[GJM] Money reform and prosperity for all [CITS Capital & Debt Watch Reply]

[robert searle]

Dear All,

        With advanced electronic controls (allowing
for super-price flexibility necessary in the present
capitalist system)the problem of inflation is solved.
It also means ofcourse that any amount of debt-free
money could be created without loosing its value but
ofcourse it is useless without the relevant
"real-world"resources..  What has just been said is
totally revolutionary.


  
http://kheper.net/essays/Transfinancial_Economics.html

Remember too that when we are talking about money we
are actually talking about ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONS of
it in the main. They can be controlled en direct
unlike the capital of the past.

Regards,

Robert Searle.




--- "W. Curtiss Priest" <bmslib at mit.edu> wrote:

> Dear John,
> 
> I've now read Morrison on "Keynes Without Debt."
> (see Gelles below)
> 
> Whether a government should spend without incurring
> debt requires a cost-benefit analysis that is
> difficult
> to do.
> 
> And, just arguing that WWII spending brought US
> prosperity
> isn't sufficient.
> 
> If a government spends any money without
> corresponding
> debt, the government is printing money and diluting
> the money supply.
> 
> And, any and all such spending is simply a "flat
> tax"
> similar to when governments raise funds by applying
> "fees."
> 
> Inflation will rise in direct proportion of the
> spending.
> 
> The costs:
> 
> 	o  inflation punishes people who save
> 	o  inflation disproportionately is a burden
> 		on people with fixed incomes or pensions
> 	o  government directed spending may, or may not
> 		provide a useful economic stimulus
> 	o  government spending may or may not work in
> 		tandem with the market system
> 
> The benefits:
> 
> 	o  such spending directly raises employment
> 	o  government directed spending may, or may not
> 		provide a useful economic stimulus
> 	o  government spending may or may not work in
> 		tandem with the market system
> 
> The reader has noted that the last two costs and the
> last
> two benefits are phrased identically.
> 
> Here is the heart of the problem of doing a
> balancing of
> costs and benefits.
> 
> If we ignore these last two "forces" -- the first
> two "costs"
> tells us that spending without debt is bad.
> 
> So, to do Keynesian spending -- i.e. -- providing an
> economic stimulus beyond that which markets and
> nonprofits
> create, we must fully convince ourselves that the
> overall
> stimulus is so great and wonderful that the "first
> two
> costs" are outweighed by the secondary benefits, a
> more
> robust economy, better "outputs and inputs," etc.,
> and
> those pensioners will be better off despite lowered
> spending power -- because "their boats rise."
> 
> What plagues the US is, at the least, enormous debt
> everywhere and the gradual decimation of "heartland
> industry."  Those who argued that service jobs would
> fill the void did not anticipate:  1.  massive
> illegal
> immigrant labor,  2.  massive outsourcing, and 3. 
> massive
> trade deficits
> 
> So, what you and Morrison need to do is convince
> "us"
> that Keynesian spending (whether with or without
> debt)
> will solve today's problems.
> 
> For example, unlike 1935, we do not have 25%
> unemployment.
> So, WPA (Works Progess Administration), while it
> produced
> wonderful infrastructure, it is not a clear solution
> to what
> ails employment, today.
> 
> As for the trade deficit, there is a petition
> circulating,
> and various congressmen asking for "trade
> protection."
> (This is not Keynesian)
> 
> And, for what currently ails the US, trade barriers
> WOULD
> solve many of our problems.  In the electronics
> industry
> (as used by Japan in the '50s) we could then have a
> concerted program to recreate our electronic parts
> industry.
> 
> For, only when such parts, "Made in USA," cost less
> than
> such same parts made in Japan or Korea, could we
> restart
> our consumer electronics industry.  What is China a
> net
> importer of?  Electronic parts.  What are the major
> exports
> of Japan and Korea?  Electronic parts.  Where is the
> lowest
> wages for reasonably skilled workers?  China.  So,
> electronics,
> except for, say, speciality medical instruments, is
> assembled
> in China and shipped here.
> 
> To beat China, we would have to do what Sweden did,
> thirty
> years ago, and bet on improved automation.  In 1985
> I
> visited Asea AB, and I viewed room after room of
> assembly
> automation with no workers in sight.  But, this
> requires
> a massive infusion of capital, and, this "bet" is
> difficult
> to wager with money going, rather, to Chinese
> imports.
> 
> What is more likely is, China will take the
> trillions of
> US dollars and invest in "robotics" and as their
> labor
> rates rise, they will have a steady capital flow
> into
> that automation.
> 
> Might the US government purchase such facilities and
> just
> give them away?  Only if the US changes the
> "industrial
> policy" of this country's federal government. 
> Starting
> with Reagan, any and all industrial policy was
> halted.  The
> arguement was:  "only free markets best know how to
> allocate
> such capital."
> 
> So, we are stuck with a free market that has created
> the
> largest wealth disparity in the history of the US,
> has 
> destroyed better paying jobs, etc.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Curtiss
> Editor, CITS Capital & Debt Watch
> 
> John Gelles wrote:
> > 
> > Thanks Curtiss for your exchange on AMI and your
> own thoughts on
> > equity, supply, and "economic democracy" -- this
> term being shorthand
> > for political democracy coupled with economic
> security for the
> > individual and rational advantage from technology
> being accepted by
> > the nation-state.
> > 
> > As all on this forum know (and give not a damn to
> hear more about) I
> > have been preaching forever on what amounts to
> "Keynes Without Debt".
> > 
> > The article by that name is available at
> >
>
http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue39/Morrison39.htm
> > and at http://www.ustaxreform.us/1016.htm
> > 
> > I will send any of our members $100 cash money if
> they will read these
> > articles and change the world to follow their
> prescriptions.
> > 
> > The articles are the brainchild of Ron Morrison --
> whom I understand
> > to be a Professor of Computer Science and Physics
> --
> > 
> > (Ron Morrison - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
=== message truncated ===



		
___________________________________________________________ 
All New Yahoo! Mail – Tired of unwanted email come-ons? Let our SpamGuard protect you. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html