[GJM] #842, Re: #841, Re: 28th Amendment by W. Curtiss Priest, TOP Figure 12N [was [FixGov] repost]
wesburt at juno.com
wesburt at juno.com
Sun Nov 4 13:10:15 MST 2007
Dear Curtiss,
Your timely reply to #841 was most welcome.
When I did not receive copies of #841 from lists
cyber-soc at topica.com and humanist at topica.com,
I worried that #841 had not been distributed by
those two lists. I have forwarded your reply below
on the outside chance that whoever disabled #841
may be asleep at the switch when #842 is posted.
My apologies in advance to list lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
for using such a long note as a first post to the list.
If list lbo-talk, like three of my current favorites, removes
graphic material from messages, I will send to each
address upon request. The graphics are essential to
make up for my modest talent as a writer.
But, back to the worth while questions: How
could the systemic defect of agrarian societies
remain uncorrected from "The Folly Of Rehoboam"
B.C. 875 to date? And, how could the systemic
defect of industrial societies continue uncorrected
from the 1898 annual meeting of the AEA to date?
Since World War II, of course, this failure to correct
has been peculiar only to the English speaking nations.
The rest of the world seems to be moving smartly
toward a stable, sustainable, decentralized new
world order with key interest rates at the ECB and
the Bank of Japan lowered to 2 percent and 0.1
percent, respectively.
Perhaps I claimed too much for Figure 17 in #841
when I wrote: "None of my other figures illustrate
Adam Smith's First Maxim Of Taxation (Page 777
of TOWN) so concisely." The attached Figure 6c.gif
treats the same commonality between the public
and private sectors of an economy as Figure 17;
but illustrates three different aspects of the
commonality.
At the top of the page is the flow of money or credit
through product lines and households, with the
corresponding counterflow of wealth produced.
Here again, is the keynote of Binary Economics with
wealth being produced by both capital and human
productive assets, both of which must be continuously
replenished by the "10% of sales = R&D" expense.
That expense is fully capitalized by the private sector
corporations for their product lines, but only capitalized
at the 50% level by local governments for US households.
In the middle of the page is shown the periodic flow of
money or credit (M1c) from product lines to households.
The economic performance of both product lines and
households, together with their respective ability to
continue their functional operations, is measured by the
"M1 + Balance" in their respective checking accounts.
When that "+ Balance" drops to zero, product lines are
liquidated and households turn to welfare.
If we accept an average of twenty six pay periods per
year, the amount of M1c required to deliver the current
GDP at current prices is less than half of M1. Notice that
this real economy replenishes both its capital assets and
its human assets from the continuous flow of M1c, less
than half of M1. Bank loans play only a small part in the
steady state operation of the real economy, but seem to
be the life blood of the speculative economy, which sits
on top of the real economy like foam on a mug of beer.
May we not conclude, from this concept of the real
economy, that the whole subject of monetary reform
is concerned entirely with facilitating the speculative
markets. May we not also conclude that; if the systemic
defect of omission in the public sector of the US real
economy had been corrected after it was identified by
Henry Carter Adams and Pope Leo X III, in 1887 and 1891
respectively, the low interest bank credit that is now
flooding the world speculative markets would have been
invested in infrastructure, education, and social justice
rather than speculation? So much for the top and middle
of Figure 6c.gif.
At the bottom of Figure 6c is shown the role of corporations
and governments in bringing product lines and households
into the market with either constant or decreasing "returns
to scale." As we know, H. C. Adams concluded in 1887,
after fifteen pages of discussion, that only those industries
with constant or decreasing "returns to scale" could be
effectively regulated by free markets. Adams' analysis
did not reach to households, but then, in Adams' time,
America was still an agrarian economy.
The logic in Figures 8 and 9, at the bottom of Figure 6c.gif
shows that every household and product line will exhibit
"decreasing returns to scale" provided that the responsible
government or corporation fully capitalizes the fixed costs
of debt service on development and other preproduction
expenses. When those fixed expenses are undercapitalized
in either sector of an economy, the actors will exhibit
"increasing returns to scale" and consequently: above 4%
unemployment, a 3.2%/year or higher "natural rate of
inflation," and a 3% of GDP shortage of purchasing power
among smaller producers; together with the competitive
drive toward monopoly and war which characterized
the 20th century and 21st century to date.
Now Curtiss, I sincerely appreciate the risk you assumed
by posting my figures on your web site. In the late 1990s,
Mr. Derek Darves assumed the same risk when he posted
my figures on the Free Speech web site, and had the site
pulled out from under the figures. I can understand J. P.
