|Subject:||Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit|
|Date:||Sunday, March 18, 2007 07:37:32 (+1200)|
|From:||Peter <cymric @.......nz>
Eric Butler, "Social Dynamics".
From page 63 to bottem page 64. This book my be on line on the ALOR site.
" ...Any Board of Directors which provide their shareholders with the type
of financial information provided by govenments, would find themselves in
the Courts charged with failure to discharge their proper responsibilities.
As the real credit of a Society is its productive capacity, and, as has
been demonstrated, is increasingly based upon a cultural heritage, which
includes the principles of complex associations which make available to man
unlimited sources of energy, a non-political organisation, which might be
termed the National Credit Authority, is essential to make available all the
relevant information concerning a Society's real credit. This authority
would bear the same relationship to Government as does the Accountancy
Branch of a business to the Board of Directors. One of the major
responsibilities of a National Credit Authority would be to provide
regularly a national balance sheet. All the data is readily available, much
of it already provided by Government Statistitions, and with modern
computers could be continuously processed without any difficulty as the
basis for financial policies serving the true purposes of the individual
member of society. A realistic National Balance Sheet would indicate in
financial terms the real profit of a society.
A National Balance Sheet would show on one side the figures of Total
National Production and on the other ( page 64) side Total National
Consumption. Total Consumption includes goods and services consumed, goods
exported, depreciation, and wastage of population ( human wealth) by deaths
and emigration. Total Production includes goods and services produced, all
goods imported, capital appreciation, all gains in birth and immigration.
The relevant figures would indicate whether a profit or a loss has been
made over any given period. In modern nations like Australia and Canada,
the anual profit is enormous. The item of national appreciation would show
the tremendous expansion of industrial plant. the building of roads,
bridges, harbours and other real assets. A realistic balance sheet must
must include human beings. It is elementary that a Society which lost all
its population would cease to exist. Every new human being in a Society
must be regarded as an asset, eventually, after obtaining an education,
increasing still further the increment of association and the real profit of
No drastic changes are necessary to start implementing, step by step,
financial policies reflecting economic realities. The trading banks would
continue operating their most efficient system in exactly the same way as
they do now, but on the clear understanding that they would be doing the
financial bookkeeping for the community against the community's real credit,
and would be entitled to charge only a legitimate profit for their services.
It has been estimated that something less than two percent would be quite
adiquate. They could be licensed with the National Credit Authority and
credit policy based solely on the requirements and real credit of the
community with no further nonsense about 'cash reserves'. The trading banks
could compete to serve producers and business organisations as they do at
present. They would be genuine service organisations and no longer
instruments used for progressively centralising power."
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Thomson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:31 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit
> Thanks, Peter. And to Martin, too. It's interesting to see how all this
> envisioned by various participants in these discussions. As you said,
> "There's more than one way to skin a cat."
> My concern remains regarding whether the NCA would have, or should have,
> any 'veto' power over 'individual' bank loans.
> My understanding was that it operated solely at the 'macro-economic'
> To ensure that there would always be sufficient effective demand available
> to consumers, as a whole, to enable each cycle of production to be fully
> financially self-liquidating.
> And to credit them over time, through effectively lowering consumer
> with the benefits of ongoing capital appreciation that is the legacy of
> their continued association and cultural heritage.
> I did not really envision bank 'debt' as being such a problem, of itself.
> Only that at the present time the means to its full repayment rests solely
> with the banking system and its 'policy'. Not with the public as
> and theirs.
> If overall bank debt were able to be made always fully
> I really don't see where there'd be any great problem with it. The
> of all the detrimental policies (to the general community) that the
> 'monopoly of credit' currently exercises arises from the present inability
> to fully repay bank debt, not from debt itself. It is this, in my view,
> I presently (mis?)understand the subject, that allows the banks to deny
> community the 'economic democracy' that we should rightly possess.
> Joe. .
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter" <email@example.com>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 3:17 AM
> Subject: Re: [socialcredit] A brief outline of Social Credit
>> I will reply Joe by " PH-"
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Joe Thomson" <email@example.com>
>> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 2:34 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
>> > 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
>> > criteria and
>> > approval of loans as at present to continue." ~ the criteria for
>> > 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 ~
>> > based on 'what'?
>> PH- I havent designed a system in detail so to go into detail will result
>> building topsy-turvy.
>> I gave a basic outline of the present private system and argued that a
>> parallel one could be instituted with very little change.
>> Certainly not creating two sets of bureaucracy to process loans, which
>> present to continue' doesnt mean. Just as branches are required to
>> policy from their head office the same will apply from the NCA, the only
>> real difference is the credit created is national credit not bank credit.
