<**>This diagnosis, and the next one, should provide
a standard test by which any third world village
idiot will be able to tell who is on the side of the
Angels and who is on the WHIP's payroll.<**>
--------------------
Dammit, Wes, this isn't helpful. The best that I can
tell by digging into this rather lengthy most recent
post of yours (that seems to repeat your previous
posts ad infinitum), is that you are proposing some
kind of tax scheme. But for the life of me I can't
tell what.
Perhaps somebody out there - if not yourself - will
kindly tell us.
--
--------- Original Message ---------
DATE: Sun, 16 Nov 2003 18:35:32 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED],[EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: The wealthy, healthy, Intelligent, and powerful folks,
the WHIPs; who want 100% Capitalism for themselves
and 50% Capitalism = Welfarism for their competitors,
customers, and employees.
Good day folks,
I'll begin this note with Bill Ryan's last message to me,
and then continue with my diagnosis of how Social
Credit relates to the 2916 year old optimum policy
(TOP) as a cure for what ails the US economy.
On Tue, 11 Nov 2003 10:46:06 -0800
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes, in part:
Wes, I've been enduring your stuff for what? - three
years now, and still don't have the slightest idea what
specifically it is you are proposing to do.
Tell us, finally - please please please - in simple
declarative sentences.
Whatever *it* is, you say *it* requires "only one third" as
much "money" to implement. But the social credit
proposals don't require any money at all, just simple
adjustments enabling demand to balance supply as
a matter of accounting.
~~~~~~~~ End Bill Ryan ~~~~~~~~~~
Bill has me at a severe disadvantage. With my 2.5/4.0
grade point average in mechanical engineering; and
expired US patents in electronic circuits, optics, and
distributed analog control systems, I would not know
a "simple declarative sentence" if I stepped in one
while dancing bare foot in the moon light through Pat
Gunning's cow pasture. I have always thought that
my eight figure global model of an industrial economy
at the Website below was simpler and more declarative
than many million of sentences could be. At least for
that majority of Americans who might want a valid
reason to change their minds about the status quo.
But since the figures first became available in digital form
in 1994, only two social scientists on the Internet have
dared to post the global model on their Websites. In 1999,
Derek Darves posted the figures in the freespeech.org
Website just below an article by Noam Chomsky. In
October 2002, W. Curtiss Priest posted the figures to the epie.org
Website, at the URL below, in the midst of all
sorts of socially uplifting articles. The results were the
same in each case. The two posters seemed to have
drained their accumulated "social capital" by the very
act of posting visual-aids on a subject which has
historically been discussed and documented only
with words, whole libraries full of words. From all this,
we should conclude that the Internet, like the print
media, radio, and TV before it, are all designed and
operated by the dominant WHIPs to preserve the
status quo. Nothing has changed since the 1890s,
when the workforce changed its mind about the
"Baker's Dozen," and the status quo continues to
date in the US as shown by the 200 year profile of
the US Consumer Price Index on Fig10b & 10d.
In addition to the 2.3%/year "natural rate of inflation"
the century old status quo in the US is characterized
by three other symptomatic economic defects:
!, Unemployment ranging from 4% to 10%.
2, Periodic injections of new money as shown
on Figures 2-3, 10b, & 10d.
3, A perennial 3% to 5% of GDP shortage of
purchasing power among parenting families.
4, The above mentioned "natural rate of inflation."
Who knows which is the chicken, and which the egg.
I am delighted that the exchange of emails between
Pat Gunning, Wally Klinck, and Bill Ryan, on various
aspects of C. H. Douglas' Social Credit theory, have
lured Ken Palmerton, Scott Horton, and Victor Bridger
out of the closet. A good sized crowd is more likely to
depart from the politically correct status quo than two
recent graduates from Jesuit debating schools. It is
hard to tell whether they are teaching subscribers (to list
social credit) the principle of the "Family Wage" or the
principle of "subsidiarity." Those principles are
mutually exclusive.
The cardinal remedial features of SC, the universal
"Social Dividend" and the "Compensated Price" have
been concisely described by the debate, and each
feature targets a specific structural defect in the US
domestic policy. The A+B theory, on the other hand,
may be brought out of the closet, and concisely
described, if the debate continues for a few more weeks.
