|
Message 5343
|
|
< Previous | Next >
|
|
|
| Subject: | RE: [socialcredit] Re: John Rawson's question | | Date: | Monday, March 31, 2008 21:21:30 (+0000) | | From: | John G Rawson <johngrawson @.......com>
|
Hi Joe.
We had some very good well-intentioned people with us in the other parties in the Alliance. But most were hard-line socialists who became upset if we tried to point out that banks create money, let alone look at anything constructive.
From what I have read recently about Alberta, I suspect it all happened too quickly to people who hadn't thought out what they hoped to do. They then grasped at sideline straws, just as this correspondence seems to be doing in another phase.
Regards.
John R.
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 08:16:16 -0800
From: thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: [socialcredit] Re: John Rawson's question
(John Rawson wrote:-) All very interesting, but ... question! If you don't have a Socred party in Parliament, who do you think is going to do this??
It's hard enough to get our own people to understand what we want to do. Try it with a bunch of reds, blues and greens!
(Joe replies:-) Well, I think you've answered your own question, John. "It's hard enough to get our own people to understand what we want to do."
Is that going to be any "easier" when they have seats in Parliament?
It wasn't here. I don't completely discount the idea that 'social credit' could be advanced that way, through a political party of that name, though there are many obvious disadvantages, too.
But to do so it seems to me there'd have to be a great deal of unity as to just what the real objective is you're trying to achieve. And that's what's lacking. Not only in "Social Credit" Parties, where they're still in existence, but in the whole worldwide Social Credit 'movement', (such as it presently exists).
It seems to me that there are a whole bunch of very well intentioned people who know there is something wrong, that it's "financial" in nature, and that it's getting worse. And that we need to "fix" it. Soon.
But that's where the process of rectification presently stops. And begins to diverge into all the wild and wooly prescriptions, to do just "what" I'm not altogether sure, that we've often witnessed on here.
Douglas told us that it's not difficult to design a "mechanism" to do whatever it is we want to do. But first of all we have to KNOW just what it is we want to do. Do we? And if we don't, isn't that the thing we should try to determine FIRST? For if that can't be done, then just what else can?
Regards,
Joe
Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:36:21 -0800
From: thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Re: [chdouglas] Re: I await youranswerstomyquestions (was: Re: Public-spirited Banking
Hello Per,
Thanks for your response and comments. I believe one of the main problems with LETS schemes, aside from gaining a universal enough 'acceptance' for the 'local' currency, lies in the area of accounting itself.
In many of them, it seems to me, it doesn't represent 'facts' properly. That's not to say that 'regular' money accounting is perfect in that respect either, especially in the larger sense. But at least there is a closer reflection of some of the realities in it that LETS scheme advocates seem to (want to?) overlook.
If it were necessary, as it clearly was in the Canadian Province of Alberta in the 1930's, to get something which functioned as 'money' to overcome a situation where regular money (credit) from the Banks was no longer available, Douglas described how such a 'local' (Provincial) currency scheme might be implemented.
Which could have quite easily co-existed with regular Canadian money, and would have done much to ease the problems then facing that Province's citizens. But what Douglas proposed back then WAS based on sound accounting principles coupled with a realistic conception of what needed to be done at that time. Unfortunately, his advice was either not well understood, or purposefully ignored by those in a position to follow it, or who hoped to accomplish some other purpose.
LETS schemes, in contrast to Douglas's ideas, seem to me to be designed with the idea that the creation of "work", whether it be in any ways useful to anyone or not, is the ultimate goal desired. "That no man should eat, (even if there's more than enough to feed him), unless he first works." In this, in my opinion, they merely perpetuate, and complicate, notions that are long outdated in any modern, productive society.
Regards,
Joe
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2008 6:45 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Re: [chdouglas] Re: I await youranswerstomyquestions (was: Re: Public-spirited Banking
Joe Thomson skrev:
Hello Martin,
That sounds very much like the "LETS" scheme that was promoted quite
actively in our area, (Comox Valley region of BC's Vancouver Island), a
number of years ago. One of the bright lights behind it then was a fellow
by the name of Michael Linton, who subsequently ran for Mayor of Courtenay,
was defeated, and moved on. While it was in vogue, the idea achieved
enough publicity for the Seattle, Washington PBS TV station to send a film
crew up here and do a documentary on it.
Despite all the favourable publicity, it very quickly petered out, though.
Eventually the only participants left in it were largely those who really
had little or nothing anyone else would normally be interested in
purchasing, including their labour. Either with ''Green dollars", or
Canadian currency.
A few service providers, as I recall, one local optometrist was one of the
strongest backers, might have been able to benefit somewhat 'under the
table', but the vast majority of 'mainstream' businesses took a look and
said, "No thanks."
These type of schemes might stand more of a chance of success in some area
where poverty is more universalized, and there is way less dependence on out
of area providers of things like electricity, and fuel, telephone, etc.,
which couldn't be paid for in the alternate currency. In our own case, in
the business we're in, it would've been completely unworkable the way it was
here. And I think that was the case with most other firms who examined its
prospects, too.
I believe, myself, that one of the greatest obstacles to SC progress is that
there has never been a clear conception of exactly just what it is we're
really trying to do. One that everyone can agree on. Once, (if ever!),
that's achieved we might be able to effectively utilize the "increment of
association" to far better advantage.
Regards,
Joe
There is ways to create "extra" money outside the banking system but it needs cooperation
among part of the businesses in the area. You can use the ordinary money as a base for it. Then
it would be easier to handle "export" and "import". Another but similar way is to copy the
"Chiemgauer-money" in Germany, it is now expanding quite fast, there are people in 32 cities that plans to
copy it. Yearly turnover is about 2 million Euro but it is quickly rising. The idea is basically the same as
Gesell presented for more than 100 years ago, and turned out to be very succesful in the small town
of Wörgl in Austria in the beginning of the thirties, before the Central bank managed to stop it.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiemgauer
Per Almgren
----- Original Message -----
From: "Martin Hattersley" <jmartinh@shaw.ca>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 11:26 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Re: [chdouglas] Re: I await your
answerstomyquestions (was: Re: Public-spirited Banking (was: Re:
TheAbolitionofInterest on Loans))
Hi, Joe
I sympathize with your wish to find a way to "break through".
I wonder whether one way is to forget about political action altogether,
at
least for a time, and create some viable alternative currency scheme. I
see
there's a group promoting "Calgary Dollars" (www.calgarydollars.ca) which
might be worth a look. Once people understand that money doesn't have to
come from bank loans, we could be on our way.
Martin Hattersley, 5929-189 St.,
EDMONTON AB CANADA T6M 2J1
Phone & Fax: (780) 483-5442
e-mail <jmartinh@shaw.ca>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Thomson" <thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 10:38 AM
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Re: [chdouglas] Re: I await your answers
tomyquestions (was: Re: Public-spirited Banking (was: Re: The
AbolitionofInterest on Loans))
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 thomsonhiyu@shaw.ca
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger |
|
RE: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