Morgan and John D. Rockefeller objecting to a public
disclosure of this topic in their day. I can also understand
General Electric's objection to a public disclosure in the
early 1950s, and the federal governments objection in the
early 1970s. But today, I cannot see any purpose in silence
on this topic except the shortsighted desire to see the
US economy crash into a second great depression, so it
can be bought up at bargain prices.
You have probably read by now, Curtiss, the article
by Henry C.K. Liu, "Super Capitalism, Super
Imperialism and Monetary Imperialism," which appeared
in AToL on October 12, 2007. Mr Liu wrote in part:
"While Reich, a liberal turned neo-liberal, sees
“supercapitalism” as the natural evolution of
insatiable shareholder appetite for gain, a polite
euphemism for greed that cannot or should not
be reined in by regulation, Hudson, a Marxist
heterodox economist, sees “super imperialism”
as the structural outcome of post-WWII superpower
geopolitics with state interests overwhelming free
market forces, making regulation irrelevant. While
Hudson is critical of “super imperialism” and thinks
that it should be resisted by the weaker trading
partners of the US, Reich gives the impression of
being ambivalent about the inevitability if not the
benignity of “supercapitalsim”.
It seems that our public debate on economic questions, once
framed between Left and Right is now framed between super
imperialism and super capitalism, with no noticeable gain in
public understanding of the questions.
When, Curtiss, am I going to learn just why you posted my
"sometimes incomprehensible" figures on your web site below?
Kind regards,
Wes Burt
TOP and TWP are cognoscible by sixth graders from
Fig. 7-9.gif on Dr. W. Curtiss Priest's web site:
http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/default.htm
TOP = 100% Capitalism --- TWP = 0 to 50% Capitalism
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "W. Curtiss Priest" <bmslib at mit.edu>
To: wesburt at juno.com
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2007 12:04:06 -0500
Subject: Re: #841, Re: 28th Amendment by
W. Curtiss Priest, [GJM] TOP Figure 12N
[was [FixGov] repost]
Dear Wes,
Thanks for the kind words and thoughtful reply.
Regards,
Curtiss
wesburt at juno.com wrote:
>
> Dear Curtiss,
>
> Thanks for adding Figure17, with it's two separate
> lifecycle charts (Figure 7) for capital and human
> productive assets, to your web site.
>
> Surely this figure, showing the whole population
> of households and of product-lines, illustrates the
> essence of Binary Economics; capital assets
> operating in tandem with human assets. None
> of my other figures illustrate Adam Smith's
> First Maxim Of Taxation (Page 777 of TWON)
> so concisely.
>
> But that First Maxim Of Taxation seems to be
> the first thing our public policy makers forget
> about Adam Smith's TWON. And, 231 years
> later, our neglect of that maxim is the systemic
> "defect of omission" in US public policy which
> enforces the trend of Figures 10c and 10e. A defect
> that the Church of Rome identified in 1891 in it's
> Encyclical Letters on economic justice for all.
>
> I'll respond, to the best of my ability, to your note
> below and questions on Figure 12n in this format:
> [WSB My Reasoned Comment WSB].
>
> Thanks again, Curtiss, for your encouragement and
> thoughtful assistance.
>
> Wes Burt
>
> TOP and TWP are cognoscible by sixth graders from
> Fig. 7-9.gif on Dr. W. Curtiss Priest's web site:
> <http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/default.htm>
> TOP = 100% Capitalism --- TWP = 0 to 50% Capitalism
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Begin Curtiss' note ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 15:38:59 -0400 "W. Curtiss Priest"
> <bmslib at mit.edu> writes:
>
> > Dear Wes,
> >
> > I am glad to see this new figure, recent figures of
> > yours are on the web site (list below).
> >
> > I see you mention holodynamics and Ron Paul
> > as recent additions.
> >
> > Where does my proposed 28th Amendment lie
> > with regard to this figure? (copied below).
> >
> [WSB At the same level as Dr. Ron Paul, Libertarians,
> and holodynamics. Your 28th Amendment does not
> address the missing feedback from production
> to development. But then, who does address that
> proprietary secret of the private sector? WSB]
>
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/Fig8i.gif
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG7-9K.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG6C.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG2-3E.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG11.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG11F.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG17H.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG17I.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG12L.GIF
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/fig10e.gif
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/Fig10c.gif
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/Fig%204%20&%208i.gif
> > http://www.epie.org/cyber-soc/FIG12N.GIF
> >
> > But, who are the leaders of reason? And, because of the
> > separation of church and state, political leaders can
> > not be leaders of a reason-based religion.
