| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] In continuing reply to Jessop Sutton -- and back to Bill | | Date: | Wednesday, April 20, 2005 08:36:57 (+0200) | | From: | Jessop Sutton <sutton @...........za>
|
Bill says:
> It is a statistical concept relating to the economy
> as a whole.
I said:
" It will have increased the volume of money in general circulation: I will
have really created some money. (But of course, there is no knowing what
effect it would have on the economy generally if I was to continue creating
money without it ever being detected! I imagine that in the process of
controlling the money supply, the Reserve Bank would eventually have to build
more and more warehouses to contain the notes it withdraws from circulation
in exchange for government bonds!)" (Go back to my original e-mail.)
It should be clear that I have gone beyond Jim's $1000 and am pushing the
process to the limits of it's absurdity. That is exactly how our monetary
system would deal with significant sums of new money coming in by a way other
than the normal banking borrow/repay system.
I think Bill is saying the same thing.
Jessop.
=============================
On Monday 18 Apr 2005 6:48 pm, William B. Ryan wrote:
> "Jim, When your bank grants you an overdraft facility
> of $1000, you can draw on it in cash which comes out
> of the cash in general circulation outside of the
> statutory (fractional) reserve held at the Reserve
> Bank."
> ----------------
> -----------------
>
> No, it does not come out of general circulation. The
> general theorem, from Douglas's third book, *Social
> Credit,* is: Loans create deposits; the repayment of
> loans cancel deposits.
> http://www.mondopolitico.com/library/socialcredit/socialcredit.htm
>
> It is a statistical concept relating to the economy
> as a whole.
>
> By the way, Post Keynesianism, founded by Professor
> Paul Davidson, editor of the Journal of Post
> Keynesian Economics, acknowledges the validity of the
> theorem.
> -
>
> "Incidentally, you say 'The essence of the fraud is
> the claim that the money that they create is their
> own money'. Where is the fraud since the bank hasn't
> actually 'created' anything?"
> ----------------
> -----------------
>
> If you would actually read Douglas, rather than
> merely pontificate about him and his theory, you
> would find the answer to your question. Perhaps you
> will not agree with the answer, but that's another
> matter:
>
> From Douglas's evidence before the Alberta
> legislature, 1934:
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/douglas-alberta-1934.txt
>
> :-
>
> "...Now that was, of course, originally--and I say
> this quite dispassionately because it is working to
> the end of a practical result which is important--
> that was a system which originated in fraud; it was a
> system which originated by the issue of more receipts
> than there were gold coins, on the assumption, which
> was generally true, that all the receipts would not
> be presented at once for honouring. So long as the
> actual gold behind those deposits was not all drawn
> at once, it was working perfectly successfully or
> fairly successfully for quite a long time.
>
> "It didn't work when everybody exercised his legal
> right to draw this gold; but it became so recognized
> that it became the basis of banking and it is now,
> and although there has been in the past few years a
> good deal of discussion about the matter, the subject
> is now a dead issue. There is no question at all
> about it that a right has been assumed by slow
> process (which I have been endeavouring to sketch),
> on the part of the banking system actually to issue
> new purchasing power by the process of issuing more
> receipts for wealth than the bank possesses the basis
> for.
>
> "Now the question is that since that system up to
> certain point works, what is the basis on which these
> additional receipts are issued? There is no question
> at all, none whatever, that the basis on which those
> receipts are issued is the general wealth of the
> community, and they are issues of receipts, or
> demands if you like, for payment by the general
> community, of real wealth, which demands only have
> value because of the existence of this real wealth.
> The real wealth does not belong to the people who
> issue the receipts, although the receipts are issued
> as the property of the issuers and not as the
> property of the owners of the real wealth for which
> they are a demand.
>
> "I hope you have grasped that because it lies at the
> bottom of the soundness of any radical amelioration
> of the existing financial system."
>
> :-
>
> Jessop, we've made other materials available at
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
>
> Please take a look at them.
> -
>
> Vic [Bridger] says: "The financial and banking powers
> ARE against the introduction of Social Credit which
> would reduce or even eliminate their power base.
> There is sufficient evidence to substantiate this."
>
> Jessop: Could you cite some?
> ----------------
> -----------------
>
> Well, for example, the official website of the Dallas
> Fed,
> Public Affairs Department
> Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas
> P.O. Box 655906
> Dallas, TX 75265-5906
> http://www.dallasfed.org/research/ei/ei9601.html
>
> under various loaded headings like:
>
> "Rediscovering the Value of Honest Money";
> "Honest Money";
> "Examining the Moral Dimensions of Monetary Policy"
>
> we find this exact quote:
>
> "Before the turn of this [the twentieth] century, an
> entire generation of preachers and ministers
> concluded that a moral monetary policy was an easy-
> money policy. 'Give the people more money and
> credit,' was the cry of the populist ministers. 'Down
> with gold, up with silver.' They mistakenly believed
> that the Treasury's printing press was the key to
> earthly salvation.
>
> "Even as late as the 1940s, this ideology is evident
> in film. As much as I love the Christmas classic,
> It's a Wonderful Life, a careful viewer can detect
> its social credit homiletics..."
>
> :-
>
> Now, if that is not anti-Social Credit propaganda
> emanating from the epicenter of banking, I don't know
> what could be.
>
> Perhaps not so coincidentally, the date on this Fed
> propaganda corresponds to the date of publication of
> the self-styled "Austrian" economist Gary North's
> http://freebooks.entrewave.com/freebooks/docs/2166_47e.htm
> anti-Social Credit screed: *Salvation Through
> Inflation," on the identical theme. In my mind, a
> coordinated effort cannot automatically be
> discounted. Of course, that IS my "conspiracy
> theorist" self talking.
> -
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Plan great trips with Yahoo! Travel: Now over 17,000 guides!
> http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> You're subscribed to this list with the email sutton@kingsley.co.za
> To unsubscribe, send a message to
> socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message