| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit | | Date: | Saturday, March 3, 2007 09:27:33 (-0700) | | From: | Jim <jschroeder @....ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 4513 (written by Joe Thomson) |
Hi Again:
There was an error in my last message in grammar that I made when trying to
change the sentence, but obviously I did not change the entire sentence.
It should read:
Hi everyone:
I just wanted to say in passing that there is a tendency to focus our
attention on criticism, and not pay enough attention to praise. Although
there may be points in Vic's outline that I don't agree with 100%, I must
state that nothing men do is perfect (and that includes Douglas), and I
believe Vic's outline to be very well written, and a thorough
introduction to the subject.
Take care,
Jim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 6:42 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit
> While I do not have the particular issue at hand, one of the trade
> magazines
> we used to receive, "Forest Industries", (now no longer published ~ I
> believe the article appeared in the 1980s), once had an extensive article
> on business financing.
>
> "Call loans" were mentioned as still being used, and the attraction was
> that their interest rate was lower. The article didn't mention what
> percentage of bank financing of forest products concerns was still done
> this
> way. But I would suspect that it was small, since it stressed that an
> 'interest rate' saving should NOT be the MAIN consideration in securing
> business financing. And this was in the era of the double digit interest
> rates.
>
> In his autobiography "This Is My Life", former US southwest banker Jim
> McCrary mentions that the establishment of the Federal Deposit Insurance
> Corporation in the 1930's was, along with the Federal Reserve, one of the
> greatest stabilising factors in banking. He makes particular note that if
> the FDIC had been in place at the onset of the Depression, it's effects
> would never have become so ruinous to so many.
>
> Joe
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <william_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
> To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 10:44 AM
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit
>
>
>> In regard to Vic's paragraph on "call loans," it is
>> perhaps a century out of date. From an Internet
>> source:
>>
>> "A call loan may be 'called in'--declared due and
>> payable--by the lender at any time. Until 1913, call
>> loans were once the common form of bank financing for
>> agriculture and business. Also, recall that until
>> 1913 there was no 'lender of last resort' to keep
>> banks liquid. If too many depositors demanded their
>> money back at once, banks would be forced to call in
>> loans, usually causing borrowers to default, often
>> causing their farms or businesses to fail, and not
>> necessarily raising enough cash to pay off the
>> depositors. The ensuing economic slowdown and
>> financial uncertainty would provoke more depositors to
>> try to withdraw funds from banks, forcing more banks
>> to call in loans, triggering more defaults and
>> business failures, dragging the economy into
>> recession."
>> http://www.terry.uga.edu/~rsteuer/courses/4000/rps2.doc
>>
>> The date 1913 refers to the year the Federal Reserve
>> was established. By 1929 call loans were little used
>> outside the securities markets. Some say that they
>> played a major role in the stock market crash of that
>> year. This is the modern definition, the very first
>> definition that comes up in an Internet search:-
>>
>> "Call loans
>> "What's the definition?
>> "Loans used to finance the purchase of securities, and
>> which may be terminated (called) at the discretion of
>> the borrower or the lender on demand."
>> http://www.investordictionary.com/definition/call+loans.aspx
>> ----------------------------------------------
>>
>> As to the National Monetary Authority and the monopoly
>> of credit, we already have national monetary
>> authorities in developed nations in the form of
>> central banks, with full capability to implement
>> social credit, if so willed. The modern central banks
>> are creatures of legislation, which may be modified
>> and changed. The problem is one of will, and that
>> follows from understanding, or lack thereof.
>>
>> As to the monopoly of credit, I see it as, or what
>> used to be called a natural monopoly, because we
>> benefit to the extent it is a monopoly. The monopoly
>> derives mostly from the clearing function that
>> requires a great deal of coordination between banks,
>> regardless of independent ownership or management.
>> But the fact that it is a monopoly requires public
>> oversight and regulation so that those in control do
>> not abuse the power of the monopoly.
>> ---------------------
>>
>> Attached is a pdf of Vic's outline with the addition
>> of page numbering to facilitate our discussion.
