new goods is not new production in this
> context.
> > In this respect, new production is presently
> financed
> > by new credits relating to new production through
> > conventional loans. The problem is that these new
> > credits cannot be amortized from income that is
> > falling in respect to the spending of these new
> > credits. In respect to producers that income
> derives
> > ultimately from sales over the retail counter.
> The
> > solution is to implement programs that sustain
> sales
> > such that sales remain proportionate to the costs
> of
> > production through time. Orthodoxy would do that
> > through the export market, which Social Credit
> > regards as irrational in that it is unsustainable.
> > Moreover, such a program requires that real goods
> be
> > exported in exchange for foreign credit
> instruments
> > used merely to close the "gap" between domestic
> > "prices" and "purchasing power." The gap is more
> > rationally closed through the domestic
> "production"
> > of credit instruments distributed through the
> > consumer dividend and retail discount. Such a
> > program would contribute toward the more efficient
> > division of labor between the nations, enabling
> them
> > to more closely approximate their natural
> comparative
> > advantages to the benefit of all.
> > -
> > 3. That the distribution of cash credits to
> > individuals shall be progressively less dependent
> > upon employment. That is to say that the dividend
> > shall progressively displace the wage and salary.
> > ----------------------------------
> > --------------------------------
> > This is actually happening erratically and
> > inadequately now (pension plans, mutual funds,
> etc.)
> > The Social Credit program would rationalize this
> > natural process.
> > -
> >
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
_______________________________________________________________________
http://www.eListas.com/
The Most Complete Mailing Lists, Groups and Newsletters System on the Net
|
Re: Swanwick Princ
Reply to this message