| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Questions in regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the Past' | | Date: | Monday, December 12, 2005 15:49:00 (+0000) | | From: | Kenneth Palmerton <kenpalmerton @................uk>
|
In-Reply-To: <002101c5fd03$5e6f2a40$fe6537d2@computer>
Do you think that it is possible Bill that this is why Socialists homed in
on "profits" as the problem ?
A mistake, as I think we agree.
Ken.
-------- Original Message --------
X-Envelope-From:
socialcredit-return-3198-kenpalmerton=cix.co.uk@elistas.comReceived: from
q53.elistas.net (q53.elistas.net [216.66.20.25]) by
mta03.mx.cix.co.uk (8.13.4/CIX/8.13.4) with SMTP id jBACQEri028352
for <kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk>; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 12:26:15 GMT
Received: (qmail 14875 invoked from network); 10 Dec 2005 14:01:35 +0100
Received: from mail.e-listas.com (66.7.164.206)
by 192.168.0.153 with EMQP; 10 Dec 2005 14:01:35 +0100
Mailing-List: socialcredit@elistas.com
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Post: <mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com>
Reply-To: socialcredit@elistas.com
List-Help: <mailto:socialcredit-help@elistas.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-subscribe@elistas.com>
Delivered-To: list socialcredit@elistas.com
Delivered-To: moderator for socialcredit@elistas.com
Received: (qmail 12906 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2005 21:43:35 +0100
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp02.maxnet.net.nz) (202.89.32.10)
by mail.egrupos.com with SMTP; 9 Dec 2005 21:43:35 +0100
Received: from computer (pool101-254.dialip.maxnet.co.nz [210.55.101.254])
by smtp02.maxnet.net.nz (Postfix) with SMTP id 167E3433E5F
for <socialcredit@elistas.com>; Sat, 10 Dec 2005 10:21:35 +1300
(NZDT)
Message-ID: <002101c5fd03$5e6f2a40$fe6537d2@computer>
From: "W. McGunnigle" <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
References: <000c01c5fb49$953b4100$bad44246@cc.shawcable.net>
<008901c5fbaf$f9584f50$ca4722cf@martinh4>
<004501c5fc99$d66905d0$6400a8c0@cdv73pbgpo6eny>
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 09:58:53 +1300
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_001E_01C5FD70.542989A0"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Questions in regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the
Past' Swanwick #2 -- Wally attempts to respond
X-Envelope-To: kenpalmerton@cixcouk.cix.co.uk
X-UIDL: _U7G.plsmDB.mta03.mx
------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C5FD70.542989A0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Reply to Wally
Thanks for those comments. I am still digesting the =
significance of them, but, taken with some recent reading about SC =
priciples and the article Debt and Taxation recommended by another =
correspondent, it certainly contrasts the philosophical thinking of =
"orthodox" economists compared to SC thinking. Quite plainly we are =
arguing from two distinctly different and incompatible viewpoints. =
"Orthodox" economists work from production costs. We work from society's =
financial needs. It is painfully obvious that if the finance available =
is only sufficient to service industrial production then there can be no =
surplus for consumer spending or service industries. Finance available =
will always be insufficient to ensure everyone can meet their daily =
requirements. This situation is aggravated by the useof progressively =
increasing debt to meet the shortfall. I have only recently begun to =
appreciate the negative effect of debt servicing on the present =
financial system.
Am I correct in theis assessment?
