[GJM] More Fun, and Games with Group8 !

[robert searle]

I was amused to read the moderators public decision
for me not to have more of my email published on their
yahoo discussion group website. Frankly, I could not
give two hoots, and I will be unsubscribing.
No doubt this would please Bezemer, and Gardiner along
with others of their kind........!!! It was a good
laugh anyway as revealed below, and to some extent
indicated in the previous emails. 

R.Searle




--- "D.J.Bezemer" <d.j.bezemer at rug.nl> wrote:

> dear Robert,
> 
> Why spent most of your precious writing time bashing
> and trashing?


  Reply. "bashing", and "trashing" are strong words,
and I have not gone overboard in this respect. Yet, if
people who should know better make seemingly
"fantastical" or rediculous  comments then they
deserve to be publicly exposed. Next you quote me
saying....

> 
> ".. certain comments about banking made by the two
> learned gentlemen 
> seem "fantastical", and they should have known
better
> not to have made 
> them in a public forum...?"



>You speak in mysteries. What are you referring to?


Reply. As far as I am concerned this is pretty obvious
except for those who cannot see. There are four of
them from yourself, and the other academic Geoffrey
Gardiner.


             Quotes, and responses.


Geoffrey Gardiner.


           "....banks do not create money for
themselves but for  their despositor.??"


Reply. This may be difficult concept to understand
because it is so simple. Banks are there to make
PROFITS for themselves. I know it sounds
extraordinary...perhaps a revelation!!! Obviously,
they have to keep depositors reasonably happy but
banks only use them for their own ends..end of story! 

What is even more comic is the ?? after the original
quote when the answer is painfully clear to anyone

.


"....Interest free credit supplied by a state bank in
Soviet economics is not a good recommendation.
Potential demand for it would be infinite, and the
results catastrophic."


What a rediculous claim especially in the light that
private banks as opposed to state run ones have also
in past notably gone bust! With proper reforms this
should not happen with the latter which would also be
open, and accountable to the people.


D.J. Bezemer.

       
> 
> "The problem we noted is that people would
presumably
> start to create 
> their own forms of credit if the state did not
> extend it to them. How 
> would one solve that in your system?"


Basically this comment makes no sense. Are we talking
about some kind of LETS or what?? It is so vague, and
odd. Maybe  I should ignore it just as you ignore
so-called "monetary cranks."




   "Fractional Reserve Banking is a concept not a
reality. "


If it is just a concept then why are there endless
references to it scholarly texts? And can you quote
any sources to your claim that the UK does not use
fractional reserve banking anymore??(which also
laughingly admits that it did at least exist as a
reality rather than a concept!!!).



> 
> "..Plus advanced computer programs can still not
deal
> with human 
> tendencies for speculation, blowing bubbles etc. The
> best (but 
> fallible) we have is wise regulation, advanced or
> otherwise.


Reply. I assume you have heard algorithmic trading? I
also assume that computers when properly programmed
can work wonders?? We are living in the 21st
century...another simple concept to try and grasp!!


> 
> You are over-reliant on control methods and on
> people harmoniuosly 
> working towards some end, foregoing their own
> private goals. It is 
> precisely this flawed assumption that undermined
> Soviet-style central 
> planning.


In TFE we are not talking about a command, or planned
economy as understood within a Soviet system of the
past(These claims about the Soviet society clearly
indicate that I have been dealing with aged academics 
who seemed to be trapped in a kind of economic
timewarp). Au contraire, competative capitalism would
still reign more powerfully than before. In TFE there
are virtually NO state planners (or rather civil
servants!), or ofcourse direct governmental 
decision-making on all aspects of production, and
distribution of the economy. However, a super advanced
version of incomes policy is involved in which most
(but NOT all) products, and services would have to be
registered by law.It is a big subject.




>> Naturally in reply you will bash me further as old
> guard, but at least 
> you have one answer! How's that?
> 
> enjoy,
> 
> Dirk
> 
> PS - congratulations on your near-publication. Keep
> going.

      And congratulations for your rediculous
comments! Thanks for the "entertainment!"

           I will be unsubscribing shortly.


Yours..Truly..

Robert Searle.


