Is this "Social Credit" concept different from technocracy? CS On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 08:23:48 -0700 Keith Wilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Wes, > > It seems to me that both you and Michael are so wrapped up in > preaching your > own brands of economic reform that you have not paid any attention > to the > fundamental concept and precept of Social Credit which are, as I > understand > them: > --Social wealth accumulates (or can, if conditions permit) by > virtue of > natural human strivings, mainly via embodied technology and > culture; > --The vehicle for equitable sharing of this accumulation is NOT > via > taxation and government spending, but rather via monetary policy. > > I invite corrections from the Social Credit experts. > > Keith > > ---- Original Message ----- > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, August 30, 2003 5:54 PM > Subject: Fw: RE: [SOCIAL CREDIT] "Fungibility" > > > > Hi folks, > > > > In the forwarded message below, Bill Ryan chides Michael > > Bindner for his opinion that the benefits of a social dividend > > must be deferred "until the debt is paid off and the scope > > of government reduced." This exchange reminds me of > > "The Screwtape Letters," 1943, by C. S. Lewis, Professor > > of Medieval and Renaissance Literature at Cambridge > > University, in which the Senior Devil "Screwtape" chides > > his nephew "Wormwood" about the hazards of being > > too specific when teaching human beings what they > > should never think about. In this age of reason, only > > one thing remains that the congregations of our Judaic, > > Christian, Islamic, and Protestant tradition are forbidden > > to think about: namely, the "geometric relationship" > > between the fixed costs of acquiring a productive asset, > > the fixed cost of sustaining the asset when in production, > > and the variable costs of production over the useful life > > of that productive asset. Unfortunately, that "geometric > > relationship" occurs twice in every human enterprise, first > > in the capital asset at 90 degrees and again in the human > > asset at 270 degrees in the macro model, Fig4-3.gif But the > > "geometric relationship" remains invisible until we view it > > in the micro model, FIG7-9D.GIF and Fig8.1.gif > > > > But again, I must agree with Bill that Michael is mistaken, > > and particularly with Bill's view that "without social credit, > > the debt and scope of government can only grow." It will > > appear to grow exponentially if plotted on a linear/linear > > scale, as shown in FIG10B.GIF Or, it will appear to grow > > linearly when plotted on a log/linear scale, as shown by > > Fig10d.gif, on the URL below. And what is the CPI, plotted > > on those two charts, but the ratio; of [money (M1) ($/year) > > disbursed by the capital plant to the congregations of > > employees], to, [the Gross Domestic Product (M1) ($/year) > > delivered to the congregations of employees for > > consumption or accumulation during the same period of time.] > > > > What other explanation can be given for the "natural inflation > > rate" of 2.3%/year but this: Douglas' flow "A" of money (M1) > > ($/year) is increasing faster than the counter flow "A" of goods > > and services ($/year) by 2.3%/year. The government's three > > 20th century monetary interventions in the economy are clearly > > illustrated on Fig10d.gif and on Fig2-3b.gif on the URL below. > > > > The first installment of "Social Credit" in the US was the > > universal public school system, which the US established > > in the 19th century and developed to its present stature. > > In that agrarian society, the first installment of "Social > > Credit" was funded by local property taxes which were > > a direct 10% tax on annual income from a family farm. > > Using the US economy data in my post of 08-27-03, with > > sixth grade arithmetic, the annual cost of twelve years > > of public education and other lessor installments of > > social credit, at today's prices, is roughly as follows: > > > > First installment of Social Credit in the 1800s, > > 1 to 12 public education. Cost = 285 X 12/77 X $6,500/year > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ = $288.7 Billion/year > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ = 2.9% of GDP > > > > Second installment of Social Credit in 1913, > > income tax exemptions per dependent, > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cost = 285 X $2,000/year X 15% > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ = $85.5 Billion/year > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ = 0.86% of GDP > > > > Recently added child tax credit. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cost = 285 X 17/77 X $1,000/year > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ = $62.9 Billion/year > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ = 0.63% of GDP > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > ---- > > Total US Social Credit to date. = 4.39% of GDP, or not > > quite half of the first Tithe listed in Figure 7 of > > FIG7-9D.GIF and in the subject index of the Scofield > > Reference Bible and The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, > > as follows: > > > > "Scofield Reference Bible" The Pentateuch and Haftorahs" > > Edited by C. I. Scofield, D.D. Edited by Dr. J. H. Hertz, > C.H. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Late Chief Rabbi of The British > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Empire ~~~~~~~~~ > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ TITHES ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > Item Date Page # > > Item > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~ > > PAID BY ABRAHAM TO > > MELCHIZEDEK > > Gen. 14. 20; B.C. 1913 ? > > Heb. 7. 6 A.D. 64 ? > > > > DUE TO GOD: > > Gen. 28. 22; B..C. 1760 ? > > Num. 18. 26; B. C. 1471 638 (Num. > XVI-XVIII) > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > DUE TO THE LEVITES: > > Num. 18. 21; B. C. 1471 647 f (Num. > XVIII, > > 21-24) > > 2 Chr. 31. 5; B. C. 624 ? > > Neh.10. 37; B. C. 445 ? > > Heb. 7. 5 A. D. 64 ? > > ~~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 719 (Num. XXXV) > > > > FOR THE FEASTS AND THE POOR 810 f (Deut. XIV, 22-27) > > Deut. 14. 23, 28 B. C. 1451 (the so-called "second > tithe") > > ~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 860 f (Deut. XIV, 22) > > ~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (Page 862 f, "The Law was to be > > ~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ written on twelve stones > > ~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ at Mt. Elba.) > > ~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1005 (Malachi III, 7-12) > > ~~~~~~~~ ? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~1006 (Malachi III, 10) > > > > Two milestones marking the loss of the whole law, > > but don't forget that the US became a world super > > power while implementing only about half of the > > first tithe. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ACCESSION AND FOLLY OF REHOBOAM > > 1 Kings 12. 1-33 B. C. 975 > > (Rehoboam abandoned the Law and the ten > > northern tribes of Israel were lost to history, > > leaving only Judah, Benjamin, and the Levites > > to convey the Bible as we know it.) > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > DECREE OF ARTAXERXES IN EZRA's BEHALF. > > Ezra 7, 24 B. C. 457 > > (The Thirteenth Tribe, the Levites, was made exempt > > from paying the first (Lord's) tithe.) > > > > (The Torah, the rest of the Old Testament, and all of the > > New Testament presents a sustained lament for the loss > > of the whole Law. Christianity received only the > > incomplete Ten Commandments (the Decalogue) of > > which Dr. J. H. Hertz said, on page 401, "it laid down the > > foundations of religion and morality, but was not in itself > > the entire structure of human duty,") > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Screwtape concluded his first letter to Wormwood so: > > > > "Do remember you are there to fuddle him. From the > > way some of you young fiends talk. any one would > > suppose it was your job to teach! > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~ Your affectionate uncle, > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Screwtape" > > > > Kind regards, > > > > Wes Burt > > > > To further explore "The Optimum Policy" illustrated > > at URL <http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/default.htm> > > please join me at list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > > > > --------- Forwarded message ---------- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:28:38 -0700 > > Subject: RE: [SOCIAL CREDIT] "Fungibility" > > > > I'm astonished by this reply, Michael. The reflux > > from the "credits" are applied to debt thereby > > reducing the debt. Unlike orthodox finance, the > > credits do not increase debt but reduce it. The > > "scope of government" is quite another matter. To a > > great extent government has had to grow to fill the > > gap caused by deficiencies in the financial system. > > > > Without social credit, the debt and scope of > > government can only grow exponentially in respect to > > the non-government sector to the point where the non- > > government sector vanishes. Finance and government > > merge into a centralized system without check or > > balance. Concepts like individual initiative, > > private ownership and free markets become > > meaningless. > > > > > > ----original message from Michael Bindner---- > > Thank you [Wes] for your response and your kind words. > > > > I would think that $5,000 is a bit much at this > > point, given the large US debt and the involvement of > > the bank and credit system in its care and feeding. > > When FDR could have put forward a credit, the debt > > was relatively low and the government small. This is > > no longer the case. Until the debt is paid off and > > the scope of government reduced, I cannot see paying > > a credit of that (or any other) size. > > > > Michael Bindner > > > > > > > > > > >
--^---------------------------------------------------------------- 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 --^----------------------------------------------------------------
