|Subject:||Re: [socialcredit] special attention jeff|
|Date:||Thursday, March 23, 2006 05:27:46 (+0000)|
|From:||John G Rawson <johngrawson @.......com>
|In reply to:||Message 3689 (written by Jeffery Smith)|
Would you care to give us one current example of "too much cash causing
inflation?". And if so, where did the cash come from and what effect will that
have on the econolmy in future?
The NZ experience was that inflation of prices was at its worst at a time when
the ratio of "cash" to goods was being reduced drastically. But interest rates
From: Jeffery Smith <email@example.com>
[socialcredit] special attention jeff
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2006 22:37:41
>On Mar 21, 2006, at 7:34 AM, Triumphofthepast@aol.com wrote:
you give an example of an aspect of cultural [heritage] not
>>showing up as a
site value somewhere?" (Jeff)
>> Yes, a shovel.
>Try again. What was the
value of land before the shovel? What was it
>after? What was the value of Egypt
before the plow? What was it
>after? What was the value of Arizona before
irrigation? What was it
>after? What was the value of suburbia before cars? What
>after? What was the value of Cape Canaveral before rocketry? What
>>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
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
>Nor should it be.
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
>Even without the surplus cash or credit of SC, there can easily be
money to represent the exchange value of all goods and
>services in exchange.
Just legalize competing
currencies. The bigger
>problem is too much excess cash creating
>> The rent TODAY, on the other hand, constitutes cost of a FUTURE
>Sort of. More precisely, it's how much people are willing to spend
>to call some site theirs, based on anticipated value, whether from a
or a mine or a deep harbor or simply a lovely view.
>>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.
>What's natural is the
market. Bidding on land is a market process.
>>to ask production to do
double-duty as our money-distributing
>>machine is to hamstring it as far as its
real purpose goes.
>Good point. Issue any needed new notes to
newcomers, who'll consume
>>it is a mistake to make the
Dividend, whose purpose is to
>>distribute goods already available,
one "dividend", but the full array of income - wages,
>"interests" (returns on
physical capital, not financial capital),
>and a share of "rent" (Earth's worth)
- can do the job splendidly.
>> conditional on someone paying us rent-costs for
>Everyone pay rent for excluding others, sometimes based
>output (as you explained above), sometimes on the mere anticipated
>psychic joy of a spectacular view.
>> 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
your explanations engage me while the longer piece is
>an unknown quantity.
Some minds learn best engaged in exchange of
>ideas. Mine is one of
>SMITH, Jeffery J., President, Forum on Geonomics
>7536 SE Milwaukie Av,
Portland Oregon 97202 USA
>Share Earth's worth to prosper and
introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are
>You're subscribed to this
list with the email
>For more information, visit
Looking for love? Check out XtraMSN Personals