|
Hi Everyone
Bilateral trade agreements would definitely contravene all the GATT
agreements and undermine the stranglehold that the IMF and World Bank have
on world trade. Since I predicted that GATT agreements would work to the
disadvantage of Primary producers and have opposed them from their inception
I can only support John Rawson. Fair trade can only take place between
direct negotiators. The IMF/World Bank introduces a third party that does
nothing except act as a wholesaler for money. We all know wholesalers are the
biggest rip off artists in the world. International Bankers are no exception,
and the sooner we cut them out of the trade cycle and negotiate directly
government treasury to governmant treasury the better.
Bill Mc G
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, October 02, 2006 8:08
PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] The Question
of Exports
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!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
