|
Thanks for the comments, Joe.
There is no such thing in Social Credit thought as
a "positive contribution to keeping unemployment down" (see Bill McGunnigle's
comments below). Properly understood, our aim is progressively to release
mankind from necessary work. We wish to promote conditions which are
conducive to an increasingly leisured and civilized society--and the moreso the
better. "Full employment" as a social policy is fundamentally NOT a Social
Credit objective and until this is clearly comprehended beyond all doubt, one
can never get "off the ground" toward becoming a Social Crediter in any
meaningful way whatsoever. Absolute economic security IS a Social Credit
objective and is to be pursued, in the financial realm, essentially by
means of the Social Credit National (Consumer) Dividend and the Compensated
Price.
Regarding a "balanced budget":
The Douglas analysis explicitly demonstrates the impossibility of a
balanced budget under the orthodox financial regime. Debt can at
times be shifted from one jurisdiction or social or governent stratum to another
but in order to carry on as a society we must, as a society, go
increasingly into debt--unrepayable except by periodic refinancing
(i.e., borrowing). Essentially, the "floating" debts of society are
converted into expanding "fixed" debt of senior governments. Under
the orthodox, or existing, system of banking and finance, a "balanced budget"
(see Douglas in The Alberta Experiment) means:
1. That the economy is static
2. That we consume all of our real (i.e.,
physical) capital currently, and
3. That the issuer of credit (i.e., the
banking system) owns, in final analysis, all real capital
Comment on the above points:
1. We should never be physically limited in
economic activity, whether in production or consumption, by artificial
financial constraint. Physical potential for production and consumption
should always be financially accommodated, i.e., finance should always reflect
physical reality.
2. Obviously we do not consume our capital
currently inasmuch as it clearly accumulates and lasts into the future.
Unfortunately under orthodox financial rules money in respect of real capital
charges is withdrawn prematurely via the price mechanism,
i.e., long before the physical capital is actually worn out or
obsoleted.
3. Productive capital is created by society
at large and banking institutions have no right to appropriate effective
ownership of it. The Social Credit National (Consumer) Dividend and
Compensated Price would confer beneficial ownership of the communal capital upon
individual citizens.
Actually, Douglas declared, and effectively
demonstrated, that a "balanced budget" is actually a bankers' policy.
That should be obvious from a Social Credit standpoint. I agree that the
"Social Credit" administration in British Columbia was anything but Social
Credit--and you provide an excellent account of the financial policies they
actually followed in your Province. It is a confirmation of Douglas's
"thesis" that even though British Columbia "enjoyed" a vigorous export
trade, the de facto Provincial debt still continued to
escalate.
Sincerely
Wally
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 2:22
PM
Subject: RE: [socialcredit] the "effect"
of interest ~ back to Peter
Hi
Bill (McGunnigle),
The
original BC Social Credit League Government did, as you say, “run in the
black.” The experience of
‘political Party’ ‘Social Credit in BC was substantially different from that
in Alberta. While the original ‘League’ government
won election after election here for 20 years, I don’t believe they ever
achieved over 50% of the ‘popular vote’.
There was never an overwhelming majority voting for ‘social credit’,
(or some version of it), as there had been in
Alberta.
Consequently,
Premier WAC Bennett, who was ‘fiscally conservative’, (and a Conservative
before joining Social Credit) could run ‘balanced (surplus, actually)
budgets’, something which is not consistent with original ‘Social Credit’
doctrine, on the claim that by doing so he was “keeping the Province out of
the clutches of the moneylenders.”
What enabled him to do so was the
tremendous growth in the BC economy in that era through ever expanding
resource exploitation. We had, at
that time, markets literally beating a path to our doors. At the same time, his government
engaged in what might be called some ‘creative accounting’. They off-loaded some items which had
been ‘direct’ Provincial Government debt onto various Crown Corporations and
‘Authorities’, which were ‘guaranteed’ as to payment by the Province, but
could then be classed as ‘contingent liabilities’ on the Province’s
books. Much in the manner of
someone ‘co-signing’ a loan ~ the debt isn’t their’s, it’s the ‘borrower’s ~ unless the borrower
defaults. In actual fact, real
overall Provincial debt (in total) continued to grow all through the WAC
Bennett years.
‘Inflation’,
which caught up to and surpassed the seemingly never
ending ‘prosperity’ by the early 1970’s, was their eventual undoing. Was a good run while it lasted, but
still fell far short of what could have been had some greater attention been
paid to ‘real’ Social Credit.
Regards,
Joe
-----Original
Message-----
From: W.
