The term itself was the title of a book by Houston
plastic surgeon Jacques Jaikaran. It is the theory
that interest is the cause of the disparity between
prices and purchasing power. The advocates of the
theory argue that banks should be prohibited from
creating money, but should only
---The fact that I receive an interest payment for
depositing money that has already been CREATED is of
no importance to Social Credit. ---
It is of no importance to the understanding of
reality. When you look at the sequence of individual
transactions like you do here you miss the
Bill,
I am not sure to whom this posting is directed.
It was in reply to Joe.
--
I have never said that Douglas stated that interest
or bank financing should be abolished. My posting the
Douglas quotes was to show that Douglas recognised:
(a) That the deficiency in
Dear Douglas interested folk,
I, as a member of the Topica Social Credit list,
will send this message only once.
---
1. The teachings of Douglas are already diffuse and
difficult to comprehend.
---
[reply] Be that as it may, we are trying to
[Wally] I think you will find that it is faithful to
Douglas's ideas but presented in a more direct style
intended to clarify various aspects for the average
reader.
I do not believe it is faithful to Douglas's ideas at
all. The 1935 essay was much better than the one
--
- Forwarded Message -
DATE: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 10:04:45
From: "Gunnar Tomasson" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Dear Michael:
First, let me note Krehm underscores the point which I raised at the outset of exchanges with Rodney Shakespeare on Gang8 some months
--
- Forwarded Message -
DATE: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 11:33:21
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: In a message dated 7/11/03 10:05:46 AM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Dear Michael: First, let me note Krehm underscores the point which I raised at
It appears you are not comatose.
--
- Original Message -
DATE: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 20:59:40
From: Keith Wilde [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Michael,
Did you read the two-part critique of binary ecoonomics posted yesterday by Bill Ryan before writing this? If
Victor, the attachment didn't come through. I think
it is because of limitations with the Topica server.
It does not archive attachments, sometimes it won't
transmit them.
If you will send it to me at this address I'll convert
to to plain text and forward it to the list.
Bill
--
-
This is the sort of stuff you get withoutmoderation. This was forwarded to me by thePost Keynesian list which is normallymoderated. The moderator apparentlywent unconscious and let this one through.Or perhaps he clicked the wrong button. Itis obviously mass email spam.--
- Forwarded
Cambell, this discussion does very much relate to
social credit, for a number of reasons, as I informed
you off list.
I am trying to separate the cult-like accretions to
social credit from the substance of the Douglas
message. It is my contention that much if not most
of what many of those
These are good questions. I have inserted some
brief comments below [comment]
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 14:42:44 -
From: Bernard Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [LibDem_SocialCredit] What If?
If under social credit government makes up the
shortfall in demand for home produced products
- Forwarded Message -
DATE: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 18:58 +0
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ken Palmerton)
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dear Bill.
Greetings. Forgive me, but your name is new to me. But you have asked me to
comment, which I would like to on this and subsequent
Replies inserted [in reply]
--
Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 13:44:44 +0100 (BST)
From: Bernard Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At the very least the credits must have limited
negotiability in terms of foreign content.
How on earth do you propose this should be brought
about?
--
[in
-- Bill, didn't the Aberhart government try to have
a 'ticket system' similar to what you're describing?
Wasn't there some problems with its acceptance by
merchants?
--
The Social Credit government issued stamp scrip notes
called Prosperity Certificates. See the attached
photocopy
Brief replies inserted [reply 08-01-03] below:
--
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2003 04:25:17 +0100 (BST)
From: Bernard Daly [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: What If?--Paine, George and Douglas.
What interference? You receive a ticket that admits
you to a specific performance at a specific theater.
I would like to hear more about the proposed voucher
system. Of course, if the banks will not accept them
for deposit and the government is prohibited by the
federal authorities from accepting them for taxes,
there will be problems of acceptability. If the
banks will not go along with the
(James K. of UT is the son of John Kenneth, originally
from Ontario.)
The first real chance to field test the social credit
idea in the United States since the Great Depression
will be to cover the looming Social Security and
Medicare deficits projected for coming years. Since
the current
...our democratic political process has not been able
to correct the 3% of GDP shortage of purchasing
power, the 2.3%/year natural rate of inflation, and
the 4% to 10% unemployment rates which the US economy
has suffered for more than a century.
