| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] The Question of Exports | | Date: | Monday, October 2, 2006 07:08:18 (+0000) | | From: | John G Rawson <johngrawson @.......com>
|
| In reply to: | Message 4311 (written by Martin Hattersley) |
Our Party in NZ has for years had a policy of bilateral agreements, in
addition to normal multilateral trade, whereby we could exchange, for example, NZ
dairy products made into ghee for railway rolling stock from India. We would
give them credit from our Reserve Bank of a certain sum to buy our product and
request a similar action from them. The Result would be an equivalent increase in
both goods (rail tickets here eventually) and money in each country without any
inflationary effect and without either having to borrow to do ther deal. It is a
means by which we could help poorer countries, practically all of whom have
something we could use. At the very worst make it fashionable to buy some of
their hand-made artifacts.
I always regarded this as one of our most important and practical policies.
"Fair trade, not humiliating aid". Got enthusiastic enough about it to be the
made Party Spokesman on O'seas Trade for some years when a Candidate. It would,
of course, be a lever to encourage monetary reform, whether SC or not, in other
countries.
It would be frowned on by those controlling traditional trade agreements etc.,
but someone has to buck them some day!
Regards. John R.
From: Martin Hattersley <hattersleyjm@interbaun.com>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] The Question of Exports
Date: Sun, 01 Oct 2006 12:20:07
-0600
>One other device that could be used in connection with exports, is
>to
agree to receive payment in the currency of the receiving country
>(which might
well be "frozen" or made non-convertible into other
>currencies). This would
avoid the problem of third world countries
>busting themselves to earn dollars
with which to repay World Bank
>loans. Instead, the World Bank, or other
overseas lender, would be
>obliged to spend the payment within the country to
which the export
>had been made, so stimulating the economy there.
>
>Martin
Hattersley
>5929 - 189
St.,
>EDMONTON AB CANADA T6M 2J1
>Phone
(780)483-5442.
>jmartinh@shaw.ca
>e-mail: hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
>-----
Original Message ----- From: "William Hugh McGunnigle"
><wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz>
>To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
>Sent: Saturday,
September 30, 2006 7:28 PM
>Subject: Re: [socialcredit] The Question of
Exports
>
>
>>This observation came from my brother Singapore. With regards to
>>exports and contractual work tendered in countries like S. Korea
>>amd
Taiwan they have devised an ingenious but perfectly legal
>>method of ensuring
that their prices always beat their competitors.
>> In contractual bids they gain
a general idea of their
>>competitor's bids and then approach their governments
for an
>>exchange rate concession. This
ensures that the Reserve Banks of S
>>Korea and Taiwan adjust the exchange rate
for that company to
>>ensure that the company's bid will beat any
competitors.
>> Their export goods are costed in a similar manner. A personal
>>rate for the
company for each country with whom they are trading.
>>The returns from this are
enormous, and benefit those country's to
>>the disadvantage of everyone else.
>>
This appears to be the ultimate in exchange rate manipulation
>>and impossible
to police or circumvent.
>> Thought it might throw some light on some of the more
bizarre
>>terading deals that have taken place over the last half century.
>>
Bill Mc G
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "MODERATOR"
<socredus@yahoo.com>
>>To:
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
>>Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2006 4:45 AM
>>Subject:
[socialcredit] The Question of Exports
>>
>>
>>>*The New Age*
>>>December 1,
1921
>>>The Question of Exports.
>>>By C. H. Douglas.
>>>
>>>The editor has passed on
to me two letters which seem
>>>to indicate some confusion of thought as to
the
>>>bearing of a modified credit system on export Trade.
>>>Both these letters
quote statistics of wheat
>>>production and consumption with a view to
throwing
>>>some doubt on our capacity to grow our own food.
>>>
>>>Now, ultimately,
statistics are indispensable to sound
>>>practical politics, but to the writers
of these
>>>letters, as well as to others
who may be tempted to
>>>attack the problem on the basis of
official
>>>statistics, it may be emphasised that it is nearly
>>>irrelevant to
the primary issues whether this country
>>>can feed it's population off its own
acreage or not.
>>>It is quite arguable that it can; and it is also
>>>arguable
that it would be bad business for it to try.
>>>
>>>These issues are:
>>>(I) Are
there inducements operating towards the best
>>>use of the land we have?
>>>(2)
If we export services (i.e., the energy element of
>>>production) do we get the
best real price for them?
>>>
>>>In regard to (1), and leaving out of the
argument, for
>>>the moment, the indisputable fact that the acreage
>>>under
wheat is
steadily decreasing decade by decade,
>>>consider the position of the farmer.
He, like everyone
>>>else at present, is in business to make money, not
to
>>>deliver goods. It is quite true that he makes money by
>>>selling things,
but he can easily make more money by
>>>selling less goods at a higher price,
than vice versa.
>>>
>>>
>>>Now wheat is one of a fairly small group
of
>>>commodities over the price of which the individual
>>>producer has
practically no control whatever. It is a
>>>graded homogeneous product bought in
bulk by experts
>>>who have a strictly finite demand for it, and the
>>>price
paid is under existing conditions purely fixed
>>>by supply and demand whether
unfettered or
>>>artificially
stimulated by rings, and is not directly
>>>based on cost.
