|
Hi Bill, I will respond in maroon.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2005 1:06 PM
Subject: [socialcredit] Re: in continuing reply to
Jim Schroeder
> Referencing
> http://www.elistas.com/list/socialcredit/archive/index/561/msg/588/> -
>
> [SCHROEDER] The simple point of A+B is
that the loan
> which originates with some capital good is cancelled
> before the cost is ever completely cancelled in the
> consumer
good. Like you state, the average "flux-
> reflux" rate is 3 weeks,
yet some capital, like a
> building, is depreciated over 30 years.
That is the
> crux of A+B, and it has nothing to do with "labour
>
displacement".
> -------------------------
> [REPLY] Then you put
yourself in direct opposition to
> Douglas, who emphasized labor
displacement in almost
> every expression of the
theorem.
(reply): I mentioned the fact
that interest could have a bearing on Douglas' A+B theorem because of the modern
advent of consumer debt, and the fact that this type of debt has flexible
repayment schedules. I certainly don't think interest has ANYTHING to do
with A+B itself.
However; labour displacement
does not have anything to do with A+B itself. Labour displacement only
means that B is GROWING relative to A. For A+B to be true, B > 0.
B does not need to be growing relative to A.
I will quote from the "Monopoly of
Credit":
"Although this is an extreme case, the constant,
and in one sense desirable, tendency is for direct charges to decrease and for
indirect charges to increase as a result of the peplacement of human labour by
machinery (in other words B, or indirect charges, will grow
over time). There is no difference between a plant charge of this
nature and a similar sum repaid as a "B" payment. The essential point is
that when a given sum of money leaves the consumer on its journey back to the
point of origin in the bank it is on it's way to extinction. If that
extinction takes place before the extinction of the price value created during
its journey from the bank, then each such operation produces a corresponding
dis-equilibrium between money and prices. (In other
words Bill, the ESSENTIAL point is that money is repaid before the cost which it
created is ultimately cancelled in a consumer good). Parenthesis
added.
Labour displacement makes the B
payments in A+B LARGER, and emphasizes the need for Social Credit to a greater
degree as time passes, but A+B is true without labour displacement. That
is my point!
I will send you a
> copy of his
«Credit-Power and Democracy» in PDF
> format if you do not have it.
In chapter II he
> prefaces the theorem with a discussion of the
>
changing ratio of Atlas' lever. Then closes with
> this
statement:
>
> "At the moment the point to be borne in mind is that
> B is the financial representation of the lever of
> capital, and
is constantly increasing in comparison
> with A..."
> -
>
> [SCHROEDER] I reject the debt virus theory outright.
>
-------------------------
> [REPLY] You reject the term rhetorically but
not the
> essence. You deny Douglas' labor displacement
>
hypothesis and substitute an alternate hypothesis,
> that the higher the
rate of interest the greater is
> the gap between prices and purchasing
power.
> Presumably, at a zero rate of interest there would be
> no gap. Douglas' hypothesis is correct. Yours is
>
pure fallacy.
>
(reply) Your "fallacy"
Bill is to even pretend to have been listening to what I've been saying.
As usual, you "presume" too much. Please show me where I've stated
anything about 0 interest loans. I only mentioned interest rates in
passing in that they might have a bearing on consumer debt, and the rate at
which it is cancelled, and hence; could increase the disequilibrium.
However; it's a MINOR point, but as usual you are trying to "exorcize" this
"monetary reform" demon that never existed. I NEVER said that interest was
in any way involved in Douglas' A+B theorem.
What I stated is that the
theorem depends on two primary hypothesis:
1) There are two types of
costs : a) consumer costs which are cancelled upon sale, and b) capital costs
which are carried forward upon sale
2) There is a double circuit of
money.
With those two primary
hypothesis, A+B is understood that when the loan which created a cost is
cancelled before the final cost that it created can be cancelled in a consumer
good, then there is a disequilibrium between money and prices.
That is the crux of A+B.
And it has to do with the two primary hypothesis I outlined. Labour
displacement only makes it "worse", but is not NECESSARY in order for A+B to be
true, nor is it necessary in order to understand A+B.
> Schroeder: "My point was that increasing interest
> rates
can cause consumer debt to be cancelled (i.e.
> the principal cancelled)
at a faster rate."
>
> Yes, your point, not Douglas' point.
>
-
(reply) I said it was my point and not
Douglas' point. And it's not a point that is in anyway tied to the A+B
theorem.
Jim
| 
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message
