Solution to the Krach. The Mechanics in a Few Words.

COMMITTEE ON MONETARY AND ECONOMIC REFORM
FREDERICK SODDY
– and –
THE DOCTRINE OF `VIRTUAL WEALTH’

– – – – –

A PAPER PRESENTED TO THE 14TH ANNUAL CONVENTION
OF THE EASTERN ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION
BOSTON, MASS. MARCH 1988
– by –
J. MARTIN HATTERSLEY, Q.C., M.A., LL.B.,
FORMER PRESIDENT
ECONOMICS SOCIETY OF NORTHERN ALBERTA

2240 – 10180 – 101 ST.,
EDMONTON, ALBERTA, CANADA
T5J 3S4: February 1988

INTRODUCTION

The study of Economics has never lacked its `heretics’ – those who, from outside the academic specialty, have often enough brought to the subject a fresh viewpoint, inspired not so much by theory as by a practical observation of the realities of trade and commerce, and a keen sense of the human element in what is otherwise a rather abstract discipline.
Among these pioneers, few have been so distinguished, from the point of view of academic credentials in other fields, as Frederick Soddy. Soddy was a world renowned researcher in the study of the chemistry of radioactive materials. His studies with Rutherford at McGill University between 1902 and 1904 had added the word `isotope’ to the vocabulary of chemistry, had disclosed the immense stores of energy contained within every atom, and had ultimately earned him a Professorship of Chemistry at Oxford University, and the 1921 Nobel Prize in chemistry, awarded him in 1922.
Soddy himself was inspired by his experiences of the first World War to develop great concern on a subject that concerns scientists perhaps more today than it did at that time – the possibility that his invention could be used for destruction. He trod new ground when he began to apply his scientific mind and method to the investigation of the economic forces that could cause this to be so. (1)
The most comprehensive summary of his economic thought is a book of remarkable originality, first published in 1926. Its title: `Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt’. Its subtitle – `The Solution to the Economic Paradox’.
Soddy’s assertion of his rightness in a field beyond his normal academic speciality was not well received. One reason, no doubt, was that he was an outsider in a field where policy solutions recommended by orthodoxy – such as Britain’s return to the gold standard in 1925 – were causing visible economic distress. Economics was at once searching for new ideas, and sensitive to the criticisms of self appointed `experts’ (such as the new Social Credit movement (2)), whose ideas, while superficially attractive, lacked academic depth. A second and more fundamental reason, though, was that the intellectual rigor of this `outsider’ spared no criticism even of those who were to be the more progressive thinkers of monetary reform. Not only Major C. H. Douglas, founder of `Social Credit’, but pioneers of new thought within the economic fraternity of the stature of J. M. Keynes and Irving Fisher felt the sting of his pen. (3) It was simply not Soddy’s mode of operation to compromise with the truth as he saw it, for the sake of winning academic allies. As a result he had few of them!
Thus was created the disappointment and bitterness of a man who fell between two stools. On the one hand, the branch of chemistry where his reputation and his qualifications lay now had less to attract his interest. The chemistry of radioactivity had been definitively explored and its research from the standpoint of chemistry, as distinct from physics, had lost much of its former glamour. On the other hand, in the realm of economics and monetary theory, where his work exhibited the genius and the scientific rigor of a true researcher, he had earned the reputation of a heretic and a crank. (4)
This paper has a simple and modest objective. It is to reintroduce a thinker whose reputation and whose research deserve greater respect than they have to now received. In a world where the “economic paradox” still seems some way from solution, Soddy’s claim to have found the answer has gone largely ignored. Perhaps, after sixty years, we owe him a hearing.

FREDERICK SODDY

Frederick Soddy was born in 1877, the youngest son of a London merchant. He obtained a first class honours degree in chemistry at Merton College, Oxford, and after two more years spent in research, travelled to Canada and took a position as a demonstrator at McGill University – where it was his good fortune to meet and work with another expatriate Britisher, Ernest Rutherford. Between 1904 and 1914 he was a lecturer at the University of Glasgow, then a Professor at Aberdeen, finally becoming professor of Chemistry at Oxford University, a post he held until his retirement in 1936. He continued with research and publications into chemistry, mathematics and monetary reform until his death on September 22nd, 1956.
The result of his early research was a new theory on the causes of radioactive decay. His outstanding contribution to chemistry was his explanation, consistent with the periodic table of the elements, of the existence of elements of identical chemical properties, yet different atomic weights, and of a process by which these elements, depending on their origins, transmuted in a sequence ending ultimately in different isotopes of the element lead. By the end of the Great War, and the time of his move to Oxford, much of the mystery of the properties of radioactive elements had been unravelled through his researches. His pioneering work was recognized when he was honoured by being awarded the Nobel Prize for Chemistry, in 1922.
Standing, as he did, at the forefront of investigation into the nature of atomic structure, Soddy very early realized the enormity of the power that was contained within the atom. In a lecture in 1915 he visualised that atomic energy could “virtually provide anyone who wanted it with a private sun of his own.” (5)
Unlike many of his contemporaries, however, who felt that it was the task of others to control the use of the fruits of scientific research, themselves morally neutral, he became deeply concerned at the destructive possibilities that lay in the abuse of his discoveries. Recognizing the place of energy in the creation of all wealth, and armed with the knowledge of an energy source a million times more powerful, weight for weight, than coal, he was appalled at the way in which the resourcefulness of science for destruction during World War I could not be mobilized, when the war was over, for peace and prosperity.

“We have to find out how it comes about that science, which, without economic exhaustion, provided the sinews of war for the most colossal and destructive conflict in history, with the manpower of the nations engaged in military service, has not yet abolished poverty and degrading conditions of living from our midst in the piping times of peace.” (6)

Unlike many of his contemporaries, who embraced various forms of Socialism or Communism as a solution to the troubles of the times, Soddy saw in the money system the key to the restriction and the abuse of the planet’s resources.

“The threatened collapse of our Western civilization has nothing to do with the political issues between capitalism and communism, but is the consequence of its false money system.” (7)

WEALTH vs DEBT: ECONOMICS vs CHREMATISTICS

In turning to his actual analysis, I will be esentially following the outline of Professor Soddy’s book `Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt’ (George Allen & Unwin, 1926). I also highly recommend the recently published symposium `Frederick Soddy, 1877 – 1956′ (D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1986, George B. Kauffman, Ed.), which contains much material not otherwise readily available, both on Soddy’s life, his chemistry and his economics. Thaddeus Trenn’s contributions to this symposium are of particular value to those interested in Soddy’s economic views.
The first `new path’ trodden by Soddy was to define the clear separation between `Wealth’ – a physical phenomenon – and `Debt’, which is a mathematical one. The science of the production of Wealth is the true economics. The handling of Debt is the science of `chrematistics’ (from the Greek, `chrema’: money).

“Debts are subject to the laws of mathematics rather than physics. Unlike wealth, which is subject to the laws of thermodynamics, debts do not rot with old age and are not consumed in the process of living. On the contrary, they grow at so much per cent per annum, by the well-known mathematical laws of simple and compound interest … It is this underlying confusion between wealth and debt which has made such a tragedy of the scientific era.” (8)
“Economics, in a national sense, is concerned with wealth as what is produced by human beings in order to maintain their lives. Chrematistics, the science of wants and demands and of how they exchange one for another, is quite a distinct study, more plainly termed commerce.” (9)

Economics, Soddy claims, has confused debt – a claim on wealth – for wealth itself. Modern economics has therefore woven for itself a hopeless tangle, in which money is counted as an asset – that is, as if it were wealth itself – whereas in reality it is a liability – an obligation of the community to provide wealth on demand. A particular result of this is that those who create and deal in money can receive rewards from the economic system as generous as if the money they had invented by the process of banking had been real wealth created by the same sort of human effort as is required, for instance, for the mining of gold.