Bill Mc G
----- Message -----=20
From: Wallace M. Klinck=20
To: socialcredit@elistas.com=20
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 9:23 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Questions in regards to Dec. 'Triumph of =
the Past' Swanwick #2 -- Wally attempts to respond
Money is issued as financial income as it is expended upon =
production--creating an accumulation of financial costs accordingly. =
These costs must be liquidated by consumer expenditure--inasmuch as =
consumption is the last function in each cycle of the economic process. =
The incomes distributed during the production process are insufficient =
to liquidate the full volume of prices generated in any given cycle and =
to give consumers at large access to the entire physical output or =
wealth represented by these financial prices. Applied to the national =
economy as a whole, this is a macroeconomic statement. Social Credit =
would issue and distribute supplementary consumer income to meet this =
deficiency of buying power. No differentiation is made between earned =
money income and credits issued to supplement income--they merge into a =
general stream of financial income which is then available to meet the =
full financial costs of production of each production cycle. The full =
stream of financial income is required to liquidate the totality of =
financial costs generated in each production cycle. If some income from =
this combined income (earned from engagement in production in addition =
to that received from outside the price-system as a consumption credit) =
is not spent on the final product of a given cycle, the costs of that =
cycle remained unliquidated. If any of this financial income is spent =
on any form of economic activity which produces goods for sale, then =
this income will generate new (i.e., additional) financial costs and =
prices, thereby producing a further discrepancy of general =
purchasing-power. This will be factored into the next national =
accounting period in order to determine the deficiency created by this =
re-investment of savings (saved incomes) which has created new financial =
costs without creating new purchasing-power. Whether production is =
initiated via the issue of new credits directly for production and =
repayble to the source of issue or initiated by the application of =
financial savings does not matter. In either case, the result is a =
shortfall of effective (cost-liquidating) demand and compensation must =
be made via new consumption credits. In either case new production is =
facilitated by the issue of new credits--whether through production or =
from the consumer. If I recall correctly, Douglas commented that a =
central problem is that the producer presently receives his income from =
the banks instead of the consumer. This is the way in which I =
understand the matter.
The problem is that producers withdraw income from consumers in retail =
prices expenditures incurred in respect of the cost of capital. These =
included charges in respect to capital are allocated charges which are =
added to price and they do not simultaneously create new and equivalent =
purchasing-power. But to prematurely withdraw and cancel consumer =
purchasing-power in this matter implies that the physical capital itself =
at the present point of time has been cancelled or fully depreciated. =
This is a gross misrepresentation of reality inasmuch as real or =
physical capital depletes slowly over future years. True cost as =
measured by Social Credit is the mean rate of consumption divided by the =
mean rate of production. The final or "Just" price of consumer goods =
must reflect this fact and requires that the consumer must not only be =
debited with capital depreciation but must be credited with capital =
appreciation (measured in money terms)--which latter is vastly greater =
than the former. Money should be withdrawn via prices only at the rate =
determined by the ratio of national consumption to national production, =
which ratio is normally and increasingly less than a numerical value of =
one. Under the present system money incomes are withdrawn and cancelled =
prematurely via the price-mechanism and Social Credit wants to "slow =
down" this rate of cancellation. Realistically, costs and prices should =
be falling over time instead of rising as they do under the existing =
orthodox financial regime. This is the way in which I understand the =
matter.
However, in a Social Credit dispensation new attitudes would arise =
which are different to those developed under the constraints and =
depredations of the present defective money system. Savings would =
become valued only primarily as a temporary means to facilitate larger =
purchases rather than as a form of indefinite hoarding out of fear of =
future insecurity. Social Credit aims at the "Life Abundant". Money =
may be saved but spoilage and obsolescence will render it valueless. =
Life, in the economic sense, can only be realized by the expenditure of =
financial income on currently available consumer goods and services. =
Remember that Douglas said we want to build a new society on a =
foundation of absolute economic security for the individual. Savings =
would not be directed to new superfluous, wasteful, destructive and =
leisure-robbing activity merely to generate additional financial income =
to compensate a previous deficiency in order that the consumer might =
access previously produced goods. Society no longer would be required =
to produce guns in order to access butter. Confidence would supercede =
fear and our attitudes and subsequent patterns of behaviour would become =
different from those which have developed previously because of =
society's past subjection to the restrictions and vissicitudes of the =
existing system, whereby money is only issued, ultimately, for =
production and not for consumption. We want to make possible the =
immediate and dynamic ability of the consumer to access the full =
physical outflow of consumer wealth from the production system in each =
cycle--without being required to commit to any further future effort or =
financial borrowing against future income. We desire to bring about a =
sharing society accomplished by means of a mechanism of =
distribution--not by means of a mechanism for effecting re-distribution. =
Again, this is the way in which I understand the matter.
