| Subject: | [socialcredit] special attention jeff | | Date: | Tuesday, March 21, 2006 10:34:45 (EST) | | From: | Triumphofthepast <Triumphofthepast @...com>
|
"This Dividend INCLUDES the dividend that would be owing due to land as a factor in production because it is based on counting ALL the fruits derived from ALL factors of production. It isn't just land alone in which we have by right a beneficiary interest. . . . What about the rest of the Cultural Heritage?" (me, combining 3-15 and 3-17)
"Can you give an example of an aspect of cultural [heritage] not showing up as a site value somewhere?" (Jeff)
Yes, a shovel. I rent a piece of ground and curse the luck there's not a shovel on the place. I buy one, work up the ground, and grow potatoes. The shovel is a descendant of the first shovel and the product of millennia of practice in metallurgy and the art of tool-making, thus a piece of the Cultural Heritage. The question is, Are there costs that go into the potatoes that are not included in the rent? Obviously there are. It is true that the rent reflects the fact that the ground is near civilization, where shovels are to be had. But I still had to buy the shovel, not to speak of fertilizer, etc. The rent alone, distributed, is not enough to buy the potatoes.
The Social Credit dividend is simple. Here are the potatoes, here is the money - enough to cover all the costs that went into the potatoes, including the rent. The rent TODAY, on the other hand, constitutes cost of a FUTURE crop. You said, 'Rent is a natural phenomenon'; but there's nothing natural about saying the cost of a future crop increases because today's crop was good.
Douglas thought that the purpose of production was to produce. It does its job when it produces as efficiently as possible. But to ask production to do double-duty as our money-distributing machine is to hamstring it as far as its real purpose goes. It cannot do both efficiently. For this reason it is a mistake to make the Dividend, whose purpose is to distribute goods already available, conditional on someone paying us rent-costs for future production.
Michael
P.S. You didn't take me up on my offer of a 20-page introductory piece on social credit. Is that because you are not interested?
|
special attention 
Reply to this message