“It is difficult or impossible to get a physical means of measuring wealth … but this difficulty must not blind us to the palpable absurdities in conventional economics introduced by always measuring wealth by exchange-value or money price. This may easily result in what could only be regarded as a national calamity appearing to increase the national wealth, or what is in every respect a national blessing appearing to reduce it. Unnecessary middlemen and speculators may much increase the prices of commodities without any addition to the national wealth. Combines of producers and trusts for limiting output and raising prices may reduce the national wealth and increase its monetary value … Such `services’ as these, which are properly means of acquiring wealth at the expense of the community rather than producing it, are, of course, not physically necessary ingredients of wealth at all.” (10)

DISCOVERY, ENERGY, DILIGENCE – THE FACTORS OF PRODUCTION

After separating, therefore, wealth from debt, the next step in solving the `economic paradox’ of poverty in a world rich enough to satisfy mankind’s basic wants with ease, is to survey the process by which wealth comes into being.
Starting with a scientist’s view of the process of production, Soddy replaces the traditional `factors of production’ of Adam Smith (Land, Labour and Capital), with an alternative three: Discovery, Natural Energy and Human Diligence.
Before wealth can be created by man, man must first find out the means by which to make his efforts valuable in producing wealth, by the process of Discovery. Of discovery, Soddy says:

“We find both in biological and human history, not continuity, but a succession of great discoveries … which once made, do alter abruptly the whole future trend and mode of existence.” (11)

On the subject of energy, of course, Soddy is an expert. He points out that the wealth mankind enjoys is a kind of `damming up’ of the great outpouring of solar energy the world continually receives, so as to make it serve a purpose useful to man before it is dissipated in worthless heat. In modern times, energy stored chemically in past ages in sources such as coal and oil has also become available to enrich mankind: additionally, man has learned to use the material and chemical resources available to him to draw on energy more and more directly, using, for instance, less and less help from the animal and vegetable kingdoms, with a consequent saving of human effort.
Finally, not human labour (for labour generally speaking has been replaced in production by the energy of machines), but human diligence.

“The function of the worker, since the introduction of mechanical power, has totally changed in many industries, and in none is the change unimportant. More and more, he does not work in the physical sense, but is directing an inanimate source of power to do what, left alone, it could not do.” (12)

Soddy points out that, though a discovery once made is made for all time, the production of wealth will always require contribution of the second and third factors. `Perpetual motion machines’ do not exist. The machine and the use of power are levers which extend the range of human effort more and more – but never replace it entirely. Consequently, when an investor or speculator makes an income by, say, investing in debt or driving up the price of commodities, the only effect of such efforts is that the investor takes for himself some wealth that has been created by the effort of others. It is the economic power given to such persons to batten on those who do create wealth that causes the `economic paradox’ of poverty in a world technically capable of creating sufficiency for all.

“Never was there an age in history so dowered as ours with all that could have sufficed for a noble and enduring civilization, whereas it is still to ancient civiliations we must go if we wish to find evidence of human effort and imagination being squandered on a national scale on something not strictly utilitarian in purpose. The most gigantic powers await our commands to provide us with all that we require, but we lead a harried, driven life, concerned for the most part with the immediate necessity of keeping the wolf from the door, and destroying our trade rivals.” (13)

One particular distinction Soddy makes with regard to wealth is to distinguish “permanent wealth” from wealth that is consumed in the very act of being of value to mankind. “Permanent Wealth” is, for example, the plough. Consumable wealth is the food grown with the plough. While consumable wealth provides value by being consumed, the whole value of permanent wealth is that it should be consumed as slowly as possible, in the mean time making the output from human diligence that much the greater per unit of effort.
The particular importance of this permanent wealth (some would call it `capital’, but Soddy avoids the term), is that it can command a rent, because of its value in the productive process, yet it cannot eliminate all human effort. Because capital is not a `perpetual motion machine’, the creation of debt which claims interest in perpetuity as the price of such capital gives a mathematical illusion of perpetual income, that is not reflected by any physically attainable form of wealth.

“Psychologically, the economic aim of the individual is, always has been, and probably always will be, to secure a permanent revenue independent of further effort, proof against the passage of time and the chance of circumstance, to support himself in old age and his family after him in perpetuity. He endeavours to do so by accumulating so much property in the heyday of his youth that he and his heirs may live on the interest on it in perpetuity afterwards. Economic and social history is the conflict of this human aspiration with the laws of physics, which make such a perpetuum mobile impossible, and reduces the problem merely to the method by which one individual may get another individual or the community into his debt and prevent repayment, so that the individual or community must share the produce of their efforts with their creditor.” (14)

`VIRTUAL WEALTH’ – THE BASIS OF THE VALUE OF MONEY

Money, then, is not wealth. From the point of view of the community, it is not an asset but a liability. It is a claim against the collective wealth of the community at that time on the market.

“Money is not wealth, even to the individual, but the evidence that the owner of the money has not received the wealth to which he is entitled, and that he can demand it at his own convenience. So that in a community, of necessity, the aggregate money, irrespective of its amount, represents the aggregate value of the wealth which the community prefers to be owed on these terms rather than to own.”(15)

One of the characteristics of production is that producers of goods tend to specialize, so becoming the owners of quantities of goods of one particular type for which, after consuming a very modest quantity, they have little personal need. As consumers, however, these same producers need a wide diversity of goods made by other producers. The difference between the `wholesale’ value to the producer of these unwanted goods, and the `retail’ prices these goods will command from persons not in a position to manufacture them, is the justification for exchange, making use of money, and is the source of the value contained in the tokens used as the nation’s money supply. The total of this value is the nation’s `Virtual Wealth’. In effect, the size of the Virtual Wealth of a community is an index of the value to each member of the community of the presence of the community there – it is an index of the value of the `increment of association’, and the purchasing power of the totalilty of the monetary stock of the community will always equal this total of Virtual Wealth.

“It is true that the nation must act, and continue indefinitely to act, as if it possessed more wealth than it does possess, by the aggregate purchasing power of its money, but the important thing is that this Virtual Wealth does not exist. It is an imaginary negative quantity – a deficit or debt of wealth, subject neither to the laws of conservation or thermodynamics… It is the quantity of goods that the community abstains from possessing that is definite, and the number of units this definite quantity is worth is all the money, whatever that all may be.
“It is the virtual wealth which measures the value of the purchasing power of money, and not money which measures the value of wealth.”(16)

In ancient times, of course, the tokens used for money had real cost and it was reasonable to pay a price for their use. Mining gold, for instance, takes effort which must be rewarded. But the development of Banking has enabled Bank Credit (indistinguishable in effect from other forms of money, and identical in effect), to be created at the cost only of pen and ink, and yet reap a reward for its use in the form of an interest charge paid to Bankers, for a value given by the Community rather than by any effort the Banker has put out.
Soddy is open to criticism here. The Banker who extends credit by way of loan is indeed creating credit by manipulating figures on paper, but that credit comes back to the banking system by way of deposits of Bank Credit on which interest has to be paid by the Banker, or the whole system will collapse. Soddy would have been more accurate to tie in the creation of credit by banks with a process by which all those who use the Banking system and the consequent free access to the community’s `Virtual Wealth’, with the well known phenomenon by which `the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’.(17) Not only bankers profit from this, but all who receive interest on their `money in the Bank’, or who can borrow from Banks cheaper than from public savings for investment purposes. All who do business with a Bank, whether it is as depositors obtaining cheap accounting and chequing services, or obtaining interest on money deposits available virtually on demand, or as borrowers enjoying a rate of interest less than that required to cause the investment of real `savings’, are exploiters of the public’s Virtual Wealth by this process. Perhaps this is a reason why the financially most sophisticated members of the public are so slow to recognize the problems the Banking system creates.