-
These percentages
In the attempt to understand what the cartalists
(Mosler) are trying to say, I've appended a stylized
diagram depicting the macro economy from the
creditary perspective. T1 represents the period of
credit expansion; T2 the period of steady state; and
T3 the period of contraction.
I believe you subscribed by clicking the link. I
apologize if the invitation was deceptive. I never
actually read it. It was generated automatically by
Topica. You can unsubscribe just as easily, by
clicking the unsubscribe link at the bottom of every
list message.
Some introductory
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2003 09:18:05 -0500
From: Wray, Randall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: still on Question 2
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED],
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
bill
you still are not getting it.
the fed and treas adopt operating procedures to
ensure:
a)
***To force the rate downward, it sells securities.
To force it upwards, it purchases securities (mostly
derivatives like repos and swaps).***
Actually--that's just backwards. To force the rate
down, it purchases. To force it up, it sells.
--
- Original Message -
DATE:
bill
1. independence of the fed boils down to setting fed
funds rate, that is all. the first time it bounces a
treasury check, greenspan co. will be out.
--
Reply: Treasury never forces the issue. It always
covers the checks it writes completely from
The text below is forwarded from Vic Bridger.
I have found that Topica is somewhat quirky and
inconsistent in posting or forwarding messages.
About two weeks ago, I myself suddenly stopped
receiving messages from Topica to my mail.com
accounts: [EMAIL PROTECTED] and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
The conspiracy theory thing relates to your claim
that the committee was putting on a dog and pony
show. The committee members were in on the joke
except Sanders and Paul and the rest of congress and
the fed and the public and Greenspan, who is out of
the loop. But in on the joke are the
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2003 12:33:24 -0500
From: Wray, Randall [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: please elaborate
bill
ok i can see we've taken this as far as it can go. i did provide references to
articles you can look up if you desire.
randy
--
***see recent jpke article by bell and wray for
Douglas certainly wasn't the first to observe that
loans create deposits, though he did much to promote
the concept among his contemporaries. The math by
the way is from Douglas not me. Most economists--
especially those who call themselves Post
Keynesian, now accept the concept.
A single
Modern economies are *creditary* not *monetary*.
What we call money is merely some arbitrarily defined
category of credit. What we typically think money is
the form of credit we receive in our pay vouchers.
In the broadest since, credit is trust and faith in
the future.
The
Money isn't primarily medium of exchange because in
the modern system it mostly redeems production into
final consumption or in the direction of final
consumption.
Nor is it store of value but may be used to
purchase stores of value in the form of durable goods
or securities that contract for
This link contains audio clips (RealPlayer) from a
documentary on William Aberhart in three parts. In
part 2 is a dialog with a Professor Orthodox
Annonymous from Aberhart's radio program. Part 2
also includes the voice of Earnest Manning.
***Doesn't this make the creation of money, to some
extent, a Ponzi scheme - which crashes down when too
many bad loans are made (such as for the creation of
the dot.coms)?***
Not from what I said in that particular post. Ponzi
finance means you are borrowing merely to pay earlier
loans.
***and how does money get into the national credit
account? Further, what is done about the hording of
B funds?***
Keep in mind that the banking system as a whole, to
the extent it can be considered to be one big bank
with many branches--has what is tantamount to an
unlimited overdraft
Something like that; it is certainly not rocket
science.
First of all, we have to address the concerns of the
skeptics, so the checks would have to be very modest
in the beginning. Perhaps $100 or $25. That can be
increased gradually as time goes on with increasing
political acceptance.
Some comments [comment 08-28] are inserted below:
--
The question still remains, who won't be benefiting
from money creation if it is shifted to social
credit?
Is it bond traders or perhaps the federal treasury?
How will it impact the economy to not use credit to
create money?
***This could be done selectively as well,
penalising luxury goods and subsidising essential
basics.***
You could but it would mire you in endless debate and
require complicated bureaucracy for enforcement.
Penalizing luxury goods and subsidizing essential
basics is not the purpose of the
Inserted comments [comments 08-29] below:
--
On Thursday 28 Aug 2003 8:24 pm, William wrote:
It is the reverse of a sales tax
except it is not charged against tax collections
but
is charged against the National Credit Account.
