| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Swanwick 2 | | Date: | Wednesday, December 28, 2005 19:01:35 (+0000) | | From: | John G Rawson <johngrawson @.......com>
|
| In reply to: | Message 3265 (written by Timothy Carpenter) |
Greetings. Without "nitpicking", I can't find much wrong with that.
On the major scale, however, you are falling into the error that so many do,
that "inflation" is always "demand inflation", caused by increase in purchasing
power.
Because it is always measured as such, "inflation" defines itself as "rising
prices", whatever the cause. And I believe that the cause is more often the
"cost push" factor. Examples are rising oil prices or increases in the interest
rate, both of which increase costs of production without producing more immediate
purchasing power.
This is also a corollary of the A+B model.
Regards, John R.
From: Timothy Carpenter <timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Swanwick 2
Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:16:29 +0000
John, and a Happy New Year to you too, and to all those on this board.
Maybe I
clarify and correct myself at the same time.
Savings = deflation, i.e. Loss of
spending power.
Investing = reflation, i.e. Restitution of spending power into
economy (albeit later)
Return on investment = deflation (i.e. Absorbing spending
power with new asset)
Ignoring interest, I can see how this causes two
deflations, though remember, they will re-invest again and so...
Savings =
deflation
Invest = reflation
Return = delflation
Re-invest = reflation
It all
depends on when you stop the clock!
I now throw out some observations, though
not necessarily my firm position on things:
In the above, the main problem
appears not to be investing, getting a return or even of interest per
se, but the interval between spending power leaving the economy and re-entering
it*.
If people work for themselves ‘for nothing’ then put an item on the market
for a price, then we have a separate situation where new channels for spending
exists and have to compete, and what we end up with right now is the creation of
more debt to pay for it.
National Dividend is eventually destroyed when the
asset is destroyed/rendered worthless (according to some interpretations)
Debt
is destroyed when it is repaid.
If I work for myself for free and create a
product then the ND is increased to allow people to buy it. The ND is then
destroyed once the results of that labour are no longer an asset.
In both cases
money is created and then destroyed. The timing is different. The distribution is
different. The control is different.
* a.k.a. savings.
Tim
On 23/12/05 19:08,
"John G Rawson" <johngrawson@hotmail.com> wrote:
Tim, in passing, Happy Christmas!
Your first paragraph misses the very
important point that the savings would have been costed into two cycles of goods,
but only spent once to purchase. Being saved from the first cycle, they were
costed into that lot of production. And nobody wants to invest without return,
so they must also be costed by some means into future production. Perhaps a
little bit at a time into various cycles per interest charges, but certainly
costed into future production.
Regards. John R.
From: Timothy Carpenter <timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] Swanwick 2
Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2005 08:29:44 +0000
Dear
Martin,
No ND: If investment is from savings the buying power is restored to the
economy, for savings withdraws buying power. It is reflationary. If the time
between saving and investing is short, then my guess is the impact is hardly
felt. If the time is long, then we have suffered due to the withdrawal and
grateful for the restoration, though damage has been done in the interim.
No ND:
If the Titanic sails or sinks, the investment spent is in the pockets of ship
workers, carpenters etc and has not left or been lost to the economy, but
restored. What will have happened, though, if the Titanic sinks is that a future
destination/vehicle of consumption will have been withdrawn, so preventing the
investors from getting back their money from the economy via the earnings of
customers buying tickets and not buying anything else (like a lampstand or
shoes).
With ND: If the Titanic sails for 20 years, any increased liquidity in
the economy caused by the spending of the savings in investment during
construction would be sucked back from the economy with interest/gain to repay
investors as part of ticket sales (the rest circulating via wages of the
employees and suppliers). Now, over time as the Titanic is scrapped/written
off/down, then my guess is the Nat Dividend should be adjusted back down (or more
realistically the negative offset against a future increase due to be added as a
result of some other worthy project) as the value of the assets in the economy
reduces.
