|Hello Jim (and Others)|
I would be challenged to criticize your comments which I think are a concise and essentially sound statement of the basic Social Credit ideas. Your thoughts appear, in my opinion, to be oriented very much in the "right direction."
On 8-Jan-08, at 8:28 AM, Jim wrote:
Hi Vic/Wally and others:
It is my understanding that all capital is "communal capital". The fruits of that capital are available to anyone who has the credit/money. While the administration of the capital is best left to private industry, the useful benefit of the capital belongs to everyone, whether that capital is tangible (machines, equipment, etc....) or intangible (technique, processes, etc....).
The price rebate is designed to negate the effect of charging all capitalized costs to the consumer. These capitalized costs represent past consumption. The real cost of production is consumption over an equivalent period of time. Since the ratio of consumption to production is always falling due to advances in technology, financial prices would fall in any Social Credit system as less inputs are used to produce a unit output.
The dividend is paid to recognize the fact that labour is being replaced by capital in the productive process. One of the results of advances in technology should be increased leisure, not unemployment. The dividend allows people to "contract out" of the productive process without being unduly punished with the loss of home and the ability to feed onself etc....
Social Credit rejects the monopolization of industry as "economic sabotage". Monopolies always tend to restrict output to less than capacity to ensure artificial scarcity (the state being the ultimate monopoly). Scarcity is used as a tool to keep us in fear. Credit has been monopolizing its power for centuries, and has led us to believe that money is scarce, not only to maximize the return on money, but more importantly, to govern through fear.
Those are my thoughts, and any comments would be appreciated.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Monday, January 07, 2008 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: [Cap_contacts] Fwd: Banking and the Canadian Government - revised
I do not believe I can add anything to what you have said. The correction has been noted and you have answered the second point of Bill's comments. On the first comment by Bill I believe that with the correct National financial accounting system in place to record facts correctly the "Communal Capital" would be part of the items recorded in a National Balance Sheet as part of the National Accounts.
On 08/01/2008, at 11:53 AM, Wallace Klinck wrote:
Many thanks, Bill, for taking the time to bring this inadvertent but serious error in my message to Connie and Wendy of the Canadian Action Party. Joe Thomson also advised me of this matter and you will all have received messages with my corrections which are made also in the message below by striking out the word "appreciation" and inserting in red
the appropriate word "depreciation
It is unfortunate that so many monetary "reformers" seem to fall into the socialist (or "statist") mode in advocating changes to monetary policy. While this is no doubt innocent in some cases where these advocates have not had the benefit of exposure to the fundamental philosophical precepts which Douglas emphasized, I am sure that it is a conscious attempt by others to hijack and thereby neutraliize the Social Credit movement with centralizing monetary technique in the interests of state pre-eminence in the guidance of society. We simply must counter these tendencies, innocent or deliberate, wherever they are to be found.
Yes, certainly, let's discuss the matters you mention below on the list where it will be available to more interested parties.
Briefly, if I understand your terminology (which you might elaborate) correctly, the "falling price level" would certainly be "effective" and not "nominal" in that it would be a realistic representation of the actual achieved reduction of physical cost of production, evaluated in monetary terms, over any given or chosen accountancy period. This would be calculated with due regard for the subtraction and addition to production occurring in the selected period, valued in money terms. Additions would refer to increased production resulting from the utilization of resources, the use of which creates a price value. Subtractions would refer to consumed or depreciated physical assets in the same manner. All additions to capital values would be written up in the National Credit Account and available from that account which would be written down with regard to credits withdrawn to assist consumption by means of the National (Consumer) Dividend and Compensated Price. As I understand the matter, the "Just" Price embraces both the National Dividend and Compensated Price which, combined, would constitute an effective increased purchasing-power in the two forms and, effectively, a lowering of overall financial prices and also a distribution of effective financial access to consumer goods, irrespective of income earned. I would like to hear also what others, including Vic Bridger, might care to offer to this discussion. I look forward to whatever further comments or analysis you might wish to offer.
Wally, I just noted a typographical error in your
email from earlier today:
"...the consumer is charged, properly, with capital
appreciation while, quite improperly, not credited
with capital appreciation."
Which I think should read:
"...the consumer is charged, properly, with capital
depreciation while, quite improperly, not credited
with capital appreciation."
