Re: OWNERSHIP: the theorem: LEISURE: Wally comments

["Wallace M. Klinck" <wmklinck@shaw.ca>]

I am sure that what Bill meant was that people have a right to buy whatever 
they want "within the limitations" of their purchasing-power--which latter 
is at present deficient.  This deficiency would be made up by Social Credit 
consumer credits in the form of a National Dividend and Price Compensation. 
To say the OPPOSITE, i.e., that consumers should not have the right to buy 
whatever they want in this context CERTAINLY WOULD BE irrational.  Most 
certainly, it would be a violation of the Social Credit principles of 
consumer sovereignty and genuine economic democracy wherein the consumer is 
to enjoy sanctions over production policy by possessing and exercising the 
full power of  his money-vote (by purchasing or not purchasing various goods 
and services)--comprised of the Dividend and advantage of Compensated Prices 
plus all income from other sources.

If the consumer(s) did not make a money call upon certain production or all 
of total national production, then production could respond by  changing its 
pattern and/or by slowing down until consumption demand resumed.  Bill 
appropriately mentions LEISURE because the productive forces of the modern 
economy can far outperform the essential life-supporting material needs of 
society and the consumer-citizen would, under Social Credit conditions, be 
free to choose increasing leisure, essential to the development of genunine 
culture, as an alternative to the phrenetic, superfluous, wasteful and 
destructive pseudo-economic activity which is now required just to keep the 
productive system functioning.

Genuine refinement of economic process does create real obsolescence and the 
need for new capital of increased sophistication.  However, this relates to 
REAL needs and/or actual desire for more and better capital and consumer 
goods.  Such "real" need is enormously different from the "perceived" needs 
of production expansion--which is driven artificially to increasingly 
excessive levels by the exponential generation of unredeemable financial 
debt, occurring consequent to a fatal financial accountancy flaw in the 
existing price-system.

Sincerely
Wally

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
To: <ownership@cog.kent.edu>; <austrianschoolofeconomics@yahoogroups.com>; 
<socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2005 9:41 AM
Subject: OWNERSHIP: the theorem: LEISURE


> "I do not wish to presume on what you mean by this.
> Right now, however, it appears irrational to suggest
> that people have a right to buy whatever they want to
> buy regardless of their purchasing power."
> ---------------
> ----------------
> [REPLY]  This is an important question.  I will
> comment briefly now, and give it more consideration
> in a day or two.
>
> I am not suggesting that people have the right to buy
> whatever they want regardless of their purchasing
> power.  We are talking about specific people but the
> population in general as consumers.
>
> The people are being paid now for increases in
> productive capacity through their wages, salaries and
> dividends, some of which being returned to industry
> through sales.
>
> As demonstrated by A+B, they are being paid less than
> the cost basis of the increasing capacity (increasing
> productivity) that the methods of accounting require
> to be impressed to the point of retail.  It is simply
> a matter of accountancy.
>
> Even if the people spend all their income as fast as
> they receive it, it is never enough to cover the cost
> basis of increasing productive capacity, so much of
> it is continually scrapped and wasted, inasmuch as it
> appears to be "unprofitable" to the entrepreneur.
> But the people are implored to spend their income as
> fast as they receive it through intense psychological
> pressure in the vain attempt to sustain sales and
> profits.
>
> The left describes this as the "falling rate of
> profit."  The right describes it as "exponentially
> increasing debt," or "usury."  Both are looking at it
> through blurred eyes.
>
> Two things are happening: 1. The people are
> foreclosed the right to choose leisure over
> consumption that increasing productivity makes
> potentially available; and 2. Productive capacity is
> being continually scrapped and wasted, due to its
> apparent "unprofitability," in a process that, in the
> absence of the waste, would have compounded over
> time, accelerating the transition to the more
> prosperous world of tomorrow.
>
> This idea is discussed in great detail in Douglas's
> second book, *Credit-Power and Democracy*, published
> in 1922, that was serialized earlier in Orage's
> journal, "The New Age."
> -
>
>
> ------original message------
> Sat, 15 Jan 2005 13:04:25 +0000
> From: "Timothy Carpenter" <timbeau_hk@yahoo.co.uk>
> To: socialcredit@elistas.com
> Subject: Re: the theorem: in continuing reply
>
> Dear Bill,
>
> Thanks for the information. Maybe I do not understand
> it all, but I believe some of it has penetrated the
> ivory dome. We are not entirely dim.
>
> Before we move on, could you expand upon the
> statement:
>
> On 14/1/05 9:49 pm, "William B. Ryan"
> <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> snip
>>
>> Consumers should have the right to consume as much
> or
>> as little as they want from productive capacity,
>> which we presume would be something less than what
>> could be produced if productive capacity were fully
>> employed, especially if it is increasing, due to the
>> limiting capacity or desire to consume.
>
> I do not wish to presume on what you mean by this.
> Right now, however, it appears irrational to suggest
> that people have a right to buy whatever they want to
> buy regardless of their purchasing power.
>
> Brgds
> Tim
> -
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
> http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
> To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
> with a single line in the body of the message that says:
> unsubscribe ownership
> 


To subscribe to this or another of COG's discussion groups register at:
http://cog.kent.edu/register.html
To unsubscribe from this group send a message to majordomo@cog.kent.edu
with a single line in the body of the message that says:
unsubscribe ownership