>>
>> Does anyone have any objections or comments to Vic's
>> text through line 259? I am referencing the
>> commentary on Social Credit philosophy and objectives.
>> At this point I have not noticed anything I find
>> particularly objectionable in that text. He seems to
>> veer considerably off track in details of finance
>> beginning with line 261.
>>
>>
>>
>> --- Joe Thomson <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca> wrote:
>>
>> (From Vic's "Outline":-) "It must be remembered that
>> the banks have discretionary powers to call in loans
>> and overdrafts even before the goods they brought into
>> existence have been sold, and they sometimes exercise
>> this power with disastrous effects on the community."
>>
>> (Joe asks:-) How much financing is still done this
>> way, where the loan is subject to 'call'? Would it be
>> substantially more or less than loans that are issued
>> for a definite term? Ones that could not be 'called'
>> so long as the terms of the loan agreement were being
>> adhered to?
>>
>> In the case that one bank were to 'call' a loan, (of a
>> firm that was fundamentally financially sound, for
>> reasons known only unto the bank), could not that firm
>> generally secure another loan from another bank?
>>
>> I have seen some evidence that this has been the case
>> here in Canada (one instance is recounted in the book
>> "The Acquisitors" by noted author Peter C Newman, in a
>> chapter on well-known (here, anyways) Vancouver
>> Island lumber entrepreneur H. S. Doman and Doman
>> Industries Ltd..
>>
>> Where, early in his firm's life as a trucking and
>> milling company, the CIBC 'called' Doman's loan, even
>> though the firm was 'sound' and was always current on
>> its payments. He quickly got another loan from Royal
>> Bank of Canada, paid off CIBC, and went on to
>> undoubtedly make millions for the RBC over the next
>> three decades.)
>>
>> (From Vic's piece:-) "The first step will be the
>> establishment of a National Credit Authority to take
>> complete control of the money system and put the
>> affairs of the nation on a proper accountancy basis.
>> This would restore money power to the people and do
>> away with the monopoly of credit by private
>> interests."
>>
>> (Joe replies:-) I realize that this piece is intended
>> for the readers of the "Michael" Journal, and so the
>> way in which some things are phrased or inferred may
>> be designed not to alienate them from their present
>> perceptions of 'Social Credit'.
>>
>> They are now the main SC group left in Canada. And
>> certainly closer to some of Douglas's ideas in what
>> they advocate than either of the two 'political party'
>> SC groups left here currently are. (The one here in
>> BC seeming to want to believe SC history began in
>> 1949, and Douglas is a complete non-entity.).
>>
>> It seems to me, anyways, from reading some of the
>> "Michael" publications I have, ones they used to
>> occasionally mail out across the Dominion, that they
>> focus considerably on the "evils" of interest. And a
>> desire to have the 'government' ''take complete
>> control of the money system". Only in ways in which I
>> believe C H Douglas would hardly have approved.
>>
>> I really do not see why what is supposed to be a
>> 'statistical agency' has to be made into what I think
>> could not help but being a 'political' one.
>>
>> Correct me if I'm wrong, please, but isn't it a case
>> that the 'problem' is not 'debt' itself, but that
>> under the current arrangements 'debt' cannot be
>> totally liquidated? Why do we have to have an all
>> powerful NCA to correct that?
>>
>> Now I recall asking Vic about this once before, quite
>> some time ago. What I've called before the "recurring
>> question", and where in Douglas could I find that he
>> specifically advocates having the 'government' "take
>> complete control of the money system." And as I
>> remember he replied that it was an area in which
>> Douglas wasn't too specific about details, but what
>> was advocated could be a 'method' which might be used.
>> And I suppose it could be. But I'm not yet convinced
>> there wouldn't be considerable disadvantages and
>> dangers in going that route. But i'm not closed
>> minded about it, so if anyone knows good reasons
>> 'why', I'd sure like to hear them.
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ____________________________________________________________________________
> ________
>> Bored stiff? Loosen up...
>> Download and play hundreds of games for free on Yahoo! Games.
>> http://games.yahoo.com/games/front
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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 jschroeder@shaw.ca
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message