----- Original Message -----
From: John Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: John Hermann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, 25 December 1999 2:41 PM
Subject: Our dead end monetary system


> Economic Reform Australia
> ERA EMAIL NETWORK
>
> Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999
> From: Ed Deak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Our dead end monetary system, was "Bluecollar economics"
>
> It is rewarding to see that more and more people are beginning to realize
> that unless the present monetary system is changed the world will continue
> to go hell in a handbasket. Perhaps not the most appropriate thing to say
in
> this holiday season, but also perhaps it is the time to reflect on the
facts
> of life to make it possible to expand the holiday seasons and make the
world
> a more hopeful place for our endangered specie of humanity........
>
> I wrote the enclosed posting 3 years ago to another list and it seems to
me
> that the main point that I made was even then the danger caused by an
> outdated and totally corrupt monetary system that could indeed kill
whatever
> civilization we may have left. I have outlined the points I made on the
> subject of the monetary system.
>
> I would also take this opportunity to wish all of you a very happy holiday
> season and a successfully subversive new year. Especially the latter. If
the
> human race doesn't succeed in pulling itself up by it's bootstrings now,
in
> the near future, it never will.
>
> With all the very best from the snowcovered forests of British Columbia.
> Cheers, Ed  (Ed Deak, Big Lake, BC, Canada)
>
> Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Ed Deak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Bluecollar economics
>
> Dear Friends,
>
> Well, we might as well start the new year off with a bang............
> Many years ago a British politician said: "War is too important to be left
> to generals" He was correct. However, generals are not the creators, only
> the executors of economic theories, which have always included wars. Only,
> today we call them "competition" to obfuscate the smell of rot and blood.
>
> Economic theories kill more people than wars, therefore economics is also
> far too important to be left to those who claim to be economists. If
falling
> bridges and crashing airliners would kill 10% of people killed by economic
> theories, all engineering faculties and practitioners would be padlocked.
>
> Economists may be "attempting" to lower costs, but they fail miserably,
> because the models they use are worthless hallucinations. In the 25 plus
> years since I started looking at costs to survive as an independent
> manufacturer, I don't know of a single economic theory in practice that
had,
> or could have reduced, costs. Automation, mass production, hi-tech, free
> trade, globalization are all attempts that failed and instead of lowering
> are raising costs, creating inflation and misery.
>
> Can anybody name a single idea, in a Canadian context, by economists like
> John Crispo, Alan Rugman, Syvia Ostrey, Michael Walker, Arnold Block, Herb
> Grubel, etc.etc. that had increased living standards and cut costs? Where
> are the lower costs? Why did our living costs double in the 7 years since
> the FTA and so on?
>
> The presently ruling dictatorial economic systems, like the idiot twins of
> capitalism and communism, are nothing but bullshit and econometrics are
the
> decorations carved on them by those cute yellow flies.
>
> A lot of interesting thoughts came on the list since the debate on
> "Materialism" started, yet, I am surprised that nobody came up with the
> obvious: All the debate was over EFFECTS, BUT NOT THE CAUSE that created
and
> creates them.
>
> The GDP, GNP, consumerism, materialism, environmental and human damage,
> etc.etc. are all effects of a simplistic ideological theory. It is neither
a
> science, or economics, but a nightmare of unsupportable rationalizations
> that grew like cancers from single cells. We can't cure the sick body by
> trying to minimize the effects. The only solution is an operation to
remove
> the cancerous cells, before they spread over the whole body. There are no
> compromises.
>
> Like cancer, one of the fastest growth systems, the need for constant
> expansion, or "growth", demanded by sick theories are the usual,
historical
> acts of desperation by inefficient demagogues trying to survive for
another
> day.
>
> In effect, this growth mania and it's phoney reporting mechanisms, the GDP
> and GNP, are nothing more than the classic, traditional pyramid schemes
that
> depend on wider and wider exploitation, before their inevitable collapse.
>
> No warring (competitive) society, or ruling system can survive
> indefinitely. If anybody disagrees, please show me where they are?
>
> Where are the great warrior societies of the Avars, Kuns, Egyptians,
> Macedonians and a thousand more?
>
> The Athenians fought themselves into slavery and extinction, but at least
> they left us a few buildings and great traditions in art and philosophy.
The
> only thing left of the mightiest warriors, the Spartans, is a tablet at
> Thermopylae, where the Persians of Xerxes slaughtered them on their own
way
> to oblivion. Who was King Arthur and where was Camelot? Who and what were
> Attila's Huns? Nobody knows. The Vikings are now making butter cookies. My
> Magyar ancestors have raided on horseback as far as Spain until only seven
> survivors were sent home with their ears and noses cut off, after the
battle
> of Augsburg in 955. Where is the mighty Mongol empire and so on and on,
> endlessly throughout the ages?
>
> They all gather at the same place where today's "competitive" money
> markets, the Dow Jones, Hang Seng and the commodity futures of Chicago are
> heading for: In the garbage heap of history.
>
>
===========================================================================
>
> Our environmental and human degradations are caused by the inflation of
> the money supply. We are in a major, uncontrolled, devastating and
> unreported inflation, because the statistics and the reporting systems do
> not exist to measure the worst kind: That of monetary capital.
>
> The profit and interest demands of the present system cause gross
> inefficiency, causing environmental and human destruction. As I have
written
> many times before: By far the major cause of deforestation and resource
> depletion are not caused by human needs, but by the demands of artificial