Comments are welcome.
Sincerely
Wally
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Martin Hattersley=20
To: socialcredit@elistas.com=20
Sent: Wednesday, December 07, 2005 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Questions in regards to Dec. 'Triumph of =
the Past' Swanwick #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.
Martin Hattersley
1970-10123-99 St.,=20
EDMONTON AB CANADA
Phone (780)423-4081;Fax(780)425-5247
e-mail: hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Joe Thomson=20
To: socialcredit@elistas.com=20
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."=20
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?=20
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?=20
There is nothing I've seen in Douglas that distinguishes 'money' =
received from the 'national dividend' from any other 'money'.=20
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? =20
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?=20
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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 wmklinck@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
-------------------------------------------------------------------------=
---
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/195 - Release Date: =
12/8/2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
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 kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C5FD70.542989A0
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=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1106" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Reply to Wally</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial=20
size=3D2> &nb
sp;&nbs=
p; =20
Thanks for those comments. I am still digesting the significance of =
them, but,=20
taken with some recent reading about SC priciples and the article Debt =
and=20
Taxation recommended by another correspondent, it certainly contrasts =
the=20
philosophical thinking of "orthodox" economists compared to SC thinking. =
Quite=20
plainly we are arguing from two distinctly different and incompatible=20
viewpoints. "Orthodox<FONT face=3D"Times New Roman" size=3D3>" =
economists work from=20
production costs. We work from society's financial needs. It =
is=20
painfully obvious that if the finance available is only sufficient to =
service=20
industrial production then there can be no surplus for consumer spending =
or=20
service industries. Finance available will always be insufficient to =
ensure=20
everyone can meet their daily requirements. This situation is aggravated =
by the=20
useof progressively increasing debt to meet the shortfall. I have only =
recently=20
begun to appreciate the negative effect of debt servicing on the present =
financial system.</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> Am I correct in theis=20
assessment?</DIV>
<DIV> Bill Mc G</DIV>
<DIV>----- Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE dir=3Dltr=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dwmklinck@shaw.ca href=3D"mailto:wmklinck@shaw.ca">Wallace =
M. Klinck</A>=20
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dsocialcredit@elistas.com=20
href=3D"mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com">socialcredit@elistas.com</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Friday, December 09, 2005 =
9:23=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [socialcredit] =
Questions in=20
regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the Past' Swanwick #2 -- Wally attempts to =
respond</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Money is issued as financial income =
as it is=20
expended upon production--creating an accumulation of financial costs=20
accordingly. These costs must be liquidated by consumer=20
expenditure--inasmuch as consumption is the last function in =
each=20
cycle of the economic process. The incomes distributed during =
the=20
production process are insufficient to liquidate the full volume of =
prices=20
generated in any given cycle and to give consumers at large access to =
the=20
entire physical output or wealth represented by these financial =
prices. =20
Applied to the national economy as a whole, this is a macroeconomic=20
statement. Social Credit would issue and distribute =
supplementary=20
consumer income to meet this deficiency of buying power. No=20
differentiation is made between earned money income and credits issued =
to=20
supplement income--they merge into a general stream of financial =
income=20
which is then available to meet the full financial costs of production =
of each=20
production cycle. The full stream of financial income is =
required=20
to liquidate the totality of financial costs generated in each =
production=20
cycle. If some income from this combined income =
(earned from=20
engagement in production in addition to that received from outside the =
price-system as a consumption credit) is not spent on the final =
product of a=20
given cycle, the costs of that cycle remained unliquidated. If =
any of=20
this financial income is spent on any form of economic activity which =
produces=20
goods for sale, then this income will generate new (i.e., additional)=20
financial costs and prices, thereby producing a further discrepancy of =
general=20
