Dear William. Like most people that have been exposed to Social Credit ideas, and have not rejected them, I accepted for a long time the statement you repeat that "Loans create deposits, and the repayment of loans cancels deposits", meant that money, after its creation, could be considered Un-created.
Only after being challenged by John Tomlinson, a heretical practising banker, another colonial, now living in civilised Oxford, did I come to accept that no banker could face the prospect of having to write off his creation just because some miscreant had the temerity to pay off their debt. John patiently stuck to his attempt to explain the reality to me, and to John Hotson who he was in dispute with on this issue at the time. He explained that in point of fact this was yet another deviation from the accounting norms that bankers indulged in, and the returned debts were in fact not "destroyed", but placed somewhere convenient to the banker awaiting revival as yet more money creation. Now I do not know what this does to your maths. I for one believe that if it is necessary to go into the realms of higher maths to attempt to refute what can be clearly demonstrated by eye in any high street, that there is a deficiency of effective demand, then there is something wrong in the forces of opposition to change and progress in this world of ours. Ken. --^---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 --^----------------------------------------------------------------