THE EFFECT OF MONEY CREATION – THE `J’ CURVE

The argument has reached a point where we have a quantity of wealth of a certain value `on the market’, ready to be exchanged for money from any buyer who is willing to purchase it at a price acceptable to the seller. How great this quantity is depends to some degree on the price level at which this wealth will be bought. If the price level shrinks, a consequence, say, of a limited supply of money tokens, goods may be taken off the market rather than sold below cost, and the Virtual Wealth will also shrink. Cartels, and all similar schames to `rig the market’ by curtailing supply of a commodity have this effect. Increasing the money supply, however, does not necessarily increase Virtual Wealth. Given physical limits on how much wealth can be put on the market in a period of time, an increase in the price level will occur when those limits are reached.
Soddy also considers what is today called the phenomenon of the `J’ curve. The total money supply circulates from consumers to business and then back from business to consumers, conveying effort by consumers into the business sector, and wealth from the business sector to consumers, in a continuous stream, constant if the quantity of money remains constant.
If production is to be increased, a period of time has to go by in which more effort is put into the system by consumers, before the products `in the pipeline’ emerge at the other end. If this increased effort is financed by new credit – say an expansion of the money supply by a bank loan, then the result is an initial period of inflation – a greater supply of money is chasing a supply of goods that has not increased. More than that, this increased money supply is chasing a supply of goods that is actually diminished by the amount of resources diverted to creating the Permanent Wealth needed to sustain the new rate of production.
Solving this paradox is the `pons asinorum’ of the economic process – the `Riddle of the Sphinx'(18). Given the potential to increase overall output of wealth by the extension of human ability through increased use of machinery and energy, what techniques are required to ensure that this increase takes place, without simply causing an increase in prices, a cycle of `boom’ followed by recession, or other untoward events?
The key lies in the relationship to each other of three processes –

  1. The abstinence of consumers, and their spending on investment rather than current consumption,
  2. The formation of new capital assets, and
  3. A subsequent increase in the supply of money to absorb the new productive capacity.

If the interrelationship of these elements is correctly achieved, then increased output at stable prices will result. If, as is so often the case, capital expansion is attempted financed by new (Bank) credit creation, without any abstinence by the consuming public, the result is only an inflation of prices, followed by depression as the loans are repaid.

“Bypassing of the consumer’s mart may be effected in various ways, all alike, however, in requiring genuine abstinence from consumption. Someone on the way to the mart to purchase supplies must be induced to lend his money to the industrialist and abstain from his customary consumption to that extent. In either case, the manufacturer increases his production, takes on more workers and diminishes unemployment by passing out the money loaned as wages, etc. (19)
“When the loans cease, consumption will not be increased, unless the new workers are continued. Since, before, the money in circulation sufficed to distribute the former flow of wealth, it is obvious that it must now be increased proportionately to distribute the increased flow, and this can be most easily be put into circulation by remission of taxation and paying for Govenment expenditure with the new money issued. If no new money is issued to purchase the wealth for consumption, the whole of the elaborate process is undone. The stocks cannot be sold, the extra wages, salaries, profits, dividends, etc. cannot be paid, the extra hands taken on must again be dismissed, and class hatred … is the natural outcome.” (20)

HIS OWN SUGGESTIONS

The totality of the policy suggestions that Soddy puts forward, based on the above analysis, is the following:

  1. The issue and withdrawal of money should be restored to the nation for the general good, and should entirely cease from providing a source of livelihood to private corporations. Money should not bear interest because of its existence, but only when it is genuinely lent by an owner who gives it up to the borrower. “The real evil is that we now have a concertina instead of a currency.” (21)
  2. The value of money should not depend on the quantity of a single commodity, such as gold. The index number of the general price level, or its reciprocal, the purchasing power of money, should be maintained constant by regulating the total quantity of money in circulation, volume being varied in order to maintain the price level constant.
  3. The issue of money should be regulated by its purchasing power, so as to maintain its purchasing power constant.
  4. A very substantial part of the National Debt should be cancelled and the same sum of National Money issued to replace the credit created by the Banks.
  5. Banks must be compelled to keep reserves of `National Money’ dollar for dollar for each dollar on deposit with them, except for deposits that are genuinely `invested’, and not available to be used as money,
  6. The taxation system must be used to prevent the permanent accumulation of debts to individuals as a result of their capital investments. These should be amortized so as to prevent the creating of a permanent and unrepayable debt burden on the community. Soddy suggests as a means of achieving this, a tax free return being allowed on investments that will be fully amortized over a limited period, whereas those of indefinite length will be taxed, the proceeds of the tax being used to buy up on the open market and discharge such debts as are not self liquidating. In such a way, the financial accounting for investment in capital will be brought into line with the physical reality that capital has a finite life, and depreciates.

CONCLUSION

To summarize the problems that Soddy identifies is to indicate how little mankind has learned in sixty years. If the National Debt was a burden in 1926, the figures of 1988 are far, far greater, and the percentage of National Product taken by debt charges is greater, directly leading to poverty and the curtailment of social programs. The fluctuation of the monetary mass and so the cycle of boom and recession is as bad as ever – the `governor’ of money supply regulated by the Price Index has never been applied. The poverty of the poor of the world continues – it has been added to by crushing international debts, enforced in the interests of sound Banking by the International Monetary Fund. Nonetheless, the institutions of the Banking world are themselves threatened by massive loan defaults. Without a doubt, the living standards of the world, rich and poor alike, are far below what is technically feasible. Personally and nationally, it is obvious that `the debt problem’ is largely to blame.
Yet the `science’ of economics continues to operate as if the laws of today’s banking are the only ones under which a money supply can be provided. And, like the tobacco companies, though the institutions of finance purvey much disinformation to the world as to what is and what is not `good’ for us, the cancer the world suffers from is nonetheless real. Soddy’s unpopularity, it appears, comes from the fact that he chose to play hardball in a setting where such a game was unexpected and unpopular. Says Soddy:

“It was indeed a revelation to the author, accustomed to think of the battle for liberty of thought in scientific matters as having been fought and won centuries ago at the time of Galileo and the Inquisition, to find that in economics, as distinct from physics, it has not yet been won at all… If economics were really a science, it would not need to protect itself from criticism by a conspiracy of silence. A responsible criticism would in any scientific subject be met with instant response, and not by the ostrich policy of burying the head in the sand in the hope that that will thereby choke the ears and throw dust in the eyes of the pursuer also.” (22)

Perhaps the real challenge of this outsider to the economic world, now as then, is his demand that economics become a genuine scientific discipline, not swayed by fashions, but bowing to truth wherever it leads, regardless of the disapproval of vested interests, whether academic or commercial. Do economists have the courage? Without it, we represent, not a science, but a sham.

