| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] RE: The "Binary" Con-Job: reply to Tim | | Date: | Monday, April 11, 2005 10:17:44 (-0700) | | From: | William B. Ryan <w_b_ryan @.....com>
|
| In reply to: | Message 876 (written by Timothy Carpenter) |
"...if you think a company can wait months to reclaim
the discount while it is paying suppliers then the
companies you have worked for are high margin and
certainly contributing to the gap! :-). Compensation
needs to be performed at worst monthly, if not
immediately, the latter requiring an equivalent to
the electronic mechanism I suggested."
------------------------
-------------------------
Tim, we never got to the stage in our extrapolation
of A+B where we would have discussed the rudiments of
accounting, since you refused to do the homework that
I suggested.
Accrual accounting is not cash accounting.
In Texas, for example, the Comptroller of Public
Accounts collects the retail sales tax weekly,
monthly, or even yearly from some businesses,
depending on the volume of sales subject to tax at
the particular business.
In each case, the business (if it's run in a
business-like manner) would carry the tax obligation
on its books as an accruing liability. In other
words, its profit or loss minute-by-minute (or
accounting period to accounting period) is not
affected by when the tax is actually collected or
when it is required to be remitted.
In the case of the Social Credit compensation from
the National Credit Account, it would be carried on
the firm's books as an accruing asset.
Incidentally, most suppliers I have dealt with are
paid on ten, thirty, sixty, ninety and even one
hundred eighty day invoices, depending on the
particular arrangement. Longer term financing is
available from other sources, including the firm's
proprietors.
We live in a creditary (that is to say, contractual)
world, Tim.
As to "high margin" business contributing to the
"gap," that is complete nonsense. The assertion
merely indicates you still don't have the slightest
understanding what the theorem is about.
If you would do your homework, perhaps you could
learn.
Introductory materials are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
Please read through them.
If you have questions, get back to me.
-
--- Timothy Carpenter <timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Vic,
>
> I was about to argue that collection would be
> difficult and invasive as
> Keith suggests, but I decided to be positive and
> look for a solution to
> resolve the issue, and it could be a voluntary
> carrot-stick mechanism - who
> would want to remain outside the discount?
>
> However, if you think a company can wait months to
> reclaim the discount
> while it is paying suppliers then the companies you
> have worked for are high
> margin and certainly contributing to the gap! :-).
> Compensation needs to be
> performed at worst monthly, if not immediately, the
> latter requiring an
> equivalent to the electronic mechanism I suggested.
>
> Tim
>
> On 11/4/05 6:55 am, "Vic Bridger"
> <socred@ecn.net.au> wrote:
>
> > Thanks Bill for your comment.
> > I have answered the question many times and have
> lost track. I keep myself
> > occupied in doing accounts for a couple of
> companies and one of the jobs I
> > have is to prepare a Business Activity Statement.
> This BAS is a record of
> > all of the transactions of a business for a three
> month period. It requires
> > details of total sales on which a Goods and
> Services Tax of 10% is payable
> > to the Government. It also records expenditures
> made on purchases and other
> > items on which GST has been paid. the total amount
> is subject to a 10%
> > refund. In addition there is a Pay (Wages)
> withholding tax of which 10% has
> > to be paid to the Government. The net amount
> calculated is the payment made
> > to the Government for the GST payment for the
> three month period.
> >
> > The suggestion made below is too silly for words
> and the application of a
> > Compensated Price discount (not a subsidy - there
> is a difference) would be
> > no more difficult than what already exists. In
> fact it would be simpler.
> > I could provide details of my career and the
> various companies and
> > government projects that I was involved in but do
> not consider this to be
> > relevant to Social Credit discussions. However, I
> guess there is nothing
> > wrong in blowing your own trumpet.