>> (apart from the mountain of credit deminishing etc)
>> > 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
>> > necessary? Why doesn't the bank just do as it does now if it approves
>> > loan application? Mobilize the appropriate amount of the 'community's
>> > credit', and get on with it?
>> PH- its not an extra step, its parallel, although that may not be the
>> word. The bank does approve it, thats why it is paid fees. I didnt
>> the private banks to send copies of loans approvals to head office before
>> the branch gets back and tells me its approved, they are doing it as
>> and that seemed to me un-necessary. In principle I am suggesting that
>> present system can be copied without any substantial change apart from
>> I indicated in my previous reply. You are effectively asking me why
>> the loan approvel informally at the branch need to go to HQ to become
>> formal, critiquing the private banking policy as much as my suggestion.
>> > The 'statistics' concerning what it's just done go into the NCA. Why
>> > 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
>> > for the amount it 'created' that's not been repaid. And that doesn't
>> > out of 'nothing' to the bank's shareholders. It's a reduction of their
>> > equity position in the bank, is it not?
>> PH- Why does HQ have to be concerned in the present private bank? As for
>> the NCA its policy may or may not require any involvement in the majority
>> cases but there are bound to be special cases where approval may be
>> at that level just as at present because there are unusual cases and
>> needing funds that dont fit the usual criteria.
>> We are in the 'imagining hypothetical cases' zone now and I see no point
>> going down this track.
>> I conceded previously that the national credit carries the can on
>> defaulters, unless the Bank has failed to comply with policy/loan
>> > 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?
>> PH- I dont intend to devise a policy, not even a logo for the NCA. As
>> Douglas said the bureaucrats have the qualifications for that job.
>> > 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?
>> PH- 'Politics' is a dirty word attitude is yours not mine. You have
>> an experience you have had with the private banks turning down loan
>> apllications, or was it just looking twice at you after already proving
>> them your credit rating in terms of repayments. So what right have they
>> do the same ( for the same reasons no doubt).
>> Just as an aside I doubt it would be practical for the general population
>> just crank a handle so to speak and money will pour out, so there has to
>> checks and balances just the same. I flicked through my last post and I
>> didnt see ' not good for the community', sounds like it relates to
>> hypothetical variable out of the ordinary which all systems have to
>> > Now I don't know about you, and maybe there is something more to this
>> > 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
>> > credit granting institutions as there are until I find one that will
>> > me.
>> > If I'm turned down everywhere, I either forget the whole thing, since
>> > 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
>> > 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
>> > wrote about to me.
>> PH- you will have to accept NO wont you, just as in the private sector
>> to all finance co and Credit Unions, but it would appear it would only
>> if it wasnt the private sector that didnt want to know you. Now you have
>> made it politics.
>> > Rather it seems more like 'socialized' banking. Where an "omnipotent
>> > bureaucracy" decides what will be 'financed', albeit in the 'name' of
>> > community, and who gets the credit and who does not. Simply because it
>> > 'knows' what's best for the 'community'. .
>> PH- socialising social/public/community Credit seems rather normal to me.
>> Privatising social credit ( banks usurping the community credit) doesnt
>> sound normal to me nor socialising private finances ( such as
>> the banks and govt taking taxes). I dont see the Credit Authority as a
>> bank. It oversees the creation and distribution/circulation of the
>> credit, through the banks. The Dividend is a case of socialising the
>> and it isnt compulsory if you are opposed to it.
>> Omnipotent bureaucracy is also where your bank you have been with for
>> turns down your loan application. This is common ground in both private
>> public sectiors, but once again it only stinks apparently if its outside
>> private sector. You will retain the freedom to not use the Community
>> and borrow at market interest rates off the private sector. I can allow
>> the possibility that there may well be amount and time limits to
>> aquiring funds, and national volumns likewise, and then there is local
>> central govt needs which may dominate the national allication outside the
>> dividend and the Just Price thus ensuring a percentage of private
>> borrowing - who knows, I dont intend to try and work this out.
>> Douglas wasnt a Libertarian that all forms of centralisation ( as I said
>> to be qualified to have any meaning) are automatically unacceptable which
>> one of the characterisations of govt and administration (private and
>> public). I cant image the bankers PR men/women arguing that privatising
>> community credit was a 'social credit ' principle to avoid
>> Is it the private sector or the public sector that knows what is best for
>> the community?
>> > Joe
>> > Peter H
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > 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 email@example.com
>> > 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 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