NOTES

1. Thaddeus J. Trenn: “The Central Role of Energy in Soddy’s Approach” (Kauffman, Ed.,`Frederick Soddy (1877-1956)’) p.185
2. C. H. Douglas’s “Economic Democracy” and “Credit Power and Democracy” were first published in 1920.
3. F. Soddy: `Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt’, pp.80,88,255
4. An account of the reception of Soddy’s ideas in the academic world is given by A. D. Cruickshank (`Soddy at Oxford’) as Chapter 8 of `Frederick Soddy (1877-1956)’, George B. Kauffman, Ed.
5. F. Soddy: Lecture to the Royal Institution, 15 May 1915
6. Ibid.(note 3),p.19
7. F. Soddy: `Money Reform as a preliminary to all reform’, Birmingham, 1950, p.2
8. Ibid.(note 3), p.70
9. Ibid.(note 3), p.73
10. Ibid.(note 3), pp.64,65
11. Ibid.(note 3), p.36
12. Ibid.(note 3), p.60
13. Ibid.(note 3), p.65
14. Ibid.(note 3), pp.122,123
15. Ibid.(note 3), pp.137,138
16. Ibid.(note 3), pp.139,140
17. I have discussed this point at more length in my brief to the McDonald Commission: J. M. Hattersley, `A New Way Forward’: Brief to the Royal Commission on Canada’s Economic Prospects 1983, page 29.
18. Ibid.(note 3), Chapter XIII, p.223
19. Ibid.(note 3), p.235
20. Ibid.(note 3), p.241. A statistical analysis of changes in the price level in Canada in accordance with Soddy’s analysis will be found in Appendix II to my brief to the MacDonald Royal Commission (note 17 above). This indicates a very high degree of correlation between an Index predicted from sales figures and money flows in the economy, and the recorded Consumer Price Index. This would seem to indicate the practicality of the converse process suggested by Soddy – of maintaining the price level stable by control of the volume of the supply of money and credit.
21. Ibid.(note 3), p.296
22. Ibid.(note 3), p.292


Poor donkey! A long pole won’t bring the turnip closer!

The Social Credit dividend would increase incomes
without increasing prices nor salaries nor taxes

COMMITTEE ON MONETARY AND ECONOMIC REFORM
FREDERICK SODDY
– and –
THE DOCTRINE OF `VIRTUAL WEALTH’

– – – – –

A PAPER PRESENTED TO THE 14TH ANNUAL CONVENTION
OF THE EASTERN ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION
BOSTON, MASS. MARCH 1988
– by –
J. MARTIN HATTERSLEY, Q.C., M.A., LL.B.,
FORMER PRESIDENT
ECONOMICS SOCIETY OF NORTHERN ALBERTA

2240 – 10180 – 101 ST.,
EDMONTON, ALBERTA, CANADA
T5J 3S4: February 1988

INTRODUCTION

The study of Economics has never lacked its `heretics’ – those who, from outside the academic specialty, have often enough brought to the subject a fresh viewpoint, inspired not so much by theory as by a practical observation of the realities of trade and commerce, and a keen sense of the human element in what is otherwise a rather abstract discipline.
Among these pioneers, few have been so distinguished, from the point of view of academic credentials in other fields, as Frederick Soddy. Soddy was a world renowned researcher in the study of the chemistry of radioactive materials. His studies with Rutherford at McGill University between 1902 and 1904 had added the word `isotope’ to the vocabulary of chemistry, had disclosed the immense stores of energy contained within every atom, and had ultimately earned him a Professorship of Chemistry at Oxford University, and the 1921 Nobel Prize in chemistry, awarded him in 1922.
Soddy himself was inspired by his experiences of the first World War to develop great concern on a subject that concerns scientists perhaps more today than it did at that time – the possibility that his invention could be used for destruction. He trod new ground when he began to apply his scientific mind and method to the investigation of the economic forces that could cause this to be so. (1)
The most comprehensive summary of his economic thought is a book of remarkable originality, first published in 1926. Its title: `Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt’. Its subtitle – `The Solution to the Economic Paradox’.
Soddy’s assertion of his rightness in a field beyond his normal academic speciality was not well received. One reason, no doubt, was that he was an outsider in a field where policy solutions recommended by orthodoxy – such as Britain’s return to the gold standard in 1925 – were causing visible economic distress. Economics was at once searching for new ideas, and sensitive to the criticisms of self appointed `experts’ (such as the new Social Credit movement (2)), whose ideas, while superficially attractive, lacked academic depth. A second and more fundamental reason, though, was that the intellectual rigor of this `outsider’ spared no criticism even of those who were to be the more progressive thinkers of monetary reform. Not only Major C. H. Douglas, founder of `Social Credit’, but pioneers of new thought within the economic fraternity of the stature of J. M. Keynes and Irving Fisher felt the sting of his pen. (3) It was simply not Soddy’s mode of operation to compromise with the truth as he saw it, for the sake of winning academic allies. As a result he had few of them!
Thus was created the disappointment and bitterness of a man who fell between two stools. On the one hand, the branch of chemistry where his reputation and his qualifications lay now had less to attract his interest. The chemistry of radioactivity had been definitively explored and its research from the standpoint of chemistry, as distinct from physics, had lost much of its former glamour. On the other hand, in the realm of economics and monetary theory, where his work exhibited the genius and the scientific rigor of a true researcher, he had earned the reputation of a heretic and a crank. (4)
This paper has a simple and modest objective. It is to reintroduce a thinker whose reputation and whose research deserve greater respect than they have to now received. In a world where the “economic paradox” still seems some way from solution, Soddy’s claim to have found the answer has gone largely ignored. Perhaps, after sixty years, we owe him a hearing.

FREDERICK SODDY

Frederick Soddy was born in 1877, the youngest son of a London merchant. He obtained a first class honours degree in chemistry at Merton College, Oxford, and after two more years spent in research, travelled to Canada and took a position as a demonstrator at McGill University – where it was his good fortune to meet and work with another expatriate Britisher, Ernest Rutherford. Between 1904 and 1914 he was a lecturer at the University of Glasgow, then a Professor at Aberdeen, finally becoming professor of Chemistry at Oxford University, a post he held until his retirement in 1936. He continued with research and publications into chemistry, mathematics and monetary reform until his death on September 22nd, 1956.
The result of his early research was a new theory on the causes of radioactive decay. His outstanding contribution to chemistry was his explanation, consistent with the periodic table of the elements, of the existence of elements of identical chemical properties, yet different atomic weights, and of a process by which these elements, depending on their origins, transmuted in a sequence ending ultimately in different isotopes of the element lead. By the end of the Great War, and the time of his move to Oxford, much of the mystery of the properties of radioactive elements had been unravelled through his researches. His pioneering work was recognized when he was honoured by being awarded the Nobel Prize for Chemistry, in 1922.
Standing, as he did, at the forefront of investigation into the nature of atomic structure, Soddy very early realized the enormity of the power that was contained within the atom. In a lecture in 1915 he visualised that atomic energy could “virtually provide anyone who wanted it with a private sun of his own.” (5)
Unlike many of his contemporaries, however, who felt that it was the task of others to control the use of the fruits of scientific research, themselves morally neutral, he became deeply concerned at the destructive possibilities that lay in the abuse of his discoveries. Recognizing the place of energy in the creation of all wealth, and armed with the knowledge of an energy source a million times more powerful, weight for weight, than coal, he was appalled at the way in which the resourcefulness of science for destruction during World War I could not be mobilized, when the war was over, for peace and prosperity.

“We have to find out how it comes about that science, which, without economic exhaustion, provided the sinews of war for the most colossal and destructive conflict in history, with the manpower of the nations engaged in military service, has not yet abolished poverty and degrading conditions of living from our midst in the piping times of peace.” (6)

Unlike many of his contemporaries, who embraced various forms of Socialism or Communism as a solution to the troubles of the times, Soddy saw in the money system the key to the restriction and the abuse of the planet’s resources.