> capital. As the investment capital grows, so does the damage. Again,
there's
> no escape, or compromises.
>
> Sustainability is an impossibility, when the banks of the world can churn
> out endless capital and the corporations endless numbers of artificial
> people in the form of shares. How can living people resists the
> psychological warfare of constant brainwash and propaganda to widen the
base
> of this pyramid fraud?
>
> Nobody in their right mind would wish to go back to gold standards, but at
> least they had some form of braking, balancing and limiting effect on
> capital creation, which is now out of control. Yet, until some form of a
> braking system reinstated, all talk of sustainability is useless.
>
===========================================================================
>
> From the point of efficiency: The vast majority of the fuel used by the
> present, outdated engine of economics is not to create useful work, but to
> drive the engine (in this case the corporate system) itself. Through
> uncontrolled capital creation this inefficiency grows by the minute,
> creating more devastation. Look at the balance sheets of corporate
systems.
> The bigger they grow, the more investments and profits they have, the more
> inefficient and the more burden on the real economy they are. It is all
> there in the reports, visible and obvious.
>
> The Genuine Progress Indicator, quoted by Maureen Hart in her Dec. 29
> posting, at least makes an attempt to identify the present money creating
> system as the culprit. I've never heard of it either, but it makes more
> sense than what I read from "noted" and "respected" economists and
> "prestigious economic thinktanks". (Who is the higher ranking the "noted",
> or the "respected"?)
>
> The most important steps for economic overhaul should be:
>
> 1. The realization that the present corporate and monetary systems have
> outgrown their usefulness and are becoming a gilded form of communism
> through the corruption by ultimate power.
>
> 2.a. The removal of the rights of money creation from the banks and from
> any self interest group, and placing it under strict public control under
> international agreements, checks and safetyguards. (The standard argument
> against government, or public control of the money supply is that it would
> lead to uncontrolled money creation, inflation and spending spree. Well,
we
> have it now. Money is a license, sanctified by governments for energy
> control. It is now out of control and the public has no right to ask what
is
> going on?)
>
> b. The replacement of the GNP and GDP with something that measures real,
> not fictional, values based on physical efficiency. A GDP without emphasis
> on human and ecological interests, i.e. employment, health and social
> services and environmental protection is a worthless lie, as it is now.
>
> At this time money can not be created to employ, educate, heal, or to make
> people useful and to prevent environmental damage, as there's no profit
> in it. Therefore the creation of money for the most important things is
> calculated as a "liability", whereas the damage causing part is an
"asset"?
> Here's the creation of sows' ears out of silk purses and it is being
taught
> as economics at universities.  Some of the textbooks remind me of the Mad
> Hatter's tea party.
>
> c. Strict public controls over tax deductible expenses by businesses,
> which at present encourage unemployment, pollution and waste. I.e. we need
> capital investment based on X number of employees, so we won't get this
> irresponsible $2-3 million and more investment per worker, bleeding the
> world dry.
>
> d. Controls over the spread of income between the highest and lowest paid
> employees. I believe some classic theorists have set this at 10 times,
which
> sounds much better than the present unlimited payments.
>
> Here we have the Royal Bank of Canada, multiplying it's profits and
> layoffs every year. The average employee gets $21,000/year and pays taxes,
> the CEO gets $2.3 million and doesn't. His excuse is that in the USA he
> could make more. Well, goodbye Charlie who the hell needs you? Anybody who
> can't make it on $200,000/year belongs in an insane asylum anyway.
>
> 3. New standards to calculate inflation. For example: A working shirt
> costs $10. and should last 2 years. Lately, through "globalization" the
> buyers have no protection, no choice, no "caveat emptor" possibilities in
> any sector, because we no longer have any of the standards we used to have
> under national economics.
> Now shirts may last only 1 year, while dyeing and ruining a washer full of
> clothes, or just a few months. This is unreported inflation, because a
> product that used to cost $10. now costs $20. or $40. through limited use.
> But this inflated waste jacks up the GDP, so everything is OK ?
>
> "Some" economists do not realize that when we cut the quality of inputs
> into certain products by 5% or 10%, it may be reported as "cost cuts", but
we
> may cut the life expectancy, or usefulness of the product by 50%, or more,
> which is unreported, huge inflation, waste, stress on the public, etc.,
but
> also it also pops up the GDP. Makes sense to anybody?
>
> Right now the Pacific Northwest is recovering from a large blizzard.
> Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of cars and boats have been
destroyed
> by collapsing carports and boathouses. For a small fraction of the
original
> building costs many of those sheds could have been built to survive very
> easily, but the money machine prevented it, again taught as "good
economics".
> We watched on TV as a carport collapsed over a new car and driver in
> Seattle, for the sake of 1 or 2 pieces, of $2. 2x4-s. Again a great jump
in
> the GDP, but at what real cost? If this is not real inflation, what is the
> "scientific" name for it?
>
> I could go on with such examples forever, each of them more stupid than
> the previous one, but for now I'll just wish all of you a very happy and
> positive New Year and a toast for the reawakening of the human spirit.
Come
> to think of it, it is coming along very well by many contributors to this
> list.
>
> Ed  (Ed Deak, Big Lake, B.C. Canada)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion.

To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe

For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
For archives
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]

Reply via email to