| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit | | Date: | Wednesday, March 14, 2007 21:27:54 (+0000) | | From: | John G Rawson <johngrawson @.......com>
|
| In reply to: | Message 4562 (written by Martin Hattersley) |
Thanks for that Martin. Your second para.- bank lending as a draw on the Nat.
credit - fits well with my ideas, so I am interested in how you derived it. Is
it "Douglas" or just plain commonsense application?
Regards. John R.
From: Martin Hattersley <hattersleyjm@interbaun.com>
Reply-To:
socialcredit@elistas.com
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re:
[socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2007 11:17:02
-0600
>It seems to me, Joe, that you are missing something. When Banks
>create
credit, they also create debt. Credit created by the National
>Credit Authority
would not involve the creation of debt, just as
>coinage by the Mint at the
present time is done without debt. Such
>money would reach the community through
devices such as the National
>Dividend and the Just Price.
>
>Banking could well
continue as at present - but bank promises to pay
>beyond the actual amount of
legal tender money they had in their
>possession would need to be regarded as a
draw against
the National
>Credit. The banks would be assessed a fee for so doing, since the
>amount of their credit creation reduces the amount of Dividend/Price
>Discount otherwise payable to the public.
>
>The result of such a system
would be that the nation's credit was
>asserted to belong to the people, not the
banks. It would cause
>quite a revolution in the way we regard the activities of
the
>Banking system!
>
>Martin Hattersley
>5929 - 189 St.,
>EDMONTON AB CANADA
T6M 2J1
>
>e-mail: ----- jmartinh@shaw.ca
>
>Original Message ----- From: "Joe
Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
>To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
>Sent: Tuesday,
March 13, 2007 7:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social
Credit
>
>
>>Hi
Peter,
>>
>>I'll respond underneath yours below.
>>
>>( Peter wrote:-) - "The
banking corporations
>>can look forward to providing 'products' for a much more
prosperous
>>community, including proccessing loan applications for their
>>customers."
>>
>>"I expect the banks to seperate the wheat borrowers from
the chalf
>>borrowers,
>>not the NCA."
>>
>>(Joe responds:-) Then you envision
the NCA to make the final
>>decision on
>>each and every loan? The private bank
can't 'create' any credit, as
>>now, is
>>that right? The private bank just
"processes loan applications"
>>and passes
>>them on?
>>
>>With, presumably,
from what you wrote previously, ( P:-"I would
>>expect
the
>>criteria and
>>approval of loans as at present to continue." ~ the
criteria for
>>approval
>>was said to be the ability to repay- Joe), a
recommendation to
>>'accept' or
>>'reject' to the NCA? Who, (the NCA), then
makes the final
>>decision ~ but
>>based on 'what'?
>>
>>If it's on the private
bank's recommendation, based on the
>>applicant's
>>projected ability to repay,
then why is this extra bureaucratic
>>step even
>>necessary? Why doesn't the
bank just do as it does now if it
>>approves the
>>loan application? Mobilize
the appropriate amount of the
>>'community's
>>credit', and get on with
it?
>>
>>The 'statistics' concerning what it's just done go into the NCA.
>>Why does
it
>>have to be concerned beyond that so far as this process goes? If
>>the
>>borrower defaults on the loan, it is the private bank that is on
>>the hook
>>for the amount it 'created' that's not been repaid. And that
>>doesn't come
>>out of 'nothing' to the bank's shareholders. It's a
reduction of
>>their
>>equity position in the bank, is it not?
>>
>>If the NCA
is going to over-rule the bank and deny credit to an
>>individual
>>applicant
the bank has previously 'approved', and approved
>>presumably
>>because that
bank has determined the applicant will indeed have the
>>ability
>>to repay,
(either through projected earnings, or from the voluntary
>>or
>>involuntary
sale of assets in the event of business
discontinuance
>>or
>>foreclosure through default), what, then, is the criteria
that
>>determines
>>this denial?
>>
>>That the loan is "not good for the
community''? Well, now, just
>>who is the
>>NCA to be determining that? And how
does this 'non-political'
>>agency arrive
>>at this high and might 'ethically'
important decision?
>>
>>Now I don't know about you, and maybe there is something
more to
>>this than I
>>am aware, but as I understand this right now, it's
certainly not a
>>proposed
>>method of controlling the 'community's credit' with
which I feel
>>very
>>comfortable.
>>
>>Right now, if I want a loan for my
business and I go to my bank and
>>they
>>say, "No.", I have the
option of going to as many other banks or
>>other
>>credit granting
institutions as there are until I find one that
>>will help
>>me.
>>
>>If I'm
turned down everywhere, I either forget the whole thing,
>>since it's
>>clear to
me that I can't convince them that I will have the ability
>>to
>>repay, or I
attempt to raise money some other way. Private
>>investors,
etc,
>>etc..
>>
>>Alternately, if I have what I feel is a particularly good
proposal,
>>one
>>which has demonstrable chances for success and a bank should
be
>>anxious to
>>fund, and one is, I might even want to shop around, to see
which
>>bank might
>>give me the best deal.
>>
>>But where am I when there is
only one show in
town? Which controls
>>ALL
>>credit, and for some unfathomable reason, has just
said "No,"?
>>This
>>certainly doesn't seem like the 'de-centralization' of
policy that
>>Douglas
>>wrote about to me.
>>
>>Rather it seems more like
'socialized' banking. Where an
>>"omnipotent
>>bureaucracy" decides what will be
'financed', albeit in the 'name'
>>of the
>>community, and who gets the credit
and who does not. Simply
>>because it
>>'knows' what's best for the 'community'.
.
>>
>>Joe
>>
>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>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:
7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.11/722 - Release Date:
>>14/03/2007 3:38
PM
>>
>>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>I
am using the free version of SPAMfighter for private users.
>It has removed 7483
spam emails to date.
>Paying users do not have this message in their emails.
>Try
SPAMfighter for free
now!
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
Live Search delivers results the
way you like it. Try live.com now!
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message