purchasing-power. This will be factored into the next =
national=20
accounting period in order to determine the deficiency created by this =
re-investment of savings (saved incomes) which has created new =
financial costs=20
without creating new purchasing-power. Whether production is =
initiated=20
via the issue of new credits directly for production and repayble to =
the=20
source of issue or initiated by the application of financial savings =
does not=20
matter. In either case, the result is a shortfall of effective=20
(cost-liquidating) demand and compensation must be made via new =
consumption=20
credits. In either case new production is facilitated by =
the issue=20
of new credits--whether through production or from the consumer. =
If I=20
recall correctly, Douglas commented that a central problem is that the =
producer presently receives his income from the banks instead of =
the=20
consumer. This is the way in which I understand the =
matter.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The problem is that producers =
withdraw income=20
from consumers in retail prices expenditures incurred in respect =
of the=20
cost of capital. These included charges in respect to capital =
are=20
allocated charges which are added to price and they do not =
simultaneously=20
create new and equivalent purchasing-power. But to prematurely =
withdraw and=20
cancel consumer purchasing-power in this matter implies that the =
physical=20
capital itself at the present point of time has been cancelled or =
fully=20
depreciated. This is a gross misrepresentation of reality =
inasmuch=20
as real or physical capital depletes slowly over future years. =
True cost=20
as measured by Social Credit is the mean rate of consumption divided =
by the=20
mean rate of production. The final or "Just" price of consumer =
goods=20
must reflect this fact and requires that the consumer must not only be =
debited=20
with capital depreciation but must be credited with capital =
appreciation=20
(measured in money terms)--which latter is vastly greater than the=20
former. Money should be withdrawn via prices only at the rate =
determined=20
by the ratio of national consumption to national production, which =
ratio is=20
normally and increasingly less than a numerical value of one. =
Under the=20
present system money incomes are withdrawn and cancelled prematurely =
via the=20
price-mechanism and Social Credit wants to "slow down" this rate of=20
cancellation. Realistically, costs and prices should be falling =
over=20
time instead of rising as they do under the existing orthodox =
financial=20
regime. This is the way in which I understand the =
matter.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>However, in a Social Credit =
dispensation new=20
attitudes would arise which are different to those developed under the =
constraints and depredations of the present defective money =
system. =20
Savings would become valued only primarily as a temporary means =
to=20
facilitate larger purchases rather than as a form of indefinite =
hoarding out=20
of fear of future insecurity. Social Credit aims at the "Life=20
Abundant". Money may be saved but spoilage and obsolescence will =
render=20
it valueless. Life, in the economic sense, can only be realized =
by the=20
expenditure of financial income on currently available consumer goods =
and=20
services. Remember that Douglas said we want to build a new =
society on a=20
foundation of absolute economic security for the individual. =
Savings=20
would not be directed to new superfluous, wasteful, destructive and=20
leisure-robbing activity merely to generate additional financial =
income=20
to compensate a previous deficiency in order that the consumer =
might=20
access previously produced goods. Society no longer would be =
required to=20
produce guns in order to access butter. Confidence would =
supercede fear=20
and our attitudes and subsequent patterns of behaviour would=20
become different from those which have =
developed previously=20
because of society's past subjection to the restrictions and =
vissicitudes=20
of the existing system, whereby money is only issued, ultimately, for=20
production and not for consumption. We want to make =
possible the=20
immediate and dynamic ability of the consumer to access the full =
physical=20
outflow of consumer wealth from the production system in each =
cycle--without=20
being required to commit to any further future effort or financial =
borrowing=20
against future income. We desire to bring about a sharing =
society=20
accomplished by means of a mechanism of distribution--not by means of=20
a mechanism for effecting re-distribution. Again, this is =
the way=20
in which I understand the matter.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Comments are welcome.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Sincerely</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Wally</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dhattersleyjm@interbaun.com=20
href=3D"mailto:hattersleyjm@interbaun.com">Martin Hattersley</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dsocialcredit@elistas.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com">socialcredit@elistas.com</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, December 07, =
2005 9:20=20
PM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [socialcredit] =
