[GJM] #38, Mary Rose On #37, TOP For The Imperial Clerisy, TWP For The Rest Of US

[wesburt at juno.com]

On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 23:34:32 -0600 "Charles(yacob)" <yacob at bellsouth.net>
writes:

>   Hi Wes
> 
> Wes I want to ask you a question based on a fact, 
> which I would assume you already understand better 
> than me.   Are your explanations of the economy 
> affected by actions of the privately owned Federal 
> Reserve System?  
> 
> Thanks,
> Charles
> =============


Hi Charles,

Thanks for your question.  As near as I can tell, 
the answer is NO.  I am inclined to agree with 
C. H. Douglas in his opinion that the whole banking 
system works just as it was intended to work, and 
it works well.  The defect of omission, which is the 
center of my attention, consists of lawmakers 
withholding the natural inheritance of children.  
This is an inheritance which would bring each 
child into the productive stage of his/her life cycle, 
fully developed, and without debt, just like children 
of wealthy parents every where.  The only source 
of such an inheritance, for the Many of us, is a 
public revenue based on a universal personal 
income tax.  The local personal property tax was 
a tax on personal income not too long ago, when 
we were a nation of property owning farmers and 
small businessmen.  That is, before we became 
a nation of propertyless nine to five employees.  
Here, at this lowest level of social organization and 
social credit is where Libertarians, Conservatives, 
and Liberals each drop the ball, in my humble opinion.

When lawmakers withhold this inheritance, the 
parents assume the burden without question, 
and are driven toward debt and poverty.  So the 
result is a corruption of the low income end of 
the labor market.  Such markets exists where ever 
people are free to specialize their production and 
exchange their earned income for products 
produced by other people.  So I see my topic as 
unaffected by the nature or structure of the 
existing monetary system.  The optimum policy 
(TOP) is as true under a Barter economy as it 
is under the most advanced Creditary monetary 
system such as has evolved in the USA and 
other industrial nations.  

To see this topic in true perspective, one has to 
look back to a time before Jews, Catholics, Muslims, 
Protestants, and Humanists were invented; because 
each of these five ideologies believe they were 
chosen to rule the world.

They were not so chosen, in my opinion.  Instead, 
the Many of each ideology were assigned to compete 
with the Many of all other ideologies, to the decided 
advantage of the Few in each ideology.  Of the five 
ideologies, the Church Of Rome, in their encyclical 
letters of 1891, 1931, and 1981, is the only one that
has even addressed this topic.   For ninety years 
the Romish Church exhorted employers to level the 
playing field for their parenting employees.  But such 
employers would become noncompetitive with those 
who declined, so all declined.  Finally, in 1981, the late 
John Paul II approved the use of the public revenue 
to level the playing field.  Thereby, he gave his blessing 
to the children's allowances which Japan and Western 
Europe had adopted after 1946.  And so the Few divide 
and conquer the Many.

Since "the Folly Of Rehoboam," B.C. 975 to date, the 
common practice seems to have been: There is no 
reason to do for the children of your own countrymen, 
what you sure as hell will not do for the children of 
foreigners or people you conquer and occupy.  As I 
read the Old Testament, the optimum policy (TOP) 
for an agrarian society, consisting of universal public 
education, was customary in the days of Abraham 
and Melchedizek.  Four hundred and forty two years 
later, Moses added the second tithe to give his 
thirteenth tribe, the Levites, an average income 
of four times the average income of the twelve tribes, 
and added the third tithe to be spent by each family 
for community building and sharing with the poor.  
That three tithe structure, in Genesis, Numbers, and 
Deuteronomy is the only place in the literature where 
I have been able to find a written record of the 
competitive pricing formula used by each of the ten 
US corporations I worked for between 1947 and 1985.  
As Adam Smith said in 1776, "the expense of government 
is like the expense of management."

Thanks again, Charles, for asking your question.  You 
gave me an opportunity to vent my frustration with a 
topic that I thought would grow legs in 1969, when I 
first started to write about the optimum policy.  But 
nothing happened, even though we live among the 
descendents of the lost ten tribes of Israel

Returning again to your question, and your concern 
that the Federal Reserve System is a privately held 
corporation.  The corporation exists at the pleasure 
of Congress, and many national legislatures have 
nationalized their central banks with no great benefit 
to their national economies.  Some corruption must 
be expected in an institution so central and powerful.  
As a private corporation the FRS makes a convenient 
red herring to divert public attention away from the 
more serious, and correctable, corruptions in our 
social order.  

Kind regards,

Wes Burt
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

               TOP and TWP are cognoscible on
                Dr. W. Curtiss Priest's web site at:
       <http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/default.htm>
                 TOP is GOOD --- TWP is EVIL
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://globaljusticemovement.net/pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20070424/42c92d3a/attachment.html