----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 7:24
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] ---Re:
ELECTRONZ - 611 and the 'Red Dawn'
Dont take this personal Bill but I have already
raised the issue of the dripping tap that Douglas is out of date, the word you
used Bill was 'archaic', and then there is the barbed psychological word
'blindly' following Douglas used by others as well.
I repeat my challenge to those who wont turn off
the dripping tap, when are you lot going to front up and spell out your
case.
There is no such thing as blindly following
Douglas or blindly stop following him to blindly follow something
else. Given the calibre of the man to me its an insult.
It's also an insult to the ernest debating and
discussion to master the finer points of the issues that has gone
on.
The case re Einstein relates to Keynes,
their views suited the powers that be. It may sound very strange having
said that but anyone who has read Auckland scientist Brian Corcoran's book "Five Dimentional Man And The New
Cosmic Civilisation" will know what I mean. ( which proves again how myopic it is to try to isolate economics
)
This book in actual fact complements Douglas as
it shows the present system is on target to self destruct because of the
mindset that rules the world just as Douglas said from his very different
investigation.
"...provided we remember the fundamenatl flaws.."
goes way beyond the present economic system, that is the difference between
Social Credit (Douglas) and the rest.
Fine tuning and modifying comes from working with
the thing, not from avoiding working with it. If they had of avoided
Einsteins theory and adopted something else it is the something else that
would have become modified.
Douglas' formula is simple. He was never
short of confidence that the technical staff in govt and the private sector
could handle it.
Douglas has spelt out his case and I am not
blindly following because he has done his homework. To the contrary you
guys who cant spell out a case are thus blindling following a presumption no
one has done any homework on.
If we all were a select committee to investigate
the application as though we had just assumed power to impliment Douglas it is
logical that some specifics may be looked closely at not done before.
This is normal human behaviour. So lets pretend we are normal humans and
let the ultr-moderns start the ball rolling by spelling out their case.
Peter H
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 11:23
AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] ---Re:
ELECTRONZ - 611 and the 'Red Dawn'
Hi everyone
I haven't jumped into this debate before now, because I wanted to see what
the various members of the forum had to say about the topic. I make the
following observations:-
1) Douglas recognised the fundamental problem
of the present monetary system namely debt financing.
2) He then reached the conclusion, which I
believe is inarguable, that the system is unsustainable in the long term
irrespective of any efforts by financial insitutions to do
otherwise
3) The fundamental flaw in the present system
is simple. Money goes into circulation as a debt to the private banking
system, but the only way that debt can be redeemed is from the
money in circulation.
4) As a consequence there is no way that this
situation can be resolved without regular and deliberate "crashes" in all
finacial operations in order to start again, since it is obvious that the
present system is a self sustaining debt organising scheme. More debt has to
be incurred at an ever increasing rate in order to simply sustain normal
finacial transactions. Debt increases in order to sustain debts already
incurred.
5) It was this situation that Douglas attempted
to explain to everyone, and the ridiculous position of allowing it to
continue.
6)Douglas also recognised that it would,
ultimately lead to general stagnation of all finacial transactions as more and more financial transactions would be simply debt
repayments and
less and less would be involved in enabling
tradfe and commerce to be undertaken.
7) His solution to that problem was expressed
in the famous A+B hypothesis. This simply states that costs in
manufacturing always exceed wage and salary
payments. Axiomatically wage and salaries cannot equal manufacturing costs, and that there will never be enough
"money" in circulation to sustain industrial output on a constant basis. He
grasped the fundamental fact that the debt
system was the initial attempt to bridge that gap to ensure continued
industrial output and financial stability.
I believe all
correspondents are losing sight of this
fundamental reason for Socred monetary reform. The principles established by
Douglas are still valid today, and, although
some of his ideas for solving the problem may be archaic, there remains the
intractable conclusion that the present
monetary system is stiffling human developement because of the way it is
organised. We do not to follow blindly Douglas dogma. The Theory of
Relativity proposed by Einstein in the early 20th century has been modified
tremendously since then to take into account new Scientific knowledge, but
its fundamental breakthrough i.e. All motion is Relative remains inviable.We
are allowed the same leeway provided we remember the fundamental
flaws in the present economic system as propounded
by Douglas. Our duty is to find a workable viable financial sytem that does not incur progressive debt and economic
stagnation. We must also remember that a tiny minority of financiers control
the system and they would always fight to the death to avoid any changes that would erode that control. Hence the
deliberate policy of ridicule directed towards us particularly the "funny
money" tag.
Bill
Mc Gunnigle
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2006 3:28
AM
Subject: RE: [socialcredit] ---Re:
ELECTRONZ - 611 and the 'Red Dawn'
(John Rawson
wrote:-) “Such
as, shall we have a totally (or almost) government funded health system as
in the UK,
or one that is basically private, as I believe exists in the
USA. In
other words, is Government going to fund this directly, or ensure that
consumers have the necessary power to purchase "health" as
needed?
“I am sure
a topic like this could occupy as much time and space as this group
covers, so I have no intent of opening it up for discussion. But I
could argue for either side at length, using SC principles.”
(Joe replies:- ) I don’t really want to open the
much discussed (in Canada,
anyways) public or private ‘Health Care’ debate up here either, but I am
curious to know just ‘HOW’ you believe the ‘Government’ could “fund this
directly” and still ensure the type of timely healthcare that’s
appropriate for the needs of all patients is delivered? None of us want to see those who
are ill, or injured, or in decline through age, unable to receive the best
medical attention and needed care that’s ‘physically’ possible to provide
simply because they can’t ‘financially’ afford it. But it seems to me there is a bit
of the usual ‘hypnotism’ present when we operate under the
‘illusion’ that ‘Government’ funded healthcare is always going to be lower
cost or even ‘free’.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
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 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 cymric@xtra.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 wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
