COG

Monetary Reform Discussion


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MONETARY: Discussing the unjust monopoly



Dan,
You ask if there has been a calculation as to what the guaranteed income is likely to be.  In the Seven Steps two basic incomes are possible.  The first basic income is from binary wide ownership.  There has been much debate on the amount of income it would provide.  Thus for reasons to do with the nature of binary economics and its associated prescriptions, share payouts could be as much as eight or nine times what is paid out at present (but people whose minds are fixed in the existing paradigm never seem to understand this).  Moreover, there are questions e.g. as to what point in time it is wished to assess the income and how long it would take to fully implement the binary economy (while a non-binary sector continues).  Furthermore, there are questions as to the assumed pace of technical advance etc etc etc
 
    Those things said, I expect that most binary economists would generally agree that a substantial income  of, say, $15-25,000 per adult per year would easily be obtainable after 15 years or so of binary policy (and children would have their own, but  smaller, income, even a small income at birth, sufficient to cover basic need).  In another posting to this Group, Norm Kurland says that $30,000 is achievable by the age of 65. Go to the Center for Economic and Social Justice website at cesj.org  and have a look at, for example, Norm's A New Look at Prices and Money (this paper is also an appendix in the Seven Steps book).  I also recommend the cesj website for other matters e.g. the Capital Homestead Act and Norm's Saving Social Security paper (in another posting to this Group)
 
    Now a crucial point about binary economics is that it brings in all the new productive investment that is required, balances supply and demand, creates new, more powerful consumers from the previously capitalless AND does this with interest-free (repayable) money and, in practice, removes the practice of taking interest from large sectors of the economy (among other things, interest is a big factor in causing inflation)  Thus new assets and consumers are brought into being money while the original money is paid back AND is cancellable.
 
    This creates a healthy economy with deeply COUNTER-INFLATIONARY forces in the sense that there will be more wealth, more wealth-creating capital, but a LOWERING of prices.
 
    At this point, Norm Kurland, for example, and other binary economists,  understandably prefer simply that there be the binary counter-inflationary situation.    However, Peter Challen and I with others realised that if, instead, a STABLE level of prices is preferred, then the way is open to introduce the Social Credit proposal to balance the binary counter-inflationary effect.  This means that debt-free money can be issued as the second basic income sufficient to keep stable the level of prices. However, my view is that there has to be the binary counter-inflation first (or, at least, beginning to happen) before there can be debt-free issuance.
 
 
 Dan, you are right in referring to the Huber and Robertson debht-free issuance proposal and the relationship between the binary aspect and the Huber/Robertson aspect is expected to be greatly discussed at a conference near Birmingham (UK) next week (I believe James Robertson will be present).  There is a very important point here -- the Seven Steps are intended to provide a format within which most (if not all) groups who understand monetary reform, basic income etc can find a home and create a situation in which, by supporting the Seven Steps, they will achieve their goals much more easily than if they continue (as at present), thinking that their own proposal is absolutely right and everybody else is absolutely wrong. 
 
    There is no compromise in the Seven Steps but -- quite remarkably -- it allows Social Credit and Binary Economics to co-operate (assuming that social crediters and binary economists wish to co-operate), accepts the reality of market-driven economies and, even more remarkably, should be acceptable to the Islamic world.  The recent conference in Malaysia (called by PM Mahathir) was highly significant because, although nine tenths of the speakers were crying out for gold as national currency there are problems with that (not least because gold proponents have no solutions for poverty, rich-poor division, position of women etc).  (Significantly, PM Mahathir has ruled out gold for the national currency).   BUT Peter and I could claim (and, by golly, we did!) that the binary aspects of the Steps are counter-inflationary thereby INCREASING the value of money (that shook an Islamic conference that did not, at first, understand that fiat money, (if made repayble and cancellable and directed at capital investment), can INCREASE the value of money). 
 
     I should add here that at the recent Malysia conference (concerned with the gold dinar and a stable and just monetary system), NO proponent of debt-free money alone (e.g. Social Credit) was invited and it was inconceivable that they would have been because debt-free (non-repayable) money is viewed by Islam as both fiat and inflationary.  Peter and I (plus Bernard Lietaer with his well-conceived terra based on a basket of commodites (rather than gold alone) for valuing and settling international trade) were the ONLY Westerners to be invited (with the exception of the leader of the British Islamic party and Tarek el Diwany, the excellent author on the banking system and interest).  Peter and I generated much interest among the academics of the International Islamic University who hosted the conference and we were kindly received by the Prime Minister's special adviser on finance at a meeting of well over an hour.
 
    In summary, the Seven Steps allow binary economics AND Social Credit AND Islam AND a lot of other groups and lines of thinking to co-operate together.  Assuming, that is, that they wish to co-operate as opposed to continue to fight each other.  As Norm says, control over money and credit is the key to economic independence and all who understand that (and that interest is largely unnecessary) should pull together.
 
    I ought to add that the Four Demands paper (sent to this Group a year or so ago) was at the early stages of thinking and the Seven Steps book  was massively developed thereafter.
 
Rodney Shakespeare.