Dear All, Bill Ryan -- in looking for an answer -- says that he has looked in the Ownership archives.
I do not believe him. Keith Wilde will, I am sure, be my supportive witness on this because the archives are very extensive and, to cover all the answers would have taken hours, and hours and hours -- time that Bill has not had and, even if he had had, he would not have given. No, at most, he just looked up a few subject headings. I say this with confidence becasue he has very obviously missed those emails in which I explain how and why binary earnings, in a binary economy, might be eight or nine times those paid out at present in dividends, yes, eight or nine times. At least one of my answers, giving all the factors in the situation, has a length virtually equivalent to a chapter in a book. I have also re-issued that long email at least once probably on another list, although I cannot remember which. Got that, Bill? Try looking again. You see there is a problem with Bill Ryan and his answers -- they come from a man who, under the claim of "moderation" prevents others seeing emails to this list and does not then tell those others that he has excluded them or give a reason for so doing. (At the moment, he is trying to justify his behaviour by claiming that his "moderation" is about excluding spam. It isn't. It's about censoring emails he does not like). Anyway, Ryan wants to know about the binary definition of earnings and has gaily ignored the fact that I gave him another way of finding any binary thoughts on the subject --he can read the whole of Binary Economics (it only has 450 or so pages) and see if the answer is there. On the short extract of dialogue between Keynes, Gregory and Douglas 73 years ago, I am pleased to see that there is some recognition that the receipts of capital are greater than what is paid out in dividends. We have made a teeny bit of progress. It remains for Bill to discover the several reasons for the eight/nine statement made above. Rodney Shakespeare. ----- Original Message ----- From: "William B. Ryan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2003 9:12 PM Subject: RE: [SOCIAL CREDIT] questions to Rodney-1 > ->I have, in the past, answered all the questions > made over an extensive period in the COG Ownership > group. I suggest you look there for the answers.<- > ---------- > > The specific question on the table is this: How do > you define "earnings"? I looked in the ownership > archives. I saw that you repeatedly used the term > but did not define it. Perhaps you will reference a > post by date where you answered the question that I > might find in the archive. The question is important > because you want earnings to be fully paid out to > stockholders. How can you do that without defining > what it is you want fully paid out? > -- > > ->Alternatively you can stop being lazy and manage to > read Binary Economics where you will find the > definition of "earnings".<- > ---------- > > Okay. I have the book. I did read it. Remember, > you sent me a copy. On what page might I find the > definition? > > -- > > This relevant dialog is between J. M. Keynes, > Professor Gregory and Major Douglas from the > Macmillan Committee hearings held seventy-three years > ago: > > Mr. Keynes: "Do you mean that the receipts of > capital are greater than the amount it pays out in > dividends?" > > Major Douglas: "Yes; that is an obvious statement of > fact; the accounts of any company will show that." > > Professor Gregory: "What happens to the difference?" > > Major Douglas: "It is represented by the fixed > assets in the company which it cannot distribute in > the form of money." > > -- > > Rodney, speaking for the binary economists, following > Louis Kelso, apparently bases his argument on the > proposition that it *can* indeed be paid out--first, > to amortize (liquidate) the loans used to purchase the > stock for the benefit of the "new capitalists," then > to provide perpetual dividend income to the "new > capitalists." What Rodney and the binarians seem to > be conjuring is a type of financial perpetual motion > machine that violates the fundamental rules of > accounting. > > _________________________________________________________________ > Help STOP SPAM with the new MSN 8 and get 2 months FREE* > http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail > > > ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84IaC.bcVIgP.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^================================================================