McGunnigle [mailto:wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: May 31,
2006
6:26
AM
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] the "effect"
of interest ~ back to Peter
You have forgotten that since then there has been a vast proliferation of
government departments and consequently the number of administrators needed to
operate them "efficiently". The classic example is the onshore administration
for the British Navy. In 1919 when the British Navy had more ships than any
two other navies compined well over 400 vessels it managed with an
administrative staff of approximately 8000-10000. I believe today when its
number of active vessels can be counted on two hands it requires an
admin. staff of around 100000. Apparently all Western nations suffer from
this disease every civil service increases by approximately 12% per year
irrespective on the work load. There are more administrators on most armed
forces budgets than service personelle. When we add Social
welfare, Judiciary, and political administration costs for parliamentary staff
all of whom have proliferated like the proverbial maggots you can see why
governments needed all that extra revenue. On the other hand perhaps by
employing all these extra staff the government is making a positive
contribution to keeping unemployment down. I know that in the UK many offices
were decentralised and transferred to areas of high unemployment. A
great pity that BC lost its Socred government, From my reading it appears to
only BC government that actually ran consistently "in the Black". I know
the NZ government hasn't done this consistently for many
years.
Bill
McGOriginal Message -----
Sent:
Wednesday, May 31, 2006 4:39 PM
Subject: RE:
[socialcredit] the "effect" of interest ~ back to
Peter
Hello
Bill (McGunnigle),
Thanks
for an interesting history and overview of taxation. I didn’t know ‘income tax’ dated
back to Pitt. Taxes seem to be
demarcated into ‘temporary’ and ‘permanent’ categories here, too. And many ‘temporary’ ones seem to
become more or less ‘permanent’ after they’ve been established. Most politicians, once elected, seem to be convinced that they know how to
spend your money for you better than you know how to spend it yourself. Especially around election time.
Here in BC, the original Social
Credit League Government did remove ‘tolls’ on various major bridges once
they were paid for. And
generally attempted to keep taxation low for everyone quite
successfully. Later governments
weren’t so dedicated. And still
toll one major arterial highway that was paid off a decade or more ago,
along with what’s suspected to be a pretty substantial ‘sinking fund’ to
cover maintaining it. The
current mob in charge tried to peddle that road and its toll booth off to a
private operator for an immediate multi-million dollar cash infusion to the
Crown’s coffers, and the opportunity to share in future revenues through
taxing the operator’s profits.
The
normally passive BC public, in
one of the most interesting examples of what can be done when truly
non-partisan ‘people-power’ is constructively exercised, revolted. Two Government MLAs whose Ridings
the road traversed, one of them the normally ‘impartial’ Speaker of the
Legislative Assembly, the other an important Cabinet Minister, got a lesson
that wasn’t lost on them in ‘yielding to pressure’. Massed public pressure.
Which completely overrode ‘Party’
affiliations, Cabinet solidarity, ancient British Parliamentary precedents
regarding what a Speaker is supposed to say and do, and, eventually very
substantial ‘Premier’ pressure from a normally unmoveable dictatorial
ideologue. The Speaker
had to speak. Against what
his Government was planning to
do. The road wasn’t
‘privatized’. But the ‘public
pressure’ wasn’t sustained, unfortunately, and too quickly dissipated. And when it did, the Government
raised the ‘toll’ ! But,
the road is still ‘ours’, and
it did illustrate what IS possible, and could be done if the public
wants something bad enough and their determination and pressure could be
focussed in a way to get it.
Hard
to believe sometimes that only 100 years ago many National governments seemed to be funding almost their entire
operations, including infrastructure construction costs, mainly through Customs and Excise
duties on Imports. And today we embrace ‘Free-trade’, and wallow deeper in
debt.
Joe
-----Original
Message-----
From: W.
McGunnigle [mailto:wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz]
Sent: May
30, 2006
5:40
AM
To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] the
"effect" of interest ~ back to Peter
Noted your comment on tax. Do you demarcate taxes into "Temporary" taxes
created to fund a particular publically incurred debt e,g, a war, and
"permanent" taxes designed to fund the general revenue for government
expenditure? I ask this because there is a particular temporary tax
introduced in 1793 to fund William Pitt the Younger's war against
France and
eventually Napoleon. It was called, surprise, surprise, INCOME TAX. I think
that 213 years for a "temporary tax" is a pretty good innings don't you. Or
are we looking at the political expediency and duplicity practiced by rulers
and politicians since time immemorial? I have the jundiced view that a
politician does not have the moral capability of distiguishing between the
two type of revenue gathering exercises once he or she gets their paws on
the money. Indeed I think they devise ways of accounting to deliberately
concealing funding sources so that they can avoid fiscal
responsibility for borrowing funds on the international money
market.
Money laundering
scams originated at government level to confuse everyone into believing our
taxes are being responsibly managed. In New Zealand the scam is called the
"Consolidated Fund" all taxation, revenue dues, road fines and overseas
borrowing disappears into this great black hole, and no one can determine
who is entitled to what because no government funding has been previously
earmarked for a particular purpose.The government SAYS that funds are
earmarked, but, if you attempt to trace the financial direction taken by any
peice of taxation or overseas borrowing, you find it is impossible to tie
down.The "Consolidated Fund" pays everything. What a magnificent way to
conceal financial fiddling and all perfectly legal. How do you combat this
sort of contrived creative accounting?
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 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 wmklinck@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free
Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.8.1/354 - Release Date:
6/1/2006
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