>
> [WSB From the notion that every form of
> government is equally bad, when the law is
> incomplete, or missing. It follows that Church
> and State melt into one useful institution, when
> the Whole Divine Law of four religious (Optional)
> commandments and eight moral (mandatory)
> commandments, as in Figure 7-9, are observed
> and practiced by the people. The Monarchy and
> the Church Of England might have preserved the
> Empire forever, if they had applied the WHOLE
> Divine LAW to all of their subjects. Instead, the
> English clerisy, followed by the American clerisy,
> kept the WHOLE LAW for it self and and taught
> only half of the LAW to everyone else. WSB]
>
> ~~~~~~~~ Snip to proposed 28th Amendment ~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > So, via the implicit leadership of nature and
> > the celebration of that, and via the explicit,
> > on-going social contract, we > can, indeed,
> > create a reason-based "faith."
>
> [WSB I wholly agree. WSB]
> >
> > To implement this, we, at the outset, must
> > not call this a religion. Indeed, as this is reason-
> > based, it is, by definition, simply a statement of
> > reason. So, if anything, it is an extension of
> > State and can be said so by declaring a 28th
> > Amendment to the US Constitution that says
> > the following:
> >
> > Section 1. In an age of increased reason and
> > knowledge, the people of the United States
> > declare a more specific approach to achieve Life,
> > Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
>
> [WSB Right On. WSB]
>
> > Section 2. As shown via the process by which
> > nature created life, it is the responsibility of all
> > people to not only perpetuate life but to sanctify
> > all forms of life in their practices, activities and
> > actions. Specifically, various virtues that
> > constitute the good life, and similar instrumental
> > values shall be celebrated.
>
> [WSB Specifically, 100% capitalization of the
> expense of human development in every local
> government. Just like capital development is
> done in the US private sector. WSB]
>
> > Section 3. A fourth body of government shall
> > exist with the purpose of reviewing all laws and
> > practices as called for in the form of a Rawlsian
> > social contract as defined and regulated by the
> > Bureau of Social Contract.
>
> [WSB If we would promulgate the WHOLE Divine
> Law to all people, the people would enforce it at
> the local level, witout so much centralized
> bureaucracy. WSB]
>
> > Section 4. With respect to the other three bodies
> > of US government, the Bureau has the power to
> > introduce, and see through to a deciding vote,
> > legislation when requested by five Senators in the
> > Senate or twenty representatives in the House.
> > With respect to the Judiciary, decisions of the
> > Supreme Court, found to be disrespectful of
> > Section 1 or Section 2, shall be formulated into law
> > and entered into the appropriate legislative body
> > within ninety days of such decisions. Similarly,
> > Executive Orders by the President found to be
> > disrespectful of Section 1 or Section 2, shall be
> > formulated into law and entered into the appropriate
> > legislative body.
> >
> > Section 5. To avoid delays for time-critical
> > situations the Bureau shall have the power to
> > enforce injunctions on any issues that that arise
> > under Section 4. Such injunctions shall require
> > the concurrence of a Federal Judge and shall be
> > subject to powers as determined by Congress.
> >
> > Section 6. In situations where it is deemed
> > that actions within a single State may manifest
> > into disrespect for Section 1 and for Section 2,
> > the Bureau may seek redress as provided under
> > Section 4 and Section 5.
>
> [WSB Sections 4, 5, and 6 seem to be locking
> the door after sections 1 and 2 have been
> disrespected by one, or more, of the three
> branches of government. WSB]
> >
> >
> > wesburt at juno.com wrote:
> > >
> > > Ashok wrote, in part, to list Fix-Gov:
> > >
> > > We need to find an appropriate position
> > > for society somewhere between Marx,
> > > Socialism and capitalism...
> > >
> > > Ashok
> > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > >
> > > Dear Ashok,
> > >
> > > The appropriate position for society is above,
> > > not between, Marx, Socialism and capitalism,
> > as illustrated on attached Figure 12n.gif.
> > >
> > > I know list Fix-Gov strips off non-text parts of
> > > each message, so I have copied this message
> > > to you, confident that you will appreciate the
> > > content of the attached visual-aid, although
> > > other subscribers to Fix-Gov will not see it.
> > >
> > > Kind Regards,
> > >
> > > Wes Burt
> > >
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~ End Curtiss' note ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > W. Curtiss Priest, Director, CITS
> > Center for Information, Technology & Society
> > 466 Pleasant St., Melrose, MA 02176
> > 781-662-4044 BMSLIB at MIT.EDU http://Cybertrails.org
--
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://globaljusticemovement.net/pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20071104/3f4c785c/attachment-0001.html
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 14223 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://globaljusticemovement.net/pipermail/discussion_globaljusticemovement.net/attachments/20071104/3f4c785c/attachment-0001.gif
More information about the Discussion
mailing list