|
Message 3545
|
|
< Previous | Next >
|
|
|
| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Scarce? | | Date: | Thursday, March 2, 2006 08:35:26 (-0800) | | From: | Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu @....ca>
|
(John Rawson wrote:-> Why on earth (no pun) land in particular? It ceased to
be the scarce factor when the industrial revolution got going.
(Jeff Smith replied:-) Wasn't exactly scare before then, just hoarded.
(Joe comments:-) Yes, and look at HOW it was hoarded. By the imposition of
a 'tax' on the LAND ITSELF, not one that involved payment of some PERCENTAGE
OF THE PRODUCE from that land.
(John Rawson:-) Why not go further back into antiquity and use a poll tax?
(No, I
> don't advocate it.)
(Jeff Smith:-) Let's distinguish between taxation and sharing society's
surplus.
(Joe:-) Then why don't we do just that. A 'site tax' on property is just
that. 'Taxation'. Far better to share 'society's surplus' by making
consumer demand 'effective demand' up to the limits of its satiation, or the
full capability of production.
(John continues:-) The manipulation of scarce factors has progressed since
then to factories and machinery, and now to an artificial scarcity of
money.
If you want to be really up to date, try a tax on the creation of money.
Or far better still, work to stop it being made a scarce factor.
(Jeff replies:-) Is it scarce, or costly? That is, plenty comes into
existence, yet the new notes are interest bearing, which they should not be.
To see how
much excess US currency there is, watch how US inflation kicks up as the
dollar loses favor abroad and those expatriated dollars come home to roost.
(Joe replies:-) But the system is now 'creditary'. If you operated under
a predominantly 'gold coin' money system and you repeatedly lent gold coins
'at interest', each time getting back more than you'd parted with, you
would, mathematically, eventually come into possession of all the gold
coins. But if you, and millions of other Americans, 'lend' your money to
your banker by depositing it in an account in his bank, and he repeatedly
pays you interest on it, do you eventually come into possession of the bank?
(John continues:-) Yes, I know it is readily available per credit cards
etc. For a time, provided we all go on borrowing at an increasing rate. But
look at
the rent we pay for the use of our own money and then tell me it isn't
used as a scarce factor. (That pun was intentional, yes, usury.)
(Jeff replies:-) Scarce, or costly?
(Joe comments:-) The banker makes his only 'commodity' ~ money ~ more
'valuable', (in terms of what it will buy, which is its only useful
'value'), the same way as all other commodities (including 'labour'), are
made more valuable in ratio to their exchange. By keeping them 'scarce'.
'Labour' is 'kept scarce' by a Union calling a strike, and taking that much
of it 'off the market'. We've seen numerous examples in the past, and
continuing even today, where various 'commodities' have been 'kept scarce'
by destruction of surpluses, by 'marketing boards' and 'quotas', by paying
farmers NOT to grow some crop, etc., all in an effort to 'keep the price
up'. The banker is also in the fortunate position that he can induce
'scarcity' by making his product more 'costly'. So is any other producer
who can charge the public for the needless inefficiency of his 'making work'
where none is actually necessary . Of which there are thousands of examples
in our day to day lives if we ever stopped to consider them.
|
Reply to this message