---
Jessop here:- The National Credit Account
Eighty-five years ago Douglas was using the three
percent figure--but then there were still some actual
gold sovereigns in circulation. It's probably far
less than that today unless you count the Fed
accommodation of some portion of the federal debt
as government money which might (or might
This was Finlay's take on the matter:
But the nature of this anti-Jewish outlook must be probed, for it is doubtful whether
it can be called anti-Semitism in the normal sense.
--
John L. Finlay, *Social Credit: The English Origins,*
1972, pages 102-105.
(notes omitted)
...What made Douglas
Comments inserted below [In reply, Monday, September 1].
--
[Bill Ryan} Joe, you've completely missed the point.
--
Possibly.
[Joe] The question remains; if Douglas never existed,
and it had been YOU who'd developed the Social Credit
concepts, and explained them without any reference to
My point exactly. All the 'free-silver' Democrats moved to Canada in disgust after
Bryan lost! Seriously though...
--
Tens of thousands actually did. 1896 also marked the closure of the frontier. Free
land for homesteading was still available in Western Canada.
I don't know what is going on, Keith. Topica no
longer transmits to my moderator account. It won't
send list messages or moderator messages. Nothing
will come to that address from Topica. So moderation
has become effectively disabled.
And there were the bouncing messages to Vic which
Thanks for forwarding this, Chick. There are several
things that are interesting about it. This
organization is marxist-anarchist. They would
eliminate government and money. The anarchist side
of their beliefs actually overlaps Douglas' theory.
Unlike them, however, Douglas was realist
News Flash!
The Museum of London has announced a major
exhibition, from October 2003, about London in the
1920s. A significant part of the exhibition will
place the Kibbo Kift in a historical perspective and
will feature some of the Kibbo Kift artifacts in the
Museum's collection.
The recording might (or might not be) still be under
copyright, but copyright doesn't convey the right of
censorship. Anyone can legally reproduce it without
prior restraint. The copyright holder presumably
would have the right of reasonable compensation for
the use of his intellectual
What is your point?
--
- Original Message -
DATE: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 14:05:54
From: Keith Wilde [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc:
Are you trying to demonstrate that Social Credit is a sectarian religion
after all?
- Original Message -
From: William B. Ryan
***] The cash comes into general circulation when the
Reserve Bank buys government stock from the
government [***
Does it purchase directly from government or
indirectly through the so-called open market as in
the United States? That creates a rake off to Wall
Street that is effectively
***]The question I was trying to clarify is, Who has
the major control over the increase in the money
supply -- the private banking sector or the government
through its monetary policy? It seems to me that the
government here has the major say, but who knows how
much the financiers with the
***] I am an unrepentant malthusian [***
Suffice it to say that Douglas was an unrepentant
anti-Malthusian as am I. At the same time I am a
conservationist. It is not a contradiction in terms
but the difference in perspective between pessimism
and optimism. Look at the rain forest of Amazonia
Douglas never advocated a means test. The draft
plan was an appendix to some editions of *Social
Credit* first published in 1924, and should be
interpreted in the context of the first desideratum
as social credit is being introduced. See:
***] No, the Malthusian issue does not reduce to
optimism vs. pessimism. I think you didn't read me
carefully enough on the nature of the dilemma. [***
Yes it does. I say that it does. Malthusians are
tunnel-vision pessimists. They are the people who
Douglas was talking about who reach
Setting aside the fact that I don't have the
slightest idea what Simonized means--please
enlighten me--I will dispute what you say about
mountains of empirical measurement. I can see
right now that for our discussion to remain
meaningful we are going to have to begin with Malthus
himself, which
Jessop, I'm confused by this sentence of yours,
***] But R25-billion of the payments could be grabbed
back from all taxpayers by a simple addition to their
assessment, which brings the BIG almost within reach
without increasing taxes. [***
By assessment you mean taxation, don't you?
***] Now, I
***] The National Dividend (or shall we call it the
BIG?) is not included in your Income so is not
subject to tax, but the ¨grab back¨ is added in to
the Receiver's calculation of the Tax you owe him.
