|Subject:||Re: [socialcredit] In reply to Keith, more on A+B|
|Date:||Saturday, April 7, 2007 10:58:17 (-0700)|
|From:||william_b_ryan <william_b_ryan @.....com>
|In reply to:||Message 4664 (written by keith wilde)|
Again, Keith, it was this statement to which I was
"...the social credit solution would have a government
office to calculate the precise amount of new claims
to goods and services that should be distributed to
keep the system churning without inflation."
There is no need to calculate the *precise* amount at
all. There is no need to calculate any amount
whatsoever so long as the dividend/discount is
introduced gradually from the inception of the
program. The inherent instability decreases as the
"gap" between "prices" and "purchasing power" is
Before, A + B and A will diverge from each other with
labor displacement, so either A + B or A or both must
diverge from real production. It is impossible with
the orthodox tools to make both change proportionately
with real production, so we have the trade-off we
observe empirically in the Phillips curve.
The monetary authorities have attempted to strike a
balance between moderate inflation and moderate
unemployment, and they have been reasonably successful
in doing so. It also means that the economy is kept
in a permanent condition of under-performance.
If the ratio of B is increasing to A, the ratio of A +
B is increasing to A.
What we want to is introduce an element C through the
dividend/discount such that the ratio A + B remains
constant to A + C through time. The ratio will not
become constant until C is raised sufficiently. You
keep increasing C until, if and when, the ratio
Up to that point A + B is the dependent variable of C.
The statistical variable we want to look at is the
ratio of A + B, or entrepreneurial spending, to real
If A + B begins to increase in respect of real
production, leading into inflation, you reduce the
rate of increase to C.
The limit will be at a significantly greater level of
economic activity than at present.
--- keith wilde <email@example.com> wrote:
Thanks for this expository effort, Bill. I have spent
quite a lot of time with it, and have also read your
more recent reaction to "Mark".
And I think I have understood fairly well. But I am
still puzzled by just what it is that you disagree
with. My point was that there must be some kind of
government office to perform the functions of the
Credit Authority. I had no intent to be making a claim
to understanding the nature of the function. So when
you observe that "the statistical variable to watch
becomes the relationship of A + B to real production"
I take that as a more accurate statement of the
function. The function remains, however, and I presume
that it would be undertaken by a pre-existing
government statistical agency. Do you agree with that?
Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.