Please be patient while I enlist the assistance of Fig4.3
(it will compensate for my lack of verbal skills) to show
how the "Compensated Price" mechanism would
perfectly compensate for the propensity of US WHIPs
to adopt indirect taxes on the production process
instead of direct taxes on their own personal income.
It seems perfectly natural, to me, that folks in the upper
tax brackets would be forever on the lookout for ways
to minimize their income taxes. An obvious way,
while holding the public revenue steady, is to shift the
tax burden to indirect forms of taxation such as Value-
Added taxes, Sales Taxes, and Tariffs. The existing SS
payroll tax goes a long way in that direction. My macro
model of a national economy, Fig4.3.gif, shows the flow
of money from left to right, with a corresponding flow of
material goods and human services from right to left.
The two flows are synchronous, and the ratio of the two
flows defined by each market transaction is the market
price of the goods or services at the time of a specific
transaction. The CPI and PPI are defined by the
aggregate of such market prices.
In the June 15, 2002 revision of the macro model, the
representation of government (and the public revenue
shown as a break in the world market), was moved from
220% to 250% on the real economy scale to 145% to
175% to show the effects of direct and indirect taxation
on the PPI and CPI. Indirect taxes are added to the
market price at each stage of production from the Alpha
point at zero% up to the Omega point at 250% where
point of sales taxes are added.
The above numbers are for the US economy which, like
Japan and Switzerland, has kept indirect taxes down to
the 5% to 10% of GDP range. In Europe, indirect taxes
(Value-Added + Sales taxes) are in the range of 10% to
20% of GDP, with total taxes up to 55% of GDP in Sweden.
And last but not least, the late great USSR included the
30% G&A rate of its capital plant in the government
budget which brought its total tax rate up to 70% to
80% of its GDP. A late 1980s publication of the USSR, celebrating 70
years of Communist government, proudly
put their direct taxes on personal incomes at 8% and
indirect taxes at 92% of GDP. Is it any wonder that so
many American WHIPs sound like socialists when
fiscal policy is being discussed.
So C. H. Douglas' "Compensated Price" would restore
the selling price of goods and services to the natural
market price. That is, the natural market price which
would result if the whole government revenue had
been raised in accord with Adam Smith's First Maxim
of Taxation, Page 777 of TOWN. In other words, "like
the expense of management to the joint owners of a
great estate (or corporation), the expense of government
requires each citizen to contribute in proportion to
the income he enjoys under the protection of the State."
The tabulation on Fig4.3.gif describes "The Optimum
Policy" applied to both the workforce and the capital
plant which includes the land and the environment.
The US capitalizes only 50% of the development
expense of its workforce, and wonders why the
economy is out of balance.
In marked contrast to European nations with high
indirect taxes: Japan, Switzerland, and the USA with
low indirect tax rates would gain only a 5% reduction
of the market price of goods and services by adopting
the first remedial measure of Social Credit. The WHIPs
of Europe may be exacting a larger tribute from their
taxpayers than US WHIPs are exacting from US
taxpayers.
But it is not the indirect taxes and the absence of a "Compensated Price"
mechanism which has subverted
and perverted the US economy since the 1890s. It is the
3% to 5% of GDP shortage of purchasing power
experienced by the lower income half of the workforce,
which shortage is completely invisible in the macro
model, Fig4.3.gif. To diagnose the structural defect in
the US economy, or any other national economy, which
is the root cause of the shortage of purchasing power,
we must look at the micro model of an economy
presented in Fig7-9.gif with more detail presented in
Fig8.1.gif.
The whole subject has a technical complexity
comparable to the old adage, "you can't put 10 pounds
of stuff in a 5 pound bag." And yet, the American
taxpayer has been persuaded for more than a century
that it can be done without making a mess by enforcing
the "principle of subsidiarity." Lets save that diagnosis
for another post, or reread some of my previous posts
which Bill Ryan has been saving for three years. This
diagnosis, and the next one, should provide a standard
test by which any third world village idiot will be able to
tell who is on the side of the Angels and who is on the
WHIP's payroll. The status quo is simply not sustainable,
and the US WHIPs need "The Optimum Policy," not an
enraged US public.
Kind regards,
Wes Burt
To further explore "The Optimum Policy" illustrated
at URL <http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/default.htm>
send a blank e-mail to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
____________________________________________________________
Enter now for a chance to win a 42" Plasma Television!
AOL users go here
This offer applies to U.S. Residents Only