Once in his hands, the grab back amount is not fed
into the general Revenue Account but goes once
***/ I was referring to the situation which would
exist if AMI proposals were adopted, not what happens
now. \***
An important clarification. The greenbacks were
indeed weak against bank credit and traded at a
substantial discount in terms of specie. Banks would
not accept them for deposit.
***| They are talking about a BIG paid from taxes.
|***
Which is why it will never go anywhere or accomplish
anything, because it would require either more taxes
which are impossible to collect to fund the BIG, or
the diversion of taxes already being collected from
other programs that have
Keith, I'm not particularly informed on Malthusianism
pro or con, though I definitely have opinions on the
subject. I was not even aware of the name Julain
Simon when you accused me of being simonized.
Abernethy was new to me. Some Internet searching
found one or two of her essays, one of which
The correct citation for the Wired article on
Julian Simon is at
http://www.geocities.com/new_economics/malthusianism/doomslayer-simon.txt
The NYT article on Lomborg is at
http://www.geocities.com/new_economics/malthusianism/lomborg.txt
Some parenthetical comments relating to these
issues:
Wally Klinck has graciously sent me the BBC recording
of Douglas's 1934 radio address, The Causes of War.
I believe it may be the only existing audio recording
of Douglas.
I've converted it to an easily downloaded file.
Right click the designated link below, then choose
save target as with your
***Price is where marginal benefits + utility (aka
market cost) = cost. (The whole point of marginalism
and STV) Cost is another term for price. So...price
+ utility = cost is circular logic. Circular logic
is impossible, therefore supply and demand is
junk.***
Your argument is invalid not
***Does this mean that you do not regard public
goods and inadequately defined property rights as
important sources of market failure?***
Not necessarily, but the focus of our attention is
the financial system.
--
***Does this mean that you advocate laws against the
corporate form of
***Marginalism/STV disagrees... They state price is
set where marginal cost = marginal utility***
No, they most definitely do NOT state that. Price is
price. The profit maximizing, market clearing or
equilibrium price is where marginal revenue
equals marginal cost. That price arises only
First, many thanks to Professor Gunning for this
interesting discussion. I hope he will indulge us
for a bit longer, for I would like to clarify a few
additional matters.
For those who are interested, I've archived some
background material at
http://istorage.iomega.com/
Login: socialcredit
All it says is that equilibrium is at the point where the
supply and demand functions *intersect.* It says nothing
about actual price at any actual point in time.
From that the proper price is given as the equilibrium price, with deviation
from such resulting in shortages and surpluses. Now
**One further question, Bill: Do you expect that
the new money that is used to finance the national
dividend or national credit office, or whatever, will
cause an ultimate increase in consumer goods prices
by raising consumer demand and costs of production?
Have you neglected the time honored
Thank you for the citations to the three books in
your concluding paragraph. They are new to me. I'll
definitely look them up.
--
**Regarding the exogenous-endogenous distinction,
unless I missed something, you proposed to add
exogenous money through the national dividend or
national
John, there is no point to having money unless there
is something to spend it on. Part of the problem is
that there is too much money over there that can only
be spent to hire assassins to kill American troops.
There are billions and billions of dollars over there
that can't be spent in the
Iraq, not Alaska.
Enter now for a chance to win a 42 Plasma Television!
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;6413623;3807821;f?http://mocda1.com/1/c/563632/113422/313631/313631
AOL users go here:
**In any case, you say it is directed at all retail
businesses. Do you assume that a uniform amount will
be given to each business?**
No, it is a flat percentage of each firm's sales,
like a sales tax in reverse, except the program has
no connection with the taxing
The main problem is that Zimbabwe is no longer a
modern economy; it has reverted to primitive barter.
Talk about printing money? The money became so
worthless they couldn't use it to purchase paper or
ink to print it on. They literally ran out of both
so the printing stopped. A first in
The flat tax, advocated by Steve Forbes and
others in order to raise revenue to finance the U.S.
government, is clearly superior as a way for the
government to obtain money than to impose a graduated
income tax with numerous and complicated exclusions,
deductions, and exceptions. But it does
Wes is a member of this and is invited to participate in
the discussions. As moderator I didn't forward this
specific message to the list because the very same message
was forwarded to several other lists as he commonly does.
