| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Looking For Info | | Date: | Sunday, January 11, 2009 23:19:12 (-0700) | | From: | Wallace Klinck <wmklinck @....ca>
|
| In reply to: | Message 5890 (written by Per Almgren) |
| Per, Social Credit has no intention of "adjusting to the realities of to-day." The so-called "realities" of the present are the evils which Social Credit aims to eliminate or rectify. Of prime concern is the elimination of both the threat and reality of the Servile State--whether it be fascist, communist, socialist, that of Keynesian debt-finance or any form of totalitarian or semi-totalitarian regime. As Douglas avered, we must build up from the individual and not down from the state. Systems were made for men and not men for systems. Economic policy must originate with individual consumers and not from the state. The ills that Douglas identified have only become more accentuated and more entrenched than when he wrote. Social Credit becomes more applicable with every increase in technological efficiency which displaces labor with technology and hence is even more appropriate than when Douglas began writing on the subject--which became known as Social Credit. I note that you have for some time made submissions to this group. The group exists to study the subject of Douglas Social Credit and anyone who contributes to it should reasonably be expected to have made a sincere and serious effort to read and understand the written works of Douglas and his close supporters. Would you kindly indicate to the group specifically which of those works you have read diligently so that those of the group might be informed as to your qualifications to expound on the subject. I am sure that you will agree that this is a fair request. Sincerely Wally
On 9-Jan-09, at 2:56 PM, Per Almgren wrote: Joe Thomson skrev: (John Rawson wrote:-) Yes, Joe, the money was issued, not lent into circulation. And yes, we did lead the world out of the slump. Along, of course, with Nazi Germany, which used similar methods to build autobahns etc. which unfortunate coincidence gives our opponents a chance to link us further with anti-semitism.
(Joe replies:-) Linking "us further with anti-semitism" would be the least of my concerns over this method of approach, John. You may not be aware of it, but what you are proposing is the building of a totalitarian "slave state", not a one in which "individual" freedom will be allowed to develop and flourish. That the "slaves" will be well fed and quartered, while they're needed, is of little consequence. They're still "slaves", beholden for their continued sustenance to "servitude" to the "State" and the "system" it imposes on them.
In my opinion this writing of "slave state" is not what John describes. My impression now is that there is to much arguing of what Douglas have expressed in a special situation in this list and I think that if Social Credit should be of any use in the future, it must be allowed to adjust to realities of to-day. If no new thinking is accepted, there is not much use to discuss, it would just be a seminar of history, not a forum for promoting useful ideas for practical use in the society. This is the very antithesis of "Social Credit". It is "Fascism" without the more odious facets of that failed system fully revealing themselves. Which they soon would, if ever it were imposed. It is interesting that we have been duped into calling this 'anti-semitism' considering where such a policy likely originated.
This could not be called Fascism in the common meaning of the word. Per Almgren (John continues:-) And, of course, your argument that new money has to be repaid means that any used for the National Dividend etc. would be in the same category, which is ridiculous.
(Joe replies:-) It is "repaid", John. It cancels that portion of /existing/ debt charges that could not otherwise be repaid. Without creating ANOTHER debt charge in the process. It is an "accounting adjustment" carried out in the economy as a whole to more fully allow the overall costs of production to be FINANCIALLY, as well as 'physically', self-liquidating with consumption. (John continues:-) An independent Credit Authority would assess how much new money needed to be put into circulation during the ensuing period without causing demand inflation. What that money was to be used for would be a political decision, even if it only considered a divarication between discount funds and those for a dividend. Or reducing taxation.
(Joe replies:-) I can generally agree with that provided it be realized this "new money" is applied to reducing prices to Consumers FIRST, not to funding other things which have additional "costs".
Regards,
Joe
----- Original Message -----
*From:* John G Rawson <mailto:johngrawson@hotmail.com>
*To:* Socred elistas <mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com>
*Sent:* Thursday, January 08, 2009 1:07 PM
*Subject:* RE: [socialcredit] Looking For Info
For the first parts, you have valid points. I have never debated
whether or not some form of price control might be necessary. But
based on the rather inane information that had previously been
circulated, I could not see how this particular mechanism could be
practicable. Your new information at least clears part of that
objection.
Yes, Joe, the money was issued, not lent into circulation. And
yes, we did lead the world out of the slump. Along, of course,
with Nazi Germany, which used similar methods to build autobahns
etc. which unfortunate coincidence gives our opponents a chance to
link us further with anti-semitism.
And, of course, your argument that new money has to be repaid
means that any used for the National Dividend etc. would be in the
same category, which is ridiculous. An independent Credit
Authority would assess how much new money needed to be put into
circulation during the ensuing period without causing demand
inflation. What that money was to be used for would be a political
decision, even if it only considered a divarication between
discount funds and those for a dividend. Or reducing taxation.
The Ottawa agreement did nothing to increase trade or spending
power. All it did was to close shop against other nations. And
one of its minor sidelines was to force us to buy useless strains
of forest seed from you rather than the USA. The Douglas fir
appeared to have come from somewhere inside the arctic circle,
because the lengtrh of day effect made it bud burst far too early
in the spring so that it got frost-burned in our much milder
climate in the central Nth. Is. Then it hardened off about
Christmas and ceased growing through all the warm summer and
autumn period. I remember a compartment in Kaingaroa Forest
planted with both this strain and a normal one from Washington or
wherever. The boundary looked like a sudden cliff face as the
canopy dropped from one to the other.The only point I was making
over food subsidies was that we had a humanitarian government that
helped both public health and a major industry by the use of
debt-free credit. Rooseveldt's New Deal did something the same
thing on borrowed money. War expenditure finallly brought us right
out, and as a point of interest NZ (with strict import controls)
came out of the war with zero overseas debt. (And a bureaucracy
subsidised less healthy white floured bread, not wholemeal!)
But the government didn't "have to" subsidise food. People were
starving and it used one method to help them. Coming from a
(broke, ex-serviceman's) farm, I never went hungry. But I knew men
my age whose developmenmt was stunted for that reason.
It seems we may have to revisit times like that before enough
people will again consider monetary reform. in any shape, SC or other.
John R.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendiumYou're subscribed to this list with the email wmklinck@shaw.ca For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message