I love "speculative fiction" and have read it for most of my life. The so-called Dean of Science Fiction Writers Robert A. Heinlein, has had more influence on me than any other individual on earth. He is the father of my spirit and the progenitor of all that I believe in philosophically. Much of what you say in this tribe is point on but I don't believe that Socialism or Communism are the answers. I would like to present the concepts that RAH postulated in his book, "Beyond This Horizon".
I posted the followin in another tribe, (I think it was the intentional communities tribe) but I think that it is equally valid here.
The Social Credit (Socred) System of Economics
Robert A. Heinlein wrote about an idealized system based on these ideas in his earlier novels. He wrote most cogently in "Beyond This Horizon" which I reccomend to everyone. Although written in 1942 his premises are still relevant:
(from Wikipedia)
<The world has become an economic utopia; the "economic dividend" is so high that work has become optional. The chief economic problem is in finding a way to use up the economic surplus: much goes into scientific research, but this has the side-effect of further increasing productivity a decade or three later, so long-term projects with no possible economic return are favoured.
The society in the book uses a method to prevent inflation: the government makes a deal with business owners. Instead of increasing prices, they cut prices, and the government (or the Bank of the United States) pays them the difference after seeing their sales receipts. Like the guaranteed income or heritage checks, this money comes out of the inkwell. In the future, the government no longer uses taxation to fund itself. The characters point out that present "fractional reserve" law allows banks to create money (by loaning out many times more money than they have on hand), while in Heinlein's future society only the US government can create US currency.>
The underlying philosophy and economic model weren't Heinlein's. He adapted them from the Social Credit movement of the 1920's. The Hearst Organization and it's Fascist confreres discredited discussion of these concepts before WW2. It would be dangerous to bring them up again (the eyes are still watching) but FYI:
(also from Wikipedia)
Social Credit (often called Socred for short) is an economic ideology and a social movement which started in the early 1920s. Social Credit was originally an economic theory developed by Scottish engineer Major C. H. Douglas. The name Social Credit came from his desire to make the betterment of society (Social) the goal of the monetary system (Credit).
C. H. Douglas proposed that because the amount of money available under capitalism is necessarily lower than the total cost of goods produced, there will always be insufficient money to pay a realistic, sustainable price. He demonstrated this fundamental flaw with his A+B theorem, which states that if A is the payments made to all the consumers in the economy (through wages, dividends, and interest paid to banks) and B is the payments made by producers that are not eventually paid out to consumers (such as the overhead costs of buildings and equipment as they wear out) then the price charged for all goods must be at least A+B — an impossibility since only A is available to spend.
For such a system to sustain itself Douglas asserted that some or all of the following must happen:
· People go into debt by buying on credit
· Governments borrow and increase the national debt
· Businesses borrow from banks to finance expansion, in a way that creates new
money
· Businesses sell below cost, and eventually go bankrupt
· A state wins a trade war, putting foreigners in debt to us for our surplus of exports
· A state has a real war, "exporting" goods such as tanks and bombs to the enemy without ever expecting to be paid for them, financing this by government borrowing
If these things don't happen "businesses are forced to lay off workers, unemployment rises, the economy stagnates, taxes go unpaid, governments cut back services, and we have widespread poverty, when physically all of us could be living in plenty."
Douglas believed that Social Credit could fix this problem by ensuring that there was always enough money (credits) issued to buy all the goods that could be produced. His solution is outlined in three core demands:
1. For a "National Credit Office" to calculate on a statistical basis the amount of credit that should be circulating in the economy;
2. For a price adjustment mechanism to absorb windfall profits in times of inflation, and return them to people in terms of subsidized, lower prices when the cost of goods on the market exceeds the money available to buy them;
3. For a "National Dividend" to give a basic guaranteed income to all regardless of whether or not they have a job.
The engineer argued that this last demand makes sense now that automation and labor-saving devices have reduced the number of workers we need to produce our goods, and the hours they would have to work.
Douglas' ideas enjoyed great popularity during the Great Depression, although not enough to realize his plan.
I posted the followin in another tribe, (I think it was the intentional communities tribe) but I think that it is equally valid here.
The Social Credit (Socred) System of Economics
Robert A. Heinlein wrote about an idealized system based on these ideas in his earlier novels. He wrote most cogently in "Beyond This Horizon" which I reccomend to everyone. Although written in 1942 his premises are still relevant:
(from Wikipedia)
<The world has become an economic utopia; the "economic dividend" is so high that work has become optional. The chief economic problem is in finding a way to use up the economic surplus: much goes into scientific research, but this has the side-effect of further increasing productivity a decade or three later, so long-term projects with no possible economic return are favoured.
