FROM OUR CANADIAN FRIENDS - AGAIN

On Aug 12, 2016, at 9:57 PM, Al... wrote:
 


Good evening my friends, mes amis, mi priateli, mein freunds, and generally all of you good, unhyphenated Canadians,
 
    First, in CFL action although the Eskies beat the Alouettes yesterday 23-12 it was a sleeper, a lack-lustre game with absolutely no excitement.  They played as though they were on a binge the night before.  But today’s game where Winnipeg beat Toronto 34-17 the game was exciting but when the cameras focused on the fans more than half had emptied.  That’s how much they think of their Argonauts.  I’m glad that Winnipeg thumped Toronto.  There are two good games tomorrow.
 
    

And while I was watching the game today a number of questions about our country crossed my mind.  I settled on two questions which I pose to you:  
 


WHAT IS CANADA?  Is it “our home and native land” or is it “a land of hope for all who toil?”  My answer is pretty simple: I think Canada SHOULD be a “land of hope for all who toil” and that it should be a country where our elected representatives ACTUALLY represent our Canadian interests and maintain our former traditions and culture and laws.  
 
It should be a land where our politicians hold regular old-fashioned town hall meetings with no holds barred and no bloody time limits.  
 
It should be a land where our elected officials are always ACCOUNTABLE TO US AND ALWAYS BE TRANSPARENT.  


 
It should be a land where the people should be consulted by referendum on important questions affecting the defense, security and taxation of our people.  
 
It should be a land where our politicians extoll those who produce for the greater good and that welfare be minimized.  
 
It should be a land where education should be the mainstay of our society and that students remain in school for a purpose.  
 
It should be a nation where our politicians bring back total, unfettered, uncluttered FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS.  
 


It should be a land where our politicians and leaders ENCOURAGE the work ethic and that it is a refutation of that ethic to collect welfare payments when you are employable.  
 
It should be a nation where every province and territory is free to trade in its goods and services without government red tape.
 
    

These, my friends, are just a few things that I think our country should be.  Now, I want to hear from you.  

What do you think Canada is or should be?  If you don’t respond I will presume that the question is of no importance to you and that you couldn’t give a shit!  The choice is yours.
 


Al, your Canadian pal
 


Wally Klinck Responds:
 


Mostly good recommendations, Al—but you throw it all away when you start promoting the Puritan “work ethic” and by blindly condemning the collection of “welfare payments” if one is employable.  

This obviously contemplates maintenance of the “Work State”, precisely the cornerstone policy of both fascism and communism, of totalitarianism, per se—and is the very antithesis of the Christian ethic. 
 It also exacerbates the Marxist dialectic as it manifests in class warfare. Make no mistake, the two positions reflect distinctive and opposing policies stemming from opposite philosophies whose pedigree is easily traced back to two different “religions”, i.e., “Puritanism” (Pharisaism) and “Christianity”.  
 


I know you claim to be an atheist and in my opinion this is the reason that you fall into the trap of supporting totalitarian policies.  In fact, although you would probably be annoyed at the suggestion, by prescribing “work” for all able-bodied individuals you are rejecting the rational policy of efficient production to eliminate the input of human energy as a cost-creating factor of production in as many economic processes as possible. 
 


You may not realize the implication of what you appear to be suggesting, i.e., that crass materialism is the highest and only form of human activity.  Moreover, by insisting on “work” for all, even as technology eliminates the need for it, you will have to depend upon a massive expansion of coercive State-mandated projects merely to keep people working—for increasingly irrelevant, wasteful and destructive activity in order to maintain them toiling at an increasingly frenetic rate of activity.  


Of course, as an alternative you could embark on an equally insane Luddite policy of destroying the very advances in technology which are rapidly freeing us from the necessity of constant toil. 
 


There is validity to your concern that “workers” will increasingly have to support “non-workers” via taxation of those who have received income via their work, especially as technology results in a growing body of non-workers.  If fact, under present defective and disastrous rules of finance and industrial and national cost-accountancy the situation will become evermore financially non-viable.  


Your grave mistake, however, and it is fatal, is that you assume that earned incomes derived from the “wages" of the employed need to be taxed in order to supplement or replace the incomes of those who may or may not be required to work.  You err in assuming that current incomes are the only source of income—in erroneously assuming that the price-system is self-liquidating, balanced and distributes incomes equivalent to total prices.

You are trapped within the walls of an artificially restricted intellectual “box” which constricts your vision.
 
Although well-known for over a century in informed circles, the average person does not realize that when banks make loans for production and increasingly for consumption they do not re-lend anyone’s money.  

They create the credit to lend and thereby expand the “money” supply—and they extend such “loans” to the amount of quadrillions of dollars and provide virtually all of the community’s “money” by this exclusive process. 
This money is immediately destroyed when it goes back through retail sales to the producer who must repay his original production loan to that amount—or replace it to capital reserve.  


The money does not “pile up” as inflationary purchasing-power, except to the extent that loans are extended in greater volume than originally made, by the State itself, at different levels, becoming thereby permanently more indebted.  
 
Money is not cancelled in respect of outstanding un-repaid debt which is increased or “rolled over" and enlarged forever.  In this manner the State through its increasing expenditure acquires an increasing unwarranted influence in the affairs of the people of the nation.

This is Fabian Socialist Keynesian debt-based financial policy which virtually all nations follow—and is the imposition of communism, or Statism, by stealth, with very few persons seeming to realize what is happening—or why it is happening.  
The reason, of course, is that as the economy modernizes, labour accounts for a diminishing portion of total cost, leaving a widening chasm between effective consumer income and total costs and prices.  