With ND: Not only do we
have the money going back to the investors’ savings accounts, but that the ND is
reduced (all things being equal) as the asset value reduces. First we get the
increase in liquidity from investor spending and wages paid before tickets are
ready to be sold, so we have in/reflation, then we get ND injection as the asset
appears in the economy (i.e. When Titanic floats and is ready for business) as a
SECOND boost, but as the ship ages and the investors are repaid the ND is reduced
too, surely doubling the effect?
Tim
On 19/12/05 02:16, "Martin Hattersley"
<hattersleyjm@interbaun.com> wrote:
From: Martin Hattersley <mailto:hattersleyjm@interbaun.com>
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Sent: Saturday, December 17, 2005 9:08 PM
Subject:
Re: [socialcredit] Swanwick 2
My own view is that, far from being an economic
downer, capital investment financed by savings is in fact a very sound way of
going about things.
If we spend, say four years in building the "Titanic", we
distribute incomes to workers and suppliers for that four year period, so
withdrawing other goods and services from the market, without putting any product
of value on the market. If financed by new credit, that is an inflationary thing
to do. If financed by savings, it simply means that consumer buying power in
total has been redistributed from the investor to the workers and suppliers,
with no inflationary effect.
The moment that the "Titanic" sails (and
assuming that it doen't sink on its maiden voyage), there's increased goods and
services available to the public (including laid-off shipbuilders), which is
every justification for increasing the money supply through a debt free National
Dividend.
If the "Titanic" sinks, of course, assuming it has been financed
through savings, all that happens is that its investors (or their insurers) lose
their money.
Comments?
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: John G Rawson
<mailto:johngrawson@hotmail.com>
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Sent:
Thursday, December 15, 2005 3:12 PM
Subject: RE: [socialcredit] Swanwick
2
Alright. Let's pursue this further.
I have (yes, more than once) in my small
flower production business, developed a new calla (Zantedeschia vars.) which may
sweep the market, or may simply drop out of ken because of changing fashions. Or
the tubers may all turn out to be "rotters" and nearly all simply disappear in
their third season. I need about $10,000 (minimum) to propagate it in large
numbers sufficient to make some sort of impact. And I am not allowed to risk my
own capital.
Do I go to one of the banks and demand, by right of being a
citizen, a loan of this amount? If
not, how the blazes to I persuade my bank manager to fund this very risky
project? Must I mortgage my property, which surely would be tantamount to using
savings?
Moral: Douglas' analysis of the economic system was absolutely
brilliant. His antisemitism, though very fashionable at the time was at the very
least irresponsible. Where, in the spectrum of his dicta do we draw the line; at
this last point, or a bit sooner in relation to some of his ideas in between? I
simply don't buy the superstitious approach of many Scoial Crediters who believe
that he must be treated as completely infallible; that his pronouncements should
not be subjected to reasonable analysis, particularly in view of changed
circumstances. (We no longer live in slump time, for example.)
This ossified and
unreasoning approach is one of our weaknesses, every bit as
dangerous as subtle movement away from his obviously valid ideas.
Bill, if you
do close down, please accept my thanks for riding herd on these discussions to
date. I'm sure I have annoyed a few people in the process, but I have gained an
immense amount of valuable information from it, as well as sorting out my own
ideas for practical use.
Regards. John R.
From: Triumphofthepast@aol.com
Reply-To: socialcredit@elistas.com
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: [socialcredit] Swanwick 2
Date: Thu, 15
Dec 2005 12:08:57 EST
"That the credits required to finance production shall
be supplied, not from savings, but be new credits relating to new
production."
Both John and Joe suggest this means "the aforementioned credits
required to LIQUIDATE production." I don't see how it could. Worse, he would
now be saying that savings SHALL NOT be used to buy consumer goods and
services!
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 johngrawson@hotmail.com
For more information, visit
http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Looking for love? Check out XtraMSN Personals
<http://g.msn.com/8HMAENNZ/2749??PS=47575>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version:
7.1.362 / Virus Database: 267.13.12/192 - Release Date: 05/12/2005
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version:
7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date:
16/12/2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk
For more information, visit
http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free
Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.1/206 - Release Date:
16/12/2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk
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 more speed? Get Xtra Broadband!
<http://g.msn.com/8HMAENNZ/2755??PS=47575>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk
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 more speed? Get Xtra Broadband!
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message