“The threatened collapse of our Western civilization has nothing to do with the political issues between capitalism and communism, but is the consequence of its false money system.” (7)

WEALTH vs DEBT: ECONOMICS vs CHREMATISTICS

In turning to his actual analysis, I will be esentially following the outline of Professor Soddy’s book `Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt’ (George Allen & Unwin, 1926). I also highly recommend the recently published symposium `Frederick Soddy, 1877 – 1956′ (D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1986, George B. Kauffman, Ed.), which contains much material not otherwise readily available, both on Soddy’s life, his chemistry and his economics. Thaddeus Trenn’s contributions to this symposium are of particular value to those interested in Soddy’s economic views.
The first `new path’ trodden by Soddy was to define the clear separation between `Wealth’ – a physical phenomenon – and `Debt’, which is a mathematical one. The science of the production of Wealth is the true economics. The handling of Debt is the science of `chrematistics’ (from the Greek, `chrema’: money).

“Debts are subject to the laws of mathematics rather than physics. Unlike wealth, which is subject to the laws of thermodynamics, debts do not rot with old age and are not consumed in the process of living. On the contrary, they grow at so much per cent per annum, by the well-known mathematical laws of simple and compound interest … It is this underlying confusion between wealth and debt which has made such a tragedy of the scientific era.” (8)
“Economics, in a national sense, is concerned with wealth as what is produced by human beings in order to maintain their lives. Chrematistics, the science of wants and demands and of how they exchange one for another, is quite a distinct study, more plainly termed commerce.” (9)

Economics, Soddy claims, has confused debt – a claim on wealth – for wealth itself. Modern economics has therefore woven for itself a hopeless tangle, in which money is counted as an asset – that is, as if it were wealth itself – whereas in reality it is a liability – an obligation of the community to provide wealth on demand. A particular result of this is that those who create and deal in money can receive rewards from the economic system as generous as if the money they had invented by the process of banking had been real wealth created by the same sort of human effort as is required, for instance, for the mining of gold.

“It is difficult or impossible to get a physical means of measuring wealth … but this difficulty must not blind us to the palpable absurdities in conventional economics introduced by always measuring wealth by exchange-value or money price. This may easily result in what could only be regarded as a national calamity appearing to increase the national wealth, or what is in every respect a national blessing appearing to reduce it. Unnecessary middlemen and speculators may much increase the prices of commodities without any addition to the national wealth. Combines of producers and trusts for limiting output and raising prices may reduce the national wealth and increase its monetary value … Such `services’ as these, which are properly means of acquiring wealth at the expense of the community rather than producing it, are, of course, not physically necessary ingredients of wealth at all.” (10)

DISCOVERY, ENERGY, DILIGENCE – THE FACTORS OF PRODUCTION

After separating, therefore, wealth from debt, the next step in solving the `economic paradox’ of poverty in a world rich enough to satisfy mankind’s basic wants with ease, is to survey the process by which wealth comes into being.
Starting with a scientist’s view of the process of production, Soddy replaces the traditional `factors of production’ of Adam Smith (Land, Labour and Capital), with an alternative three: Discovery, Natural Energy and Human Diligence.
Before wealth can be created by man, man must first find out the means by which to make his efforts valuable in producing wealth, by the process of Discovery. Of discovery, Soddy says:

“We find both in biological and human history, not continuity, but a succession of great discoveries … which once made, do alter abruptly the whole future trend and mode of existence.” (11)

On the subject of energy, of course, Soddy is an expert. He points out that the wealth mankind enjoys is a kind of `damming up’ of the great outpouring of solar energy the world continually receives, so as to make it serve a purpose useful to man before it is dissipated in worthless heat. In modern times, energy stored chemically in past ages in sources such as coal and oil has also become available to enrich mankind: additionally, man has learned to use the material and chemical resources available to him to draw on energy more and more directly, using, for instance, less and less help from the animal and vegetable kingdoms, with a consequent saving of human effort.
Finally, not human labour (for labour generally speaking has been replaced in production by the energy of machines), but human diligence.

“The function of the worker, since the introduction of mechanical power, has totally changed in many industries, and in none is the change unimportant. More and more, he does not work in the physical sense, but is directing an inanimate source of power to do what, left alone, it could not do.” (12)

Soddy points out that, though a discovery once made is made for all time, the production of wealth will always require contribution of the second and third factors. `Perpetual motion machines’ do not exist. The machine and the use of power are levers which extend the range of human effort more and more – but never replace it entirely. Consequently, when an investor or speculator makes an income by, say, investing in debt or driving up the price of commodities, the only effect of such efforts is that the investor takes for himself some wealth that has been created by the effort of others. It is the economic power given to such persons to batten on those who do create wealth that causes the `economic paradox’ of poverty in a world technically capable of creating sufficiency for all.

“Never was there an age in history so dowered as ours with all that could have sufficed for a noble and enduring civilization, whereas it is still to ancient civiliations we must go if we wish to find evidence of human effort and imagination being squandered on a national scale on something not strictly utilitarian in purpose. The most gigantic powers await our commands to provide us with all that we require, but we lead a harried, driven life, concerned for the most part with the immediate necessity of keeping the wolf from the door, and destroying our trade rivals.” (13)

One particular distinction Soddy makes with regard to wealth is to distinguish “permanent wealth” from wealth that is consumed in the very act of being of value to mankind. “Permanent Wealth” is, for example, the plough. Consumable wealth is the food grown with the plough. While consumable wealth provides value by being consumed, the whole value of permanent wealth is that it should be consumed as slowly as possible, in the mean time making the output from human diligence that much the greater per unit of effort.
The particular importance of this permanent wealth (some would call it `capital’, but Soddy avoids the term), is that it can command a rent, because of its value in the productive process, yet it cannot eliminate all human effort. Because capital is not a `perpetual motion machine’, the creation of debt which claims interest in perpetuity as the price of such capital gives a mathematical illusion of perpetual income, that is not reflected by any physically attainable form of wealth.

“Psychologically, the economic aim of the individual is, always has been, and probably always will be, to secure a permanent revenue independent of further effort, proof against the passage of time and the chance of circumstance, to support himself in old age and his family after him in perpetuity. He endeavours to do so by accumulating so much property in the heyday of his youth that he and his heirs may live on the interest on it in perpetuity afterwards. Economic and social history is the conflict of this human aspiration with the laws of physics, which make such a perpetuum mobile impossible, and reduces the problem merely to the method by which one individual may get another individual or the community into his debt and prevent repayment, so that the individual or community must share the produce of their efforts with their creditor.” (14)

`VIRTUAL WEALTH’ – THE BASIS OF THE VALUE OF MONEY

Money, then, is not wealth. From the point of view of the community, it is not an asset but a liability. It is a claim against the collective wealth of the community at that time on the market.

“Money is not wealth, even to the individual, but the evidence that the owner of the money has not received the wealth to which he is entitled, and that he can demand it at his own convenience. So that in a community, of necessity, the aggregate money, irrespective of its amount, represents the aggregate value of the wealth which the community prefers to be owed on these terms rather than to own.”(15)

One of the characteristics of production is that producers of goods tend to specialize, so becoming the owners of quantities of goods of one particular type for which, after consuming a very modest quantity, they have little personal need. As consumers, however, these same producers need a wide diversity of goods made by other producers. The difference between the `wholesale’ value to the producer of these unwanted goods, and the `retail’ prices these goods will command from persons not in a position to manufacture them, is the justification for exchange, making use of money, and is the source of the value contained in the tokens used as the nation’s money supply. The total of this value is the nation’s `Virtual Wealth’. In effect, the size of the Virtual Wealth of a community is an index of the value to each member of the community of the presence of the community there – it is an index of the value of the `increment of association’, and the purchasing power of the totalilty of the monetary stock of the community will always equal this total of Virtual Wealth.