>>>
>>>Normally, a
given amount of foreign wheat is
>>>contracted for in this country-bought on
"futures" by
>>>grain brokers whose price fixes a datum line for
>>>home-grown
wheat. So long as wheat is in short supply
>>>as compared with the demand, the
price rises and
>>>everyone engaged in the grain trade, either as
>>>producer or
dealer, may benefit, although no doubt
>>>most of the benefit goes to the
dealer.
>>>
>>>The relation of the farmer to this situation must
>>>surely be plain. The
one situation he must avoid at
>>>all costs is that produced by throwing grain on
the
>>>market in any quantity which will bring down prices,
>>>that
is to say, slacken the demand or competition to
>>>buy. His criterion of a
satisfactory output,
>>>therefore, bears no relation to what amount of
wheat
>>>the public requires, or what amount the land will
>>>produce, but rests
fundamentally on, firstly, the
>>>operations of the grain brokers and, secondly,
an
>>>estimate of what margin of profit can be extracted
>>>from the market by
keeping it short of wheat without
>>>causing a secondary movement of grain from
other
>>>markets.
>>>
>>>As transportation facilities improve, the
proposition
>>>becomes less and less attractive to the farmer who is
>>>driven more and more
to the production of perishable
>>>goods, such as eggs, butter and milk, whose
nature
>>>enables him to control the local market, or to the
>>>raising of stock
on which the transportation charges
>>>and risks are heavy.
>>>
>>>The first
prime question can therefore be answered
>>>quite confidently in the
negative.
>>>
>>>In regard to the second point, let us assume that the
>>>magnitude, at any
rate of our imports of foodstuffs,
>>>is a reasonable subject of discussion and
policy. It
>>>is evident that there is a point at which it is
>>>debatable
whether we should grow the last few million
>>>quarters of wheat required on land
which may not be of
>>>the most suitable description, or whether it is
sound
>>>business management to obtain this wheat by the
>>>exchange for it of
manufactured goods-that is to say,
>>>by an export of economic energy.
>>>
>>>It
does not take much consideration to see that the
>>>answer to this is purely
quantitative: how much wheat
>>>are we to get for a given energy
export?
>>>
>>>It is true enough, as our super-industrialists and
>>>orthodox
economists are always telling us, that
>>>imports are paid for by exports, but,
on the whole,
>>>they are content to leave it at that. They do not
>>>explain,
for instance, how a population which most
>>>certainly cannot, and does not, buy
its own total
>>>production for cash (if it could, there would be no
>>>necessity
either for home or export credits, and no
>>>"unemployment" problem), can become
able to buy
the
>>>imports which are exchanged for the unpurchasable
>>>surplus.
>>>
>>>They
do not, again, explain how a textile worker, paid
>>>wages for converting a bale
of raw cotton worth, say,
>>>into goods worth, say, can benefit if in return
for
>>>these manufactured goods two more bales of raw cotton
>>>at are received-a
condition common to Trade booms. Nor
>>>do they generally publish the fact that
English
>>>machinery is often sold to export agents abroad at far
>>>lower prices
than those at which the same machinery
>>>can be obtained at home, or that it is
possible to
>>>buy, in the bazaars of Bombay, a shirt made in
>>>Lancashire for a
quarter the price at which the same
>>>shirt can be bought retail in
Manchester.
>>>
>>>The simple facts are that, under existing
>>>arrangements,
our principal pre-occupation is the
>>>provision of employment--the making of
work. On this
>>>simple canon hangs the Law and the profits.
>>>
>>>When,
therefore, a locomotive is required for the
>>>Argentine, and assuming for the
moment that it is in
>>>any sense sold in the open market, there is
a
>>>competition, open to the industrial nations of the
>>>world, to sell
locomotives and to buy wheat, with the
>>>usual and logical result that wheat
appreciates in
>>>price in terms of locomotives, the industrial
>>>exporting
country continually gives more, and the
>>>exporting agricultural country
continually
less,
>>>economic energy in every bargain.
>>>
>>>In order to make a bargain
which is Just, i.e.,
>>>judicious, the industrial nation must be restored
to
>>>the position of a free, not a forced, seller, just as
>>>to restore social
equilibrium inside the nation the
>>>individual must be put in the position of a
free, not
>>>a forced, worker. The arrangements which would fulfil
>>>these
desiderata are already sufficiently familiar in
>>>principle to readers of *The
New Age.*
>>>-
>>>
>>>__________________________________________________
>>>Do
You Yahoo!?
>>>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection
around
>>>http://mail.yahoo.com
>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>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
>>hattersleyjm@interbaun.com
>>For more information, visit
>>http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>>
>>
>>--
>>No virus found in this
incoming message.
>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>Version: 7.1.407 / Virus
Database: 268.12.11/460 - Release Date:
>>01/10/2006
>>
>>
>
>
>
>--
>No virus
found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.1.407 /
Virus Database: 268.12.11/460 - Release Date:
>01/10/2006
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
>johngrawson@hotmail.com
>For more information, visit
http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
Discover fun and games at XtraMSN Kids!
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message