The society in the book uses a method to prevent inflation: the government makes a deal with business owners. Instead of increasing prices, they cut prices, and the government (or the Bank of the United States) pays them the difference after seeing their sales receipts. Like the guaranteed income or heritage checks, this money comes out of the inkwell. In the future, the government no longer uses taxation to fund itself. The characters point out that present "fractional reserve" law allows banks to create money (by loaning out many times more money than they have on hand), while in Heinlein's future society only the US government can create US currency.>
The underlying philosophy and economic model weren't Heinlein's. He adapted them from the Social Credit movement of the 1920's. The Hearst Organization and it's Fascist confreres discredited discussion of these concepts before WW2. It would be dangerous to bring them up again (the eyes are still watching) but FYI:
(also from Wikipedia)
Social Credit (often called Socred for short) is an economic ideology and a social movement which started in the early 1920s. Social Credit was originally an economic theory developed by Scottish engineer Major C. H. Douglas. The name Social Credit came from his desire to make the betterment of society (Social) the goal of the monetary system (Credit).
C. H. Douglas proposed that because the amount of money available under capitalism is necessarily lower than the total cost of goods produced, there will always be insufficient money to pay a realistic, sustainable price. He demonstrated this fundamental flaw with his A+B theorem, which states that if A is the payments made to all the consumers in the economy (through wages, dividends, and interest paid to banks) and B is the payments made by producers that are not eventually paid out to consumers (such as the overhead costs of buildings and equipment as they wear out) then the price charged for all goods must be at least A+B — an impossibility since only A is available to spend.
For such a system to sustain itself Douglas asserted that some or all of the following must happen:
· People go into debt by buying on credit
· Governments borrow and increase the national debt
· Businesses borrow from banks to finance expansion, in a way that creates new
money
· Businesses sell below cost, and eventually go bankrupt
· A state wins a trade war, putting foreigners in debt to us for our surplus of exports
· A state has a real war, "exporting" goods such as tanks and bombs to the enemy without ever expecting to be paid for them, financing this by government borrowing
If these things don't happen "businesses are forced to lay off workers, unemployment rises, the economy stagnates, taxes go unpaid, governments cut back services, and we have widespread poverty, when physically all of us could be living in plenty."
Douglas believed that Social Credit could fix this problem by ensuring that there was always enough money (credits) issued to buy all the goods that could be produced. His solution is outlined in three core demands:
1. For a "National Credit Office" to calculate on a statistical basis the amount of credit that should be circulating in the economy;
2. For a price adjustment mechanism to absorb windfall profits in times of inflation, and return them to people in terms of subsidized, lower prices when the cost of goods on the market exceeds the money available to buy them;
3. For a "National Dividend" to give a basic guaranteed income to all regardless of whether or not they have a job.
The engineer argued that this last demand makes sense now that automation and labor-saving devices have reduced the number of workers we need to produce our goods, and the hours they would have to work.
Douglas' ideas enjoyed great popularity during the Great Depression, although not enough to realize his plan.
posted by:
|
New York City
|
-
Re: Social Credit Economy
Sun, December 17, 2006 - 4:57 AMRobert Heinlein rocks! Do you grok?
Several of my prairie farmer uncles were socreds.
Some great solutions came out of the great depression. Unfortunately those with the greatest power to implement change at the time dropped the gold standard and allowed banks and governments to print money over any whim--out of the ink bottle indeed.
Which is to say--it has no value except that which the public gives to it. And now--there is even very little money--it is mostly ones and zeros in computers which gets shifted around.
Thank you my friend for posting this. I DO enjoy discussions about money :-))
Yes, indeed it was the Great depression which demonstrated that money no longer serves in a technologically advancing society. The new workers are machines. The new workers are not consumers. The further our technology advances, the fewer people actually have earnings to spend.
Yet all the while, the economy MUST grow because money is debt certificates. We have been using desperate measures to shore up our economic growth, the number of people in debt has grown exponentially since the '30s, we experience greater and greater planned obsolescence, we economically exploit less......"civilized" countries. 75% of all paid work is not involved in life support either for people or for our planet.(new thread)
Those luxocrats are rubbing their hands together in anguish because they know their ship is burning.
The 20 hour work weeks they promised us when I was 20 never really showed up. Why? Because of the desperate need for economic growth.
Yet, technology is our friend. It allows us to do more with less. It allows us even more free time to pursue spiritual pursuits and personal developement. We have the technology to feed all the hungry of our planet, to make it green and vibrant once again and to allow every single human being the opportunity to grow in amazing ways. We even have the resources and much more to spare.
We have the technology to dispense with crime, famine, disease and wars. What stands in our way?
NOT human behavior, NOT powerful governments, NOT guns and weapons, NOT nationalistic or religious pride.
But the price system, money, economic growth.
Money is an expression of lack. Plain and simple. It grew as a natural extension of the barter economy. Where I dont have a lot of resourcers to spare but I can give you 3 chickens in exchange for shoes for all of my family.
But once technology began to flourish, allowing us to do so much more with less, money became less and less useful. Sadly, most of us dont understand this and still measure the value of people by how much money they have. Even hundreds of years after money has ceased to be anything but a milestone around our necks.
Okay I have talked enough for now. I leave you with a link to technocracy's scientific answer to the problem.
www.technocracy.ca/modules.php
I look forward to further discussion if youre interested.