I think practically everyone on this list already gets his
**Thanks, Bill. I have been mistaken in thinking
that you were an economist. This is where we part
company. It is only in a world without scarcity that
a money tree could take root. In such a world, there
is no need for economists.**
There is no need for sarcasm. Scarce does
**Well, if you want my opinion on this, you will
have to define standard marginalism in your
terms.**
How about intro Nordhaus or Samuelson, any edition?
Or perhaps Heilbroner's micro? I am simply trying to
establish you as a legitimate proxy for the
mainstream position in
**A couple of weeks ago I was sure I saw what
appeared to be an agreement between you two that
natural resources are abundant.**
I think you may be thinking of Professor Rosser over
on the Post Keynesian list, which I believe you
subscribe to.
Good to hear from you.
Thanks for this information. By the way, in using
the term sounding board I didn't intend for you to
be a strawman. A sounding board is something that
you bounce off of. I am a firm believer in the
Socratic method of adversarial discussion in that it
helps all discussants - on all sides of the
**If I buy from a retailer at the discounted price,
goods to sell in my unregistered Spaza shop, my
customers get the benefit of the lower price
anyway...**
That's right, I hadn't thought of that. It is
obviously correct. Thanks, Jessop. But what is a
Spaza shop?
The point
John, I could answer your question off the cuff but
would rather put it to the members of the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] list , which has several
capable economist members.
I am separately sending you an invitation to join the
list.
On my end I will do some research so I can reply from
an informed
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Bill Ryan)
Subject: Re: TURMEL: #2 Money, Interest and Prosperity
November 11, 2003
Okay, I found bowl.
**If you have a bowl and you put a ball in it and
then give the ball a little shove, it will travel up
one side, gravity will bring it down and it will rock
back and
To get a good idea of what we are missing by defending the status quo, read Wally's message below and replace the words "Social Credit" with the words "The Optimum Policy" (TOP) as you read. Both sets of words, when implemented, would produce the result that Wally and all of us desire. But, "The
A few points in closing:
Of the five hypothetical examples, three from Turmel,
one from myself -
The right side up bowl, the upside down bowl and the
ball rolling along the plane, and the terminal
velocity example -
Arguably, not one of them demonstrates any type of
feedback properly defined.
The
It is however true that much debt will masquerade as
equity.
--
**It is as true in a barter society as in a money
economy that a person can save by accepting others'
promises. So long as the lender expects the promises
to be kept, those promises are equity to him. There
is no masquerade.**
**The lender's wealth has not been reduced unless
the borrower is unable to repay the loan.**
It has been reduced if the borrower throws the money
into the ocean, as is reflected in the valuation of
the borrower's securities in the secondary market for
notes, stocks and bonds.
Ken, the indidivual bank has to keep in
lockstep with the banking system as a whole.
That's why we call it the monopoly of
credit.
Original Message Follows
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[snipped]
_
Is your computer infected with a
What is interesting is that you and the socialist
Dougie are in complete agreement on this matter,
which should tell us something about both socialism
and Austrian economics. Is it any wonder that Hayek
was affiliated with the London School of Economics,
founded by the Fabians?
original
**What the A + B theorem does is to carve out a
cross section of the market economy at a point in
time, stop all the movement, and form theorems as if
the said static cross section represents the steadily
evolving market economy.**
This assumption about social credit theory is
**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
What I mean concerns the questions posed to Bill.
Suppose that he supports the view that in the modern
U.S. banking system, money creation by one bank is
ordinarily offset by money destruction by the same
bank or by other banks unless the Federal Reserve
Board deliberately chooses to make it
Misstatements of fact:
For some reason, I was added to the list and
starting receiving its emails.
-
Professor Gunning himself subscribed to the list at
Topica. He was sent an invitation to which he
replied affirmatively. Topic software then
automatically sent a confirmation message to
Brief comments inserted:
--
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2003 09:19:36 +0800
From: Pat Gunning [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: [SOCIAL CREDIT] farewell
Thanks, Bill. That is what I needed to hear. Of
course, I said nothing about a money multiplier.
--
[Insert] You did
101 - 190 of 190 matches
Mail list logo