“It is true that the nation must act, and continue indefinitely to act, as if it possessed more wealth than it does possess, by the aggregate purchasing power of its money, but the important thing is that this Virtual Wealth does not exist. It is an imaginary negative quantity – a deficit or debt of wealth, subject neither to the laws of conservation or thermodynamics… It is the quantity of goods that the community abstains from possessing that is definite, and the number of units this definite quantity is worth is all the money, whatever that all may be.
“It is the virtual wealth which measures the value of the purchasing power of money, and not money which measures the value of wealth.”(16)

In ancient times, of course, the tokens used for money had real cost and it was reasonable to pay a price for their use. Mining gold, for instance, takes effort which must be rewarded. But the development of Banking has enabled Bank Credit (indistinguishable in effect from other forms of money, and identical in effect), to be created at the cost only of pen and ink, and yet reap a reward for its use in the form of an interest charge paid to Bankers, for a value given by the Community rather than by any effort the Banker has put out.
Soddy is open to criticism here. The Banker who extends credit by way of loan is indeed creating credit by manipulating figures on paper, but that credit comes back to the banking system by way of deposits of Bank Credit on which interest has to be paid by the Banker, or the whole system will collapse. Soddy would have been more accurate to tie in the creation of credit by banks with a process by which all those who use the Banking system and the consequent free access to the community’s `Virtual Wealth’, with the well known phenomenon by which `the rich get richer and the poor get poorer’.(17) Not only bankers profit from this, but all who receive interest on their `money in the Bank’, or who can borrow from Banks cheaper than from public savings for investment purposes. All who do business with a Bank, whether it is as depositors obtaining cheap accounting and chequing services, or obtaining interest on money deposits available virtually on demand, or as borrowers enjoying a rate of interest less than that required to cause the investment of real `savings’, are exploiters of the public’s Virtual Wealth by this process. Perhaps this is a reason why the financially most sophisticated members of the public are so slow to recognize the problems the Banking system creates.

THE EFFECT OF MONEY CREATION – THE `J’ CURVE

The argument has reached a point where we have a quantity of wealth of a certain value `on the market’, ready to be exchanged for money from any buyer who is willing to purchase it at a price acceptable to the seller. How great this quantity is depends to some degree on the price level at which this wealth will be bought. If the price level shrinks, a consequence, say, of a limited supply of money tokens, goods may be taken off the market rather than sold below cost, and the Virtual Wealth will also shrink. Cartels, and all similar schames to `rig the market’ by curtailing supply of a commodity have this effect. Increasing the money supply, however, does not necessarily increase Virtual Wealth. Given physical limits on how much wealth can be put on the market in a period of time, an increase in the price level will occur when those limits are reached.
Soddy also considers what is today called the phenomenon of the `J’ curve. The total money supply circulates from consumers to business and then back from business to consumers, conveying effort by consumers into the business sector, and wealth from the business sector to consumers, in a continuous stream, constant if the quantity of money remains constant.
If production is to be increased, a period of time has to go by in which more effort is put into the system by consumers, before the products `in the pipeline’ emerge at the other end. If this increased effort is financed by new credit – say an expansion of the money supply by a bank loan, then the result is an initial period of inflation – a greater supply of money is chasing a supply of goods that has not increased. More than that, this increased money supply is chasing a supply of goods that is actually diminished by the amount of resources diverted to creating the Permanent Wealth needed to sustain the new rate of production.
Solving this paradox is the `pons asinorum’ of the economic process – the `Riddle of the Sphinx'(18). Given the potential to increase overall output of wealth by the extension of human ability through increased use of machinery and energy, what techniques are required to ensure that this increase takes place, without simply causing an increase in prices, a cycle of `boom’ followed by recession, or other untoward events?
The key lies in the relationship to each other of three processes –

  1. The abstinence of consumers, and their spending on investment rather than current consumption,
  2. The formation of new capital assets, and
  3. A subsequent increase in the supply of money to absorb the new productive capacity.

If the interrelationship of these elements is correctly achieved, then increased output at stable prices will result. If, as is so often the case, capital expansion is attempted financed by new (Bank) credit creation, without any abstinence by the consuming public, the result is only an inflation of prices, followed by depression as the loans are repaid.

“Bypassing of the consumer’s mart may be effected in various ways, all alike, however, in requiring genuine abstinence from consumption. Someone on the way to the mart to purchase supplies must be induced to lend his money to the industrialist and abstain from his customary consumption to that extent. In either case, the manufacturer increases his production, takes on more workers and diminishes unemployment by passing out the money loaned as wages, etc. (19)
“When the loans cease, consumption will not be increased, unless the new workers are continued. Since, before, the money in circulation sufficed to distribute the former flow of wealth, it is obvious that it must now be increased proportionately to distribute the increased flow, and this can be most easily be put into circulation by remission of taxation and paying for Govenment expenditure with the new money issued. If no new money is issued to purchase the wealth for consumption, the whole of the elaborate process is undone. The stocks cannot be sold, the extra wages, salaries, profits, dividends, etc. cannot be paid, the extra hands taken on must again be dismissed, and class hatred … is the natural outcome.” (20)

HIS OWN SUGGESTIONS

The totality of the policy suggestions that Soddy puts forward, based on the above analysis, is the following:

  1. The issue and withdrawal of money should be restored to the nation for the general good, and should entirely cease from providing a source of livelihood to private corporations. Money should not bear interest because of its existence, but only when it is genuinely lent by an owner who gives it up to the borrower. “The real evil is that we now have a concertina instead of a currency.” (21)
  2. The value of money should not depend on the quantity of a single commodity, such as gold. The index number of the general price level, or its reciprocal, the purchasing power of money, should be maintained constant by regulating the total quantity of money in circulation, volume being varied in order to maintain the price level constant.
  3. The issue of money should be regulated by its purchasing power, so as to maintain its purchasing power constant.
  4. A very substantial part of the National Debt should be cancelled and the same sum of National Money issued to replace the credit created by the Banks.
  5. Banks must be compelled to keep reserves of `National Money’ dollar for dollar for each dollar on deposit with them, except for deposits that are genuinely `invested’, and not available to be used as money,
  6. The taxation system must be used to prevent the permanent accumulation of debts to individuals as a result of their capital investments. These should be amortized so as to prevent the creating of a permanent and unrepayable debt burden on the community. Soddy suggests as a means of achieving this, a tax free return being allowed on investments that will be fully amortized over a limited period, whereas those of indefinite length will be taxed, the proceeds of the tax being used to buy up on the open market and discharge such debts as are not self liquidating. In such a way, the financial accounting for investment in capital will be brought into line with the physical reality that capital has a finite life, and depreciates.

CONCLUSION

To summarize the problems that Soddy identifies is to indicate how little mankind has learned in sixty years. If the National Debt was a burden in 1926, the figures of 1988 are far, far greater, and the percentage of National Product taken by debt charges is greater, directly leading to poverty and the curtailment of social programs. The fluctuation of the monetary mass and so the cycle of boom and recession is as bad as ever – the `governor’ of money supply regulated by the Price Index has never been applied. The poverty of the poor of the world continues – it has been added to by crushing international debts, enforced in the interests of sound Banking by the International Monetary Fund. Nonetheless, the institutions of the Banking world are themselves threatened by massive loan defaults. Without a doubt, the living standards of the world, rich and poor alike, are far below what is technically feasible. Personally and nationally, it is obvious that `the debt problem’ is largely to blame.
Yet the `science’ of economics continues to operate as if the laws of today’s banking are the only ones under which a money supply can be provided. And, like the tobacco companies, though the institutions of finance purvey much disinformation to the world as to what is and what is not `good’ for us, the cancer the world suffers from is nonetheless real. Soddy’s unpopularity, it appears, comes from the fact that he chose to play hardball in a setting where such a game was unexpected and unpopular. Says Soddy:

“It was indeed a revelation to the author, accustomed to think of the battle for liberty of thought in scientific matters as having been fought and won centuries ago at the time of Galileo and the Inquisition, to find that in economics, as distinct from physics, it has not yet been won at all… If economics were really a science, it would not need to protect itself from criticism by a conspiracy of silence. A responsible criticism would in any scientific subject be met with instant response, and not by the ostrich policy of burying the head in the sand in the hope that that will thereby choke the ears and throw dust in the eyes of the pursuer also.” (22)

Perhaps the real challenge of this outsider to the economic world, now as then, is his demand that economics become a genuine scientific discipline, not swayed by fashions, but bowing to truth wherever it leads, regardless of the disapproval of vested interests, whether academic or commercial. Do economists have the courage? Without it, we represent, not a science, but a sham.

NOTES

1. Thaddeus J. Trenn: “The Central Role of Energy in Soddy’s Approach” (Kauffman, Ed.,`Frederick Soddy (1877-1956)’) p.185
2. C. H. Douglas’s “Economic Democracy” and “Credit Power and Democracy” were first published in 1920.
3. F. Soddy: `Wealth, Virtual Wealth and Debt’, pp.80,88,255
4. An account of the reception of Soddy’s ideas in the academic world is given by A. D. Cruickshank (`Soddy at Oxford’) as Chapter 8 of `Frederick Soddy (1877-1956)’, George B. Kauffman, Ed.
5. F. Soddy: Lecture to the Royal Institution, 15 May 1915
6. Ibid.(note 3),p.19
7. F. Soddy: `Money Reform as a preliminary to all reform’, Birmingham, 1950, p.2
8. Ibid.(note 3), p.70
9. Ibid.(note 3), p.73
10. Ibid.(note 3), pp.64,65
11. Ibid.(note 3), p.36
12. Ibid.(note 3), p.60
13. Ibid.(note 3), p.65
14. Ibid.(note 3), pp.122,123
15. Ibid.(note 3), pp.137,138
16. Ibid.(note 3), pp.139,140
17. I have discussed this point at more length in my brief to the McDonald Commission: J. M. Hattersley, `A New Way Forward’: Brief to the Royal Commission on Canada’s Economic Prospects 1983, page 29.
18. Ibid.(note 3), Chapter XIII, p.223
19. Ibid.(note 3), p.235
20. Ibid.(note 3), p.241. A statistical analysis of changes in the price level in Canada in accordance with Soddy’s analysis will be found in Appendix II to my brief to the MacDonald Royal Commission (note 17 above). This indicates a very high degree of correlation between an Index predicted from sales figures and money flows in the economy, and the recorded Consumer Price Index. This would seem to indicate the practicality of the converse process suggested by Soddy – of maintaining the price level stable by control of the volume of the supply of money and credit.
21. Ibid.(note 3), p.296
22. Ibid.(note 3), p.292

(c) 1988 J.M.Hattersley
8112-144a St. EDMONTON AB CANADA T5R 0S2
martinh@ecn.ab.ca
Press `Enter’ to continue.
Last update: 3 March 2001

The circulation of money
in a Social Credit system

Money is loaned to the producers (industry) by the National Credit Office, for the production of new goods, which brings a flow of new goods with prices (left arrow). Since wages are not sufficient to buy all of available goods and services for sale, the National Credit Office fills the gap between the flow of purchasing power and the flow of total prices by issuing a monthly dividend to every citizen. Consumers and goods meet at the market place (retailer), and when a product is purchased (consumed), the money that had originally been loaned for producing this product returns to its source, the National Credit Office. At any moment, there is always equality between the total purchasing power available in the hands of the population, and the total prices of consumable goods for sale on the market.

The Social Credit proposals explained in 10 lessons
Lesson 5: The chronic shortage of puchasing power
The social dividend to every citizen

Financing production is not enough. Goods and services must also reach those who need them. In fact, the only reason for the existence of production is to meet needs and wants. Production must be distributed. How is it distributed today, and how would it be distributed under a Social Credit system?

Today, goods are put up for sale at certain prices. People who have money buy these goods by passing over the counter the required sum. This method allows those who have money to buy the goods that they want and need.

Now, Social Credit would in no way change this method of distributing goods. The method is flexible and good — provided, of course, that individuals who have needs also have the purchasing power to choose and buy the goods which would fill these needs.

Purchasing power in the hands of those who have needs and wants: it is precisely here that the present system is defective, and it is this defect that Social Credit would correct.

The money distributed in the form of wages, profits, and industrial dividends constitutes purchasing power for those who receive these various allotments. But there are a few flaws in the present system:

1. Industry never distributes purchasing power at the same rate that it generates prices.

2. The production system does not distribute purchasing power to everyone. It distributes it only to those who are employed in production.

And they still hesitate to change the wheel!

Even if the banks charged no interest, at any given moment, the amount of money available to the community as purchasing power is never sufficient to buy back the total production made by industry.
The economists maintain that production automatically finances consumption; that is to say, that the wages and salaries distributed to the consumers are sufficient to buy all the available goods and services. But facts prove just the opposite. Scottish engineer Clifford Hugh Douglas was the first to demonstrate this chronic shortage of purchasing power. He explained it this way:

A cannot buy A+B

The producer must include all his production costs in the price of his product. The wages distributed to the employees (which for convenience’s sake can be labeled “A” payments) are only one part of the cost price of the product. The producer has other costs besides wage costs (which are labeled “B” payments), that are not distributed in wages and salaries, such as the payments for raw materials, taxes, banking charges, depreciation charges (to replace machinery), etc.

The retail price of the product must include all the costs: wages (A) and other payments (B). So the retail price of the product must be at least A + B. Then, it is obvious that the wages (A) cannot buy the sum of all the costs (A + B). So there is a chronic shortage of purchasing power in the present system.

There are more reasons for this gap between prices and purchasing power: When a finished good is put on the market, it comes with a price attached to it. But part of the money included in this price was distributed perhaps six months or a year ago, or even more. Another part will be distributed only once the good is sold, and the merchant takes out his profit. Another part will perhaps be distributed in ten years, when worn machinery — of which wear is included as an expense in the price — is replaced by new machinery, etc.

Then there are those individuals who receive money, and who do not spend it. This money is included in the prices, but it is not in the purchasing power of those who need goods.

The repayment of short-term bank loans, and the present fiscal system, increase the gap between the prices and the purchasing power. Hence the accumulation of goods, unemployment, and all that ensues.

Some people might say that the businesses paid with “B” payments (those that supplied the raw material, machinery, etc.) then paid wages to their own employees, and part of these “B” payments therefore become “A” payments. This changes nothing of what has been said before: this is simply a wage distributed in another step of production, and this “A” wage cannot be distributed without being included into a price, which cannot be less than A + B; the gap is still there.

If you try to increase wages and salaries, the wage increases will automatically be included in the prices, and it will accomplish nothing. (Like the donkey on the cartoon running after the turnip.) To be able to buy all of the production, an additional income is needed coming from a source other than wages and salaries, an income at least equivalent to B. This is what the Social Credit dividend would do, being given every month to every citizen in the country. (This dividend would be financed with new money created by the nation, and not by the taxpayers’ money.)

Poor donkey! A long pole won’t bring the turnip closer!

