|Subject:||Re: [socialcredit] Rawson's complaint|
|Date:||Sunday, January 7, 2007 08:08:56 (+1300)|
|From:||Peter Haines <cymric @.......nz>
I agree. I havent bothered following the discussion on the theorem, it has
become so boring, over and over again. And pointless to get involved as for
me the fundamental issue is whether the people control their own (
community) credit, or the banks retain the usurped power in which case the
result is as you have outlined.
For me the choice is benign dictatorship if the policy that is dominant here
prevails over the global banking system (will to slightly restrained power)
or true Social Credit ( will to freedom).
The 'profit motive' has become piracy and slavery which comes natural under
the prevailing philosophy. The principles that Douglas outline, that concur
with reality ( which some seem to think both are out of date now) sees an
increment of association, profit for all is a natural outcome in a just
system, and beyond that if anyone wants more money they simply have to work
a full week and not exploit anyone else.
The private exploitation of the peoples credit will fulfill through debt
Lenin's dream of a one world centralised 'democracy' and it's not far off
Have you ever compared the prophesies on Jacob and Esau? One was to be the
wealth producer and the other steals the wealth of producers. It refers to
the fatness of the earth and abundance ( poverty is manmade) and the other
entity uses the sword and has no connection with the dew of heaven (
therefore neither sweat). Today the sword is compulsion of interest and
taxes, 'market forces', economic principles etc, and they are away from the
dew of heaven, in highrise buildings and enjoying airconditioning,
manipulating prices, finance, stock markets, labour cost, govt/laws, at the
expense of the producer ( employer and employee) of the real wealth. Gen
----- Original Message -----
From: "William Hugh McGunnigle" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 7:18 PM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Rawson's complaint
> Subject Rawson's complaint
> The arguments being forwarded at
> present appear to be Socialist rather than Social credit. Socialism
> endorses whole-heartedly the present flawed economic system in the form of
> Keynes's principles, namely "Borrow now and pay back later" using the
> private banking to fund the excess spending via government bonds. This
> incurs a permanent and unrepayable debt on the governments expenditure
> that can only be sustained by progressively greater and greater borrowing
> that is not Social Credit. Social Credit simply uses treasury credit to
> finance infrastructure development WITHOUT incurring a permanent debt. No
> private banks are involved. To me all the arguments around the A+B theorem
> are irrelevant to the basic question that Douglas was attempting to solve
> i.e. the progressive and increasing indebtedness of sovereign governments
> to the private international banking system. Indepted governments lose
> their freedom of independant action to preserve the freedom and benefits
> of their own monetary system. In the same way that a company that is
> heavily indepted to a bank is forced to adopt policies that can damage its
> permanent workforce simply because the bank tells them to do so.
> Accountants, as you have rightly pointed out, consider personelle training
> as a liability not an asset. This applies on a national basis too. One of
> the worst aspects of our present economic system is the progressive and
> possibly irreversible deskilling of the Western world's workforce. This is
> the ultimate exploitation of the human world. It would be unnecessary if
> the "profit motive" was not the driving force behind human endeavour.
> Arguing about the A+B theorem on this forum may be a satisfying academic
> exercise, but it has not yet produced a solid basis for reforming the
> flawed economic system that controls the world. Our job, as Social Credit
> adherants, should be to provide a workable alternative system. To that end
> I have still to see a concrete proposal forwarded on this forum.
> Bill Mc Gunnigle
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William B. Ryan" <email@example.com>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2007 7:47 AM
> Subject: [socialcredit] Rawson's complaint
>> But, John, A+B is not a hypothesis but an analytical
>> argument in support of a hypothesis, from the time
>> Douglas first presented it *Credit-Power and
>> It also seems to me that you are proposing two
>> different things here: "testing it against reality"
>> and testing it by "inductive scientific reasoning."
>> "It" being the underlying hypothesis to A + B.
>> For the record, please state what you think that
>> underlying hypothesis might be.
>> --- John G Rawson <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Greetings for 2007.
>> Might I suggest that Social Credit ceased to be a
>> science before the 1930's, whenever Douglas'
>> supporters started trying to "prove" the hypothesis
>> (A+B) instead of testing it against reality, along the
>> lines this correspondence has been heading and others.
>> All that is necessary to remedy the situation is to
>> take it in its true context, as a scientific model,
>> and test it (and its orthodox opposite) by inductive
>> scientific reasoning.
>> But, of course, those with vested interests in the
>> present financial racket will do their utmost to
>> prevent this happening, won't they?
>> I agree that this forum is fulfilling its aim of
>> "studying the works of Douglas", but I believe it has
>> no useful function whatever in promoting his message
>> to others. Again, I agree that the later is not its
>> function, but I think others should also ber aware of
>> John R.
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
>> You're subscribed to this list with the email firstname.lastname@example.org
>> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> You're subscribed to this list with the email email@example.com
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit