| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] more on the State Theory | | Date: | Thursday, May 17, 2007 01:10:47 (+1200) | | From: | William Hugh McGunnigle <wmcgunn @.........nz>
|
| In reply to: | Message 4744 (written by william_b_ryan) |
Further to my previous comment
I don't think the US government particularly wanted to have the
responsibility of providing the world with enough dollars to maintain the
oil trade. It was foisted upon them by the Bretton Woods agreement. Now the
US has to maintain the supply of dollars in terms of world trade to prevent
the world's global economy from collapsing. Comments that the USA have
manipulated this for their own advantage may to some degree be true, but
that does not mean that the US government's financial advisers particularly
want to maintain this position when it is quite plainly bleeding them dry. I
am quite sure that the USA would willingly give up that position if it could
do so without creating world financial trading chaos. In 1948 when the
dollar dominated world trade the USA was the world's greatest manufacturing
centre. Although today this is no longer true the USA still remains the
largest and most affluent market for manufactured goods. That requires money
and has meant that the US government has needed to run deficits for the last
50 years to supply both its own country and the world with enough dollars to
maintain world trade. It is an iniquitous system and doing immense damage to
that country. The USA is in the same position now that the UK was in at the
turn of the 20th century. The UK only recovered when it gave up its position
as a reserve currency. There was a period of very great hardship there until
the pound sterling reajusted its value on the international market.
regards
Bill Mc G
----- Original Message -----
From: <william_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2007 10:00 AM
Subject: [socialcredit] more on the State Theory
> On May 15, 4:23 pm, "The Trucker" <mik...@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>
> "There is little but taxation and the force of the USA
> in insisting that dollars must be used to buy oil that
> gives the US dollar any value at all."
> --------------------------------------
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Dollars have value because sellers will accept them
> when tendered for what they are selling. By "dollars"
> we mean deposits denominated in dollars that are
> created by commercial banks when they grant loans.
>
> Taxation is the analogue to sales by a commercial
> enterprise.
>
> A firm with little prospect for sales would have
> little credit with the commercial banks.
>
> The same is true for governments with little prospect
> for tax collections.
>
> Where is your evidence that the government of the USA
> "insists" that dollars must be used to buy oil?
>
> Isn't it rather due to the fact that the domestic
> product of the USA is very nearly greater than all the
> rest of the world's economies combined?*
>
> It is the domestic product of the USA that gives value
> to its dollar in international transactions.
> -
>
> * I know this is an exageration but you see the point.
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a PS3 game guru.
> Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo!
> Games.
> http://videogames.yahoo.com/platform?platform=120121
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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 wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message