Questions=20
in regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the Past' Swanwick #2</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2>I can only say that I find the Swanwick =
principle #2 the=20
hardest part of Douglas's proposals to swallow. Particularly, does =
this=20
recommendation apply to all business capital, including fixed =
capital=20
assets, or simply to working capital for day to day operation? And, =
if fixed=20
capital is intended, does this imply that private capital investment =
is=20
prohibited? Perhaps some of the experts here can give me some=20
answers.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Martin Hattersley<BR>1970-10123-99 St., <BR>EDMONTON AB =
CANADA<BR>Phone=20
(780)423-4081;Fax(780)425-5247<BR>e-mail: <A=20
=
href=3D"mailto:hattersleyjm@interbaun.com">hattersleyjm@interbaun.com</A>=
</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- =
</DIV>
<DIV=20
style=3D"BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>=20
<A title=3Dthomsonhiyu@shaw.ca =
href=3D"mailto:thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca">Joe=20
Thomson</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=3Dsocialcredit@elistas.com=20
=
href=3D"mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com">socialcredit@elistas.com</A> =
</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, December =
07, 2005=20
9:16 AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [socialcredit] =
Questions in=20
regards to Dec. 'Triumph of the Past' Swanwick #2</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>The expanded version of Swanwick =
principle #=20
2, as printed in (I believe) the second edition of 'Warning =
Democracy',=20
and as reproduced on the NZ Social Credit Ass'n's website =
states:- =20
"That the credits required to finance production shall be supplied =
not=20
from savings but from new credits <U>relative to production, and =
shall be=20
recalled only in the ratio of general depreciation to general=20
appreciation</U>." </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> I believe it's been =
established=20
previously that in the first and third editions of 'Warning =
Democracy' the=20
last part has been omitted, and the quote ends 'relative to =
<U>new</U>=20
production', as it appears in the original rendition. I =
don't recall=20
now if it was ever determined why there was a change, and then a =
change=20
back. Does anyone know? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>Michael opines that the "national =
dividend"=20
be used only to purchase 'consumer goods', and not 'stocks and=20
bonds'. How is it to be determined just 'what' the 'national =
dividend' in the hands of each of us as recipients will be spent=20
on? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> There is nothing I've seen =
in Douglas=20
that distinguishes 'money' received from the 'national dividend' =
from any=20
other 'money'. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2> It isn't of the nature of a =
'Prosperity=20
Certificate', for instance. Nor, under what might be called =
'normal'=20
circumstances, where control over 'credit' wasn't being contested =
between=20
two 'governments', would it be in a tangible form restricted in =
what it=20
could be used for. Does it not seem feasible that Douglas, =
in the=20
expanded version of Swanwick # 2 above is referring to a =
macro-economic=20
concept "the ratio (over the whole economy) of =
general depreciation=20
to general appreciation", with ALL 'money' being analogous and =
concerned=20
only with 'flows', not with what each individual who gets a =
'national=20
dividend' spends it on? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>If I used my 'national dividend' =
to purchase=20
'stocks and bonds' held by someone else, is it not conceivable =
that the=20
seller might be using the money received to then purchase =
'consumer=20
goods'? What's changed? If I used my 'national =
dividend'=20
to purchase capital stock, say when a firm makes an intial public=20
offering, how would this differ from my using my 'earnings' to do =
the same=20
thing? Does not Swanwick # 2 simply encompass the changes=20
in 'flows' at the macro-economic level so that the 'natioanal =
dividend' and 'compensated price discount' can be adjusted in =
future=20
accordingly? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>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=20
Edition.<BR>Version: 7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/192 - =
Release=20
Date: 05/12/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
=
<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 wmklinck@shaw.ca
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=20
Edition.<BR>Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.13.13/195 - =
Release Date:=20
12/8/2005<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
=
<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 wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
<P></P></PRE>
<P></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
<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 kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
<p></pre><p>
------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C5FD70.542989A0--
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message