[GJM] Another Response on Inflation Controls.

[robert searle]

--- robert searle <dharao4 at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> Dear Mr Johnson,
> 
>       There are many unknowns in economics, and your
> simplistic comments about how everything would
> devolve
> into hyperinflation, and lead to total devaluation
> is
> an example of this. Ofcourse, this would probably
> happen if no effective controls existed...
> 
> However, you are correct about price controls having
> a
> poor record.........BUT THEY DID NOT HAVE THE FULL
> WEIGHT OF MODERN TECHNOLOGY TO ENSURE THAT THAT
> PRICES
>  COULD BE CONTROLLED DIRECTLY, AND INSTANTANEOUSLY 
> IN
> A COMPREHENSIVE SUPER FLEXIBLE MANNER. This makes
> COMPLIANCE EASY. Got it? 
> 
> And please try, and understand that MONEY IS
> ELECTRONIC INFORMATION. As such it can be directly
> controlled just as I can press a button on the
> computer, and delete your dull repetative posts
> INSTANTLY. 
> 
> If you do not like this Discussion Group you are
> free
> to unsubscribe.....and I also see that you are an
> accountant which probably explains everything!!!! 
> 
> 
> Robert Searle,.
> 
> 
> 
> --- Zack Johnson <zackjohnson at louisiana.usa.com>
> wrote:
> 
> >  In Western industrialized economies government
> > spending is essentially half of all spending. 
> What
> > is
> > counted as the money supply is the residuum of the
> > spending by all sectors of the economy, and its
> > reflux.  The totality of transactions is a
> multiple
> > of
> > the quantity of money when counted this way. 
> Let's
> > say the multiple is four in an economy where half
> > the spending is by government.  That means that,
> if
> > the government stops taxing but keeps spending,
> the
> > quantity of money will double every six months. 
> It
> > is absolutely impossible for there not to be
> > hyperinflation in such a situation, despite the
> > imposition of controls such as Mr. Searle
> proposes:-
> > 
> > "With respect, I have tried to explain in simple
> > English how an effective though admittedly
> > unpopular approach (rather like taxation) would
> > probably be vital in the initial introduction of a
> > tax,
> > and interest free economy. It would probably
> > involve the electronic lowering of the Price
> Ceiling
> > so that any rapid price rises would be capped
> > automatically. This process may be repeated
> several
> > times if necessary.  Thus, in spite of any
> > inflationary pressures businesses would have no
> > choice but to lower their prices to certain levels
> > or
> > risk being fined out of existence in a very short
> > period of time!! Yes, a 'draconian' measure if you
> > will....like the non-payment of income taxation,
> and
> > the possibility of the jailhouse!"
> > 
> > There are literally hundreds of examples
> throughout
> > history where the authorities have tried to impose
> > controls such as these, and every one of them has
> > failed miserably--the most recent example being
> > Venezuela, which has the highest rate of inflation
> > in
> > the Western Hemisphere.  Yes, if sufficient
> > penalties are imposed, businesses will lower their
> > prices below their costs of production, but they
> > also
> > stop supplying goods and services.  So this
> > inherently rich oil-exporting country has
> shortages
> > of everything except oil.
> > 
> > With all due respect, Mr. Searle does not appear
> to
> > be very knowledgeable about how economies work,
> > but rather appears to be an utter ignoramus.
> > 
> > Why is his junk tolerated on this list?
> > 
> > Zack Johnson
> > Certified Public Accountant
> > Monroe, Louisiana
> > 
> >   ----- Original Message -----
> >   From: "robert searle"
> >   To: discussion at globaljusticemovement.net
> >   Subject: [GJM] Another Response on Inflation
> > Controls.
> >   Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:36:04 +0000 (GMT)
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >   Dear All,
> > 
> >   Zack Johnson is at it again! Anyway, I will
> >   attempt the "impossible" by trying to satisfy
> his
> >   questioning though his mind seems to be clearly
> > set in
> >   "old paradigm" economics to use Rodneys
> > expression.
> > 
> > 
> >   1) It appears that his first query is how the
> >   inflation control system relates to Government.
> >   Ofcourse, this has been explained before...but
> > never
> >   mind we shall do it once again!
> > 
> >   The answer is this. The inflation control system
> >   should be separate from the Government if
> desired.
> > In
> >   other words, a private commercial company.
> Indeed,
> > it
> >   would probably be part of the banking system. It
> > too
> >   like the FED is a business per se though it may
> > give a
> >   false impression of being some kind of
> > governmental
> >   organization.
> > 
> >   Who though conducts inflation control
> > policy....the
> >   private sector, or the government? It can be
> > former,
> >   or a bit of both...It does not matter too much.
> > What
> >   matters if whether the use of direct
> > super-flexible
> >   controls allow things to run "well".
> > 
> >   It should be noted that in the UK, and many
> other
> >   countries the tax authorities have powers to
> check
> >   private bank accounts. Similiarly, the inflation
> >   control agency connected with a democratic
> > government
> >   could do likewise if absolutely necessary.
> > 
> >   ii) With respect, I have tried to explain in
> > simple
> >   English how an effective though admitedly
> > unpopular
> >   approach (rather like taxation) would probably
> be
> >   vital in the initial introduction of a tax, and
> >   interest free economy. It would probably involve
> > the
> >   electronic lowering of the Price Ceiling so that
> > any
> >   rapid price rises would be capped automatically.
> > This
> >   process may be repeated several times if
> > necessary....
> > 
> >   Thus, in spite of any inflationary pressures
> >   businesses would have no choice but to lower
> their
> >   prices to certain levels or risk being fined out
> > of
> >   existence in a very short period of time!! Yes,
> a
> >   "draconian" measure if you will....like the
> >   non-payment of income taxation, and the
> > possibility of
> >   the jailhouse!
> > 
> >   However, there would be special back-up with any
> >   businesses that get into trouble with the above.
> > Yet,
> 
=== message truncated ===



      ___________________________________________________________ 
Rise to the challenge for Sport Relief with Yahoo! For Good  

http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/