> 
> 
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007 14:39:48 +0100 (BST)
>   robert searle <dharao4 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > Dear All,
> > 
> >       It was revealing what comments were made by
> the
> > two academics. One thing is clear at the outset is
> > that we are dealing with the old guard of the
> economic
> > world who are probably also right wing if they are
> > honest enough.
> > 
> > i) The project may seem at first sight to be
> "nutty"
> > but actually it is not if one has the time, and
> > patience to read through it carefully, and
> > sensibly...ideally without preconceived notions
> > ofcourse!. Certainly, TFE is radical in extremis
> > especially for old guard economists though I have
> come
> > across more enlightened beings. 
> > 
> > ii) It is quite clear that the issue of money
> creation
> > in spite of what has been published is still a
> grey
> > even among those who claim to be economists. This
> does
> > not bode well. It is as if a veil of secrecy were
> > placed over it!!
> > 
> > iii) Fractional Reserve Banking is not a concept
> but a
> > reality of most (note the word most) countries.
> This
> > is backed up by any number of sources, including
> > textbooks at graduate level by people who are NOT
> > so-called monetary cranks.
> > 
> > iv) I would agree that my presentation of the
> >Fractional Reserve Banking was deliberately
> > simplistic, and undoubtely there will be
> variations of
> > it, plus certain "systems" quite dissimiliar to it
> in
> > a minority of countries in the world. This is
> still
> > subject to research, and clarification with the
> aid of
> > relevant literature, and "experts".
> > 
> > 
> > v) Ofcourse, I am NOT necessarily suggesting that
> > interest free loans should be created by state
> banks
> > as opposed to private ones. This would probably be
> > undertaken by commercial banks but the profits
> > (including services charges of one sort, or
> another 
> > would be generated by an independent public body,
> and
> > this would depend on the customers
> business/account
> > records.
> > 
> > However, on the other hand, unlike the State Banks
> of
> > the old Soviet Union there would be tighter
> controls
> > to ensure money was not wasted. Incidently, in TFE
> the
> > amount of credit creation would in theory be
> infinite
> > without fear of inflation as this would be
> controlled
> > by advanced computers systems.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > I have to confess certain comments about banking
> made
> > by the two learned gentlemen seem "fantastical",
> and
> > they should have know better not to have made them
> in
> > a public forum. I am not going to repeat them here
> as
> > it is pretty obvious to anyone as to what I am
> > referring to.
> > 
> > It would be interesting to see if the forum gives
> me a
> > right of reply on all this. 
> > 
> > 
> > Regards,
> > 
> > Robert Searle.
> > 
> > 
> > PS. I remember talking to an old guard
> Economist(!!!)
> > at the LSE in the UK, and when I mentioned about
> the
> > possiblity of state banks he went beserk. He
> likened
> > the idea ofcourse to the failed Soviet experiment
> in
> > monetary reform. Ofcourse, there is no reason to
> > believe that in the future there could be public
> > bodies which could create credit interest free.
> Yet,
> > the right accountable legislation would need to be
> > developed to ensure their success!
> > 
> > 
> > --- "D.J.Bezemer" <d.j.bezemer at rug.nl> wrote:
> > 
> >> Goeffrey,
> >> 
> >> Agree, I had not even replied to this idealistic
> >> project since it 
> >> seemed nutty to me -  plus people would
> presumably
> >> start to create 
> >> their own forms of credit if the state did not
> >> extend it to them.
> >> 
> >> But: > Banks are only intermediaries. They do not
> >> create money for
> >> >themselves but for their depositors.??
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Not so sure. Here we return to an old debating
> >> issue. If the credit 
> >> market is truly quantity rationed then, as
> Richard
> >> Werner argues, 
> >> banks have a remarkable ability to ' push loans',
> >> far beyond the 
> >> abiltiy of clients to demand loans. Effectively,
> >> banks' not client 
> >> preferences determine the creation of loans.
> >> > 
> >> > 'Fractional Reserve Banking' is a concept, not
> a
> >> reality. It does 
> >> >not exist in the British monetary system. The
> >> reserves a UK bank 
> >> >keeps are not a fraction of its deposits but its
> >> estimated liquidity 
> >> >requirements in the next few days. The supply of
> >> liquidity is totally 
> >> >under the combined control of the Central Bank,
> the
> 
=== message truncated ===




      ___________________________________________________________ 
Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good  http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html