In each production cycle the value of goods brought in from a previous costing cycle, including allocated capital charges, swells the costs which enter into prices without simultaneously distributing, in the same costing cycle, available commensurate consumer income.  
 


Something absolutely must intervene to allow producers to sell and recover their costs through purchases made by consumers—the ultimate and only source from which business can recover its costs and remain financially viable.  
 
That intervention, currently and historically, has been in the form of increasing volumes of financial credit issued as debt by the banking system to allow us to live today by purchasing past production only by mortgaging future production.  This is quite insane and is a fatal accountancy misrepresentation of reality.  

The physical cost of production is met as production takes place and when any article is completed the real, as opposed to financial, costs have been completely paid.  Otherwise it could not exist.  That is simply axiomatic—an irrefutable fact.  
 


What then is to be done? It should be obvious that in claiming ownership of the credit they create in the form of debt merely to monetize the community’s real assets, and the right to foreclose upon them in the event of non-performance of a loan—although they, the banks, have not created those assets—the banking fraternity has appropriated the communal capital in such a manner as to charge the consumer with capital depreciation while unjustly failing to credit the consumer with capital appreciation, which greatly and increasingly exceeds the rate of depreciation.  

We should be receiving increased incomes while at the same time enjoying rapidly falling retail prices.  To do this we must challenge the legalized counterfeiting of the banking system in order to recover our stolen inheritance.  We must break the Monopoly of Credit creation which the banks now hold by legal charter and the deception of legerdemain.
 


The money required to fill the widening cost-price/income deficiency is absolutely needed. We have produced consumer wealth. We have demonstrated our capacity to produce it and it awaits purchase, without which the consumer is denied access to it and the producer must face bankruptcy if production costs cannot be met by its sale.  


Production and consumption are mutually dependent.  It would be mindless to produce consumer wealth without any prospect of it ever being claimed for use.  And make no mistake, the banks are creating at their own pleasure massive inflationary volumes of “money” as loans for production and increasingly for consumption—the latter to “bridge" the price-income gap in varying degree depending upon their policy of monetary ease (whereby they promote production and consumption) or restraint (when they arbitrarily exercise their power to contract financial liquidity, slow or arrest economic expansion and foreclose upon the community’ assets).  

Consumer loans allow the producer to recover his costs but these costs remain as a debt charge against future production—which is no liquidation at all.
 
“Money” in the modern economy is not a medium of material substance or “exchange”, but simply a "claim ticket" or system of accountancy and our major problems are due to the fact that the existing system fails properly to credit us with our real assets.  

What we need is sound and accurate accountancy.  
No mere “change of heart” can rectify the situation without intelligent thought being brought to bear upon the problem.  As has been observed, even an army of angels could not successfully administer the present mathematically flawed financial system.  


The new money required to ensure that consumers can fully access produced goods as they emerge from the production line, without incurring consumer debt, must be created in the proper manner, i.e., issued without being recorded as debt and merely being drawn from a properly constructed, actuarially accounted National Credit Account, being an approximate accounting estimation of the value of all of the nation’s productive assets which might result in prices if employed for production.  

This National Credit Account would nevertheless be constantly increasing as the value of all new real capital assets would regularly be credited to it.  
 
The new consumer credits issued without debt should be in the form of universal National (Consumer) Dividends issued by right of inalienable inheritance to all citizens, with a portion of it being directed to retailers at point of sale enabling those businesses to reduce their prices, i.e, to establish Compensated (Retail) Prices according to a universal adjustment of retail prices as determined in amount by the national ratio of total consumption to production.  


In a realistic system of accountancy it will be seen that money issued need not result in inflation but can actually result in the reduction of prices.  There is no “magic” to the situation.  All it requires is intelligent action.  
One might ask if the answer is so essentially logical why the required measures have not been implemented.  
 


The founder of Social Credit, Major C. H. Douglas averred that “Society is hypnotized and only a drastic de-hypnotization can save it."  It is a total tyrannical delusion to imagine that imposed “work”, by decree or by artificially contrived scarcity, is a moralizing or civilizing influence upon men and women.  Only in a leisured and spiritual society wherein human motivation derives from the Love born of the Holy Spirit and a profound respect and love for each other, and for the magnificent universe in which we have been placed, can we “redeem” our human condition.  

There is, let me repeat, no place for a Puritan policy of “full-employment” in a Christian dispensation.  
 


I do not know what to do about Al’s proclivity toward atheism.  It is a spiritual and metaphysical “problem” which he, as must all of us, “work” out for himself.  Although the process may incur some perspiration, I hope that it does not involve toil!  

A very ugly word—indeed, a curse from the beginning!  After all, adherents of the Christian faith are told that works devoted to “salvation” are as filthy rags, that the rain falls upon the just and the unjust, that our burden is light.  

The story of the multiplication and free distribution of loaves and fishes provided a symbolic model for an abundant and properly distributive, rather than acquisitive, economy.  "See the lilies of the field…they toil not."  
 


It is a magnificent egotistic delusion, actually a sacrilege and idolatry, to imagine that humans produce all wealth and that only work or “toil” can justify partaking of the abundance that has been bequeathed upon mankind by a loving, beneficent God and the magnanimous outpouring bounty of Providence.  

We must claim the “wages of the machine” as an inheritance for all of "God’s Children."



What is Canada?
The Haircut: a Tale ‘doing the rounds’ in Canada