This requires explanation and clarification, which
I'll be glad to discuss in further detail on the
Surely we're not referring to capital appreciation in
the ordinary accounting sense, but perhaps in the
sense of the "communal capital" deriving from the
social heritage and increment of association, which
determine in part productive capacity. Making it
possible for the public to more fully draw upon the
communal capital, which is naturally increasing, is
one of the justifications for the national dividend in
its various forms. The analogy is to the corporate
dividend drawing upon the capital of the firm.
The second point I would like to discuss is the
contention that the national dividend (and retail
discount, etc.) would result necessarily in a falling
price level. I do not believe that the falling price
level would be nominal but effective, in terms of
--- Wallace Klinck <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
Thanks for the video Web links below, Connie and
While the videos review, with varying accuracy,
certain important aspects of banking history and
banking procedures, especially in the Canadian
context, they tend to overlook the critical factors
which should be considered in the crafting of a proper
monetary system. By advocating the creation of money
solely by the Bank of Canada they appear to be
promoting a centralized form of credit control which
seems not really that dissimilar to that which was
utilized by both the communist and fascist states--the
central economic policy of which was "full-employment'
as a social policy promoted and/or administered by the
State. The video commentators tend to regard interest
as the central economic evil while completely failing
to deal with the more fundamental error in national
cost accountancy wherein the consumer is charged,
properly, with capital appreciation depreciation while, quite
improperly, not credited with capital appreciation.
This accountancy error is the
primary cause of escalating unrepayable debt, the
elimination of which latter would obviate problems
attributed to interest. Where the consumer is
empowered to liquidate all financial costs of current
production with adequate current financial income,
there is no cost carry-over charges against future
cycles of production. Where no accumulating consumer
debt is necessary the "problem" of interest becomes
non-existent. The remedial measures advocated by the
video presenters stress the need for state control and
issue of credit issued as debt, albeit at low or zero
rates of interest. The important issue, which they
overlook, is the decentralization of credit control
which must properly be achieved through the issue,
from outside the price, or costing, system, of
consumer credits which are not registered as debt
and--which are distributed to all citizens as
consumers as a beneficial share in the communal
capital. Through use of such consumer credit to
compensate prices at point of retail, this would
result in a falling price level and would be in
keeping with the natural law of cost which is the
national ratio of consumption divided by the national
rate of production. A portion of the required
consumer credit issued directly to each citizen as an
addition to income regardless of whether or not the
individual is receiving earned income would recognize
the entitlement of all to an inalienable inheritance
in the Cultural Heritage of mankind--based upon the
reality that labor factors of production are,
relatively, being replaced by non-labor factors.
On 6-Jan-08, at 10:33 PM, Constance Fogal wrote:
Cap_contacts list: For removal send email
CANADIAN ACTION PARTY/PARTI ACTION CANADIENNE
LEADER, CONSTANCE (Connie) FOGAL
Telephone Connie Fogal at: 604 872 2128
----- Forwarded message from Wendy Forrest
Date: Sun, 6 Jan 2008 12:38:47 -0500
From: Wendy Forrest <email@example.com>
Reply-To: Wendy Forrest <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Banking and the Canadian Government -
Woo Hoo: Hooray for Gerald Brutus!
Gerald has done this awesome video on the Bank of
Canada and has just
updated it further. Of course he mentions CAP so
its a great
campaiging. He also includes a bit of Bill Abram
from his wonderful
Crime of the Canadian Banking System. He also has
a plug for Paul
excellent Money as Debt. Please forward widely!
Banking and the Canadian Government
For those of you who haven't seen those other
videos yet -
Part 1 The Crime of the Canadian Banking System
Part 2 The Great Canadian Experiment
Part 3 Gerald G. McGeer: A True Canadian Hero
Money as Debt
Check out the related videos - there's one of me
at Toronto City
the summer regarding the new proposed taxes,
including a municipal
transfer tax. They didn't listen to me, but I
think I had some
the fact that first time buyers are now receiving
provincially as well for all homes, not just new
homes. I guess
Toronto Davenport candidate:
If you don't stand for something, you will fall
for everything -
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful,
committed citizens can
the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever
has - Margaret Mead
----- End forwarded message -----
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.