> > Vic Bridger
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
> > To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>;
> <ownership@cog.kent.edu>;
> > <austrianschoolofeconomics@yahoogroups.com>;
> <ijccr@yahoogroups.com>;
> > <distributism@yahoogroups.com>
> > Cc: <james@jamesrobertson.com>;
> <robert-a@clear.net.nz>; "Henry. Raynel"
> > <henry.raynel@actrix.gen.nz>;
> <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz>
> > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 9:52 PM
> > Subject: [socialcredit] RE: The "Binary" Con-Job:
> >
> >
> >> ...One of those is the absurd notion that the
> billion
> >> dollar a day retail industries would be amenable
> to
> >> supplying their thousands of cash register
> ribbons or
> >> computer discs to a state department every day so
> >> that their bank accounts could be credited with
> the
> >> right amounts of Just Price Discount for their
> 10,000
> >> different items, none of which now in advanced
> >> countries like N.Z. have a single national price
> for
> >> any product or service.
> >> -------------------------
> >> --------------------------
> >>
> >> The 'retail discount price compensation' is
> >> simplicity itself: It would work exactly like a
> >> sales tax in reverse. It is simply a percentage
> of
> >> the individual retailer's gross sales paid to the
> >> credit of the individual retailer. It doesn't
> matter
> >> what his individual prices are or how they
> compare to
> >> those of other retailers. It doesn't matter what
> his
> >> individual profit margin is as compared to others
> in
> >> his line of business--or even if he is making a
> >> profit. If he has sales he gets the credit as a
> >> straight percentage.
> >>
> >> I saw in your newsletter where you made this same
> >> point before. I thought it was answered then. I
> >> think I remember Vic Bridger having answered it.
> >>
> >> Where in the world did you get such a confused
> idea
> >> in the first place?
> >>
> >> And why do you persist with it?
> >> -
> >>
> >>
> >> --- donzbeth@ihug.co.nz wrote:
> >>
> >>> Greetings Rodney, My commendations on your
> replies
> >>> to criticisms like the
> >>> one below.
> >>> You have dealt with the questions in a
> restrained
> >>> and logical way, and I can
> >>> assure you that most readers will recognise the
> >>> validity of your points.
> >>>
> >>> I write as a lifelong supporter of Social Credit
> who
> >>> has also made impacts
> >>> in other directions, such as the presidency of
> the
> >>> collapsing (1972) Social
> >>> Cedit Party (quadrupling its membership, and
> turning
> >>> it into a progressive
> >>> political organization); Chairing and driving
> the
> >>> WEL Energy (Community)
> >>> Trust throughout its 7 year commercial battle
> with
> >>> U.S. based UtiliCorp ,
> >>> finally succeeding in turning the Wel Energy
> >>> Electrical Company from a
> >>> 33% Trust owned, U.S. controlled Public Company
> into
> >>> a 100% Community Trust
> >>> Company, buying Utilicorp right out of the
> Waikato,
> >>> with a negotiated $116
> >>> Million Table Loan which the Company is
> servicing
> >>> and paying off at no cost
> >>> to the community; inventing special purpose
> >>> incubators in the hatchery
> >>> equipment business, and also the patented
> >>> MEASURITE Calibration System,
> >>> which is now internationally protected, ready
> for
> >>> production. And I've been
> >>> in the N.Z. Coy Directors Index for > 40
> years.
> >>>
> >>> With that track record it pains me to see people
> >>> claiming to be experts in
> >>> Social Credit , and using odd sentences which
> >>> conflict with the Douglas
> >>> philosophy to try and justify what can only be
> >>> momentary lapses or
> >>> misinterpretations of his major works which made
> >>> valuable contributions to
> >>> economic knowledge.... At the Bard Conference
> in
> >>> New York last year I told
> >>> Delegates in the de-briefing session that if the
> >>> various independent groups
> >>> of monetary reformers around the world could
> >>> concentrate on their
> >>> overlapping and similar objectives, they would
> >>> become a powerful
> >>> progressive force; instead of continuing as many
> >>> inconsequential clubs,
> >>> separated by technical and mainly irrelevant
> little
> >>> barriers.
> >>>
> >>> While I would rather do more pleasant things, I
> have
> >>> convinced myself that I
> >>> should join your efforts in providing simple
> >>> explanations aimed at burying
>
=== message truncated ===
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new resources site!
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message