| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Questions in regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the Past' Swanwick #2 | | Date: | Wednesday, December 7, 2005 21:20:47 (-0700) | | From: | Martin Hattersley <hattersleyjm @.........com>
|
| In reply to: | Message 3183 (written by Joe Thomson) |
I can only say that I find the Swanwick principle #2 the hardest part of
Douglas's proposals to swallow. Particularly, does this recommendation apply to
all business capital, including fixed capital assets, or simply to working
capital for day to day operation? And, if fixed capital is intended, does this
imply that private capital investment is prohibited? Perhaps some of the experts
here can give me some answers.
Martin Hattersley
1970-10123-99 St.,
EDMONTON AB CANADA
Phone (780)423-4081;Fax(780)425-5247
e-mail: hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Joe Thomson
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:16 AM
Subject: [socialcredit] Questions in regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the Past'
Swanwick #2
The expanded version of Swanwick principle # 2, as printed in (I believe) the
second edition of 'Warning Democracy', and as reproduced on the NZ Social Credit
Ass'n's website states:- "That the credits required to finance production shall
be supplied not from savings but from new credits relative to production, and
shall be recalled only in the ratio of general depreciation to general
appreciation."
I believe it's been established previously that in the first and third
editions of 'Warning Democracy' the last part has been omitted, and the quote
ends 'relative to new production', as it appears in the original rendition. I
don't recall now if it was ever determined why there was a change, and then a
change back. Does anyone know?
Michael opines that the "national dividend" be used only to purchase 'consumer
goods', and not 'stocks and bonds'. How is it to be determined just 'what' the
'national dividend' in the hands of each of us as recipients will be spent on?
There is nothing I've seen in Douglas that distinguishes 'money' received
from the 'national dividend' from any other 'money'.
It isn't of the nature of a 'Prosperity Certificate', for instance. Nor,
under what might be called 'normal' circumstances, where control over 'credit'
wasn't being contested between two 'governments', would it be in a tangible form
restricted in what it could be used for. Does it not seem feasible that Douglas,
in the expanded version of Swanwick # 2 above is referring to a macro-economic
concept "the ratio (over the whole economy) of general depreciation to general
appreciation", with ALL 'money' being analogous and concerned only with 'flows',
not with what each individual who gets a 'national dividend' spends it on?
If I used my 'national dividend' to purchase 'stocks and bonds' held by
someone else, is it not conceivable that the seller might be using the money
received to then purchase 'consumer goods'? What's changed? If I used my
'national dividend' to purchase capital stock, say when a firm makes an intial
public offering, how would this differ from my using my 'earnings' to do the same
thing? Does not Swanwick # 2 simply encompass the changes in 'flows' at the
macro-economic level so that the 'natioanal dividend' and 'compensated price
discount' can be adjusted in future accordingly?
Joe
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/192 - Release Date: 05/12/2005
------=_NextPart_000_004B_01C5FB74.174827B0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2900.2769" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I can only say that I find the Swanwick principle #2 the
hardest part of Douglas's proposals to swallow. Particularly, does this
recommendation apply to all business capital, including fixed capital assets, or
simply to working capital for day to day operation? And, if fixed capital is
intended, does this imply that private capital investment is prohibited? Perhaps
some of the experts here can give me some answers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Martin Hattersley<BR>1970-10123-99 St., <BR>EDMONTON AB CANADA<BR>Phone
(780)423-4081;Fax(780)425-5247<BR>e-mail: <A
href="mailto:hattersleyjm@interbaun.com">hattersleyjm@interbaun.com</A></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT:
#000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca href="mailto:thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca">Joe Thomson</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=socialcredit@elistas.com
href="mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com">socialcredit@elistas.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:16
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [socialcredit] Questions in
regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the Past' Swanwick #2</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The expanded version of Swanwick principle # 2,
as printed in (I believe) the second edition of 'Warning Democracy', and as
reproduced on the NZ Social Credit Ass'n's website states:- "That the
credits required to finance production shall be supplied not from savings but
from new credits <U>relative to production, and shall be recalled only in the
ratio of general depreciation to general appreciation</U>." </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> I believe it's been established previously
that in the first and third editions of 'Warning Democracy' the last part has
been omitted, and the quote ends 'relative to <U>new</U> production', as it
appears in the original rendition. I don't recall now if it was ever
determined why there was a change, and then a change back. Does anyone
know? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Michael opines that the "national dividend" be
used only to purchase 'consumer goods', and not 'stocks and bonds'. How
is it to be determined just 'what' the 'national dividend' in the hands of
each of us as recipients will be spent on? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> There is nothing I've seen in Douglas that
distinguishes 'money' received from the 'national dividend' from any other
'money'. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> It isn't of the nature of a 'Prosperity
Certificate', for instance. Nor, under what might be called 'normal'
circumstances, where control over 'credit' wasn't being contested between two
'governments', would it be in a tangible form restricted in what it could be
used for. Does it not seem feasible that Douglas, in the expanded
version of Swanwick # 2 above is referring to a macro-economic concept "the
ratio (over the whole economy) of general depreciation to general
appreciation", with ALL 'money' being analogous and concerned only with
'flows', not with what each individual who gets a 'national dividend' spends
it on? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>If I used my 'national dividend' to purchase
'stocks and bonds' held by someone else, is it not conceivable that the seller
might be using the money received to then purchase 'consumer goods'?
What's changed? If I used my 'national dividend' to purchase
capital stock, say when a firm makes an intial public offering, how would this
differ from my using my 'earnings' to do the same thing? Does not
Swanwick # 2 simply encompass the changes in 'flows' at the
macro-economic level so that the 'natioanal dividend' and 'compensated price
discount' can be adjusted in future accordingly? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Joe</FONT></DIV>
<P><PRE>---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
<P></P></PRE>
<P>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>No virus found in this incoming message.<BR>Checked by AVG Free
Edition.<BR>Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/192 - Release Date:
05/12/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_004B_01C5FB74.174827B0--
--=======AVGMAIL-4397B6A77BBB======Content-Type: text/plain; x-avgÎrt;
charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Description: "AVG certification"
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/192 - Release Date: 05/12/2005
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message