The Social Credit dividend would increase incomes
without increasing prices nor salaries nor taxes
What has kept the system going

Without this other source of income (the dividend), there should be, theoretically, a growing mountain of unsold goods. But if goods are sold all the same, it is because, instead, we have a growing mountain of debt! Since people do not have enough money, retailers must encourage credit buying in order to sell their goods: buy now, pay later (or should we say more precisely, pay forever…) But this is not sufficient to fill the gap in the purchasing power.
So there is also a growing stress upon the necessity for work that distributes wages without increasing the quantity of consumer goods for sale, such as public works (building bridges or roads), war industries (building submarines, airplanes, etc.). But this is not sufficient either.
So each country will strive to achieve a “favourable balance of trade”, that is to say, to export, to sell to other countries more goods than it receives, in order to obtain from these foreign countries, the money that the population is lacking at home to buy their own products. However, it is impossible for all nations to have a “favourable balance of trade”: if some countries manage to export more goods than they import, there must also necessarily be countries that receive more goods than they export. But no country wishes to be in that position, so it causes trade conflicts between nations that can degenerate into armed conflicts.
Then as a last resort, economists have discovered a new export market, a place where we can send our goods without anyone trying to send anything back, a place where there are no inhabitants: the moon, outer space. Some countries will spend billions of dollars building rockets to go to the moon or other planets; this huge waste of resources is just to generate wages that will be used to buy the production left in our countries. Our economists are really in the clouds!

Progress replaces the need
for human labour

The second flaw in the present system is that the production system does not distribute purchasing power to everyone. It distributes it only to those who are employed in production. And the more the production comes from the machine, the less it comes from human labour. Production even increases, whereas required employment decreases. So there is a conflict between progress, which eliminates the need for human labour, and the system, which distributes purchasing power only to the employed.

Yet, everybody has the right to live. And everybody is entitled to the basic necessities of life. Earthly goods were created by God for all men, and not only for those who are employed, or employable.

That is why Social Credit would do what the present system is not doing. Without in any way disturbing the system of reward for work, it would distribute to every individual a periodical income, called a “social dividend” — an income tied to the individual as such, and not to employment.

Earthly goods created for all

This is the most direct and concrete means to guarantee to every human being the exercise of his fundamental right to a share in the goods of the earth. Every person possesses this right — not as an employee in production, but simply as a human being.

Pope Pius XII said in his Pentecost radio-address of June 1, 1941:

“Material goods have been created by God to meet the needs of all men, and must be at the disposal of all of them, as justice and charity require.

“Every man indeed, as a reason-gifted being, has, from nature, the fundamental right to make use of the material goods of the earth, though it is reserved to human will and the juridical forms of the peoples to regulate, with more detail, the practical realization of that right.

“Such an individual right cannot, by any means, be suppressed, even by the exercise of other unquestionable and recognized rights over natural goods.

“The economic wealth of a nation does not properly consist in the abundance of goods judged by a sheer material computation of their worth, but it consists in what such an abundance does really and effectively mean and provide as a sufficient material basis for a fair personal development of its members.

“If such a just distribution of goods were not to be effected or just imperfectly ensured, the true end of the national economy would not be achieved, opulent though the abundance of available goods might be, since the people would not be rich, but poor, as it would not be invited to share in that abundance.

“Obtain, on the contrary, that this just distribution be efficiently realized on a durable basis, and you will see a people, though with less considerable goods at its disposal, become economically sound. “

The Pope said that it is up to the peoples themselves, through their laws and regulations, to choose the methods capable of allowing each man to exercise his right to a share in the earthly goods. The Social Credit dividend to all would achieve this. No other proposed system has been, by far, so effective, not even our present social security laws.

Why a dividend to all

— A social dividend to all? But a dividend presupposes a productive-invested capital!
Precisely! It is because all members of society are co-capitalists of a real and immensely productive capital.
We said above, and we could never repeat it enough, that financial credit is, at birth, the property of all of society. It is so because it is based on real credit, on the country’s production capacity. This production capacity is made up partially of work, and the competence of those who also take part in production. But it is mainly made up of other elements which are the property of all.
There are, first of all, natural resources, which are not the production of any man; they are a gift from God, a free gift that must be at the service of all. There are also all the inventions made, developed, and transmitted from one generation to the next. It is the biggest production factor today. No man can claim to be the only owner of progress, which is the fruit of many generations.
No doubt that one needs men of our present times to make use of this progress — and they are entitled to a reward: they get it in remuneration: wages, salaries, etc. But a capitalist who does not personally take part in the industry where he invested his capital is entitled to a share of the result just the same, because of his capital.
The largest real capital of modern production is, in fact, the sum total of the progressive inventions, i.e. discoveries, which today give us more goods with less work. And since all human beings are, on an equal basis, coheirs of this immense capital that is always increasing, all are entitled to a share in the fruits of production.
The employee is entitled to this dividend and to his wage or salary. The unemployed person has no wage or salary, but is entitled to this dividend, which we call social, because it is the income from a social capital.
We have just shown that the Social Credit dividend is based on two things: the inheritance of natural resources, and the inventions from past generations. This is exactly what Pope John Paul II wrote in 1981 in his Encyclical letter Laborem Exercens on human work (n. 13):

“Through his work man enters into two inheritances: the inheritance of what is given to the whole of humanity in the resources of nature, and the inheritance of what others have already developed on the basis of those resources, primarily by developing technology, that is to say, by producing a whole collection of increasingly perfect instruments for work. In working, man also “enters into the labor of others.”

The folly of full employment

To speak of full employment, that is of universal employment, is to make a contradiction with the pursuit of progress in the techniques and processes of production. New and more perfect machines are not introduced to tie man to employment, nor are new sources of energy tapped for this end, but rather they are brought into production for the purpose of liberating man from work.

But, alas, we seem to have lost sight of ends. We are confusing means and ends, we mistake the former for the latter. This is a perversion, which infects our whole economic life and which makes it impossible for men to enjoy the logical rewards of progress to the full.

Industry does not exist to give employment, but to furnish products, goods. If it succeeds in furnishing such goods, then it has accomplished its purpose, met its end. And the more completely it meets this end with the minimum of time and the minimum employment of human hands, the more perfect it is.
Mr. Jones, for example, buys his wife an automatic washing machine. Now the weekly wash will take only a quarter of the day instead of a full day. When Mrs. Jones puts the clothing in the washing machine along with the soap, when she turns on the taps bringing in the proper mixture of hot and cold water, she has nothing more to do except to turn on the machine. The machine washes the clothes, rinses them, and then stops automatically when the clothes are ready to come out.

Is Mrs. Jones going to bemoan the fact that she now has more time to do what she pleases? Or is Mr. Jones going to search for another type of work to replace that from which his wife has been freed? Certainly not. Neither one is that stupid.

But we do find such stupidity running rampant in our social and economic life, for the system makes progress penalize the individual, instead of bringing him relief, in that it persists in tying purchasing power, the distribution of money, to employment and employment alone — employment in production. Money comes only as a recompense for effort and labour in production.

It is true that production distributes money to those who are employed in the work of producing. But this is as a means, and not as an end. The purpose of production is not to supply money, but to furnish goods and services. And if production is able to replace twenty salaried individuals by the introduction of one machine, it has not in any way thwarted its true purpose. And if it could furnish all the production necessary for humans, and not distribute one cent of money, it would still be meeting the end for which it exists: to furnish goods and services.

When purchasing power disappears

In freeing men from labour, industry should certainly receive the same gratitude which Mr. Jones received from his wife when he liberated her from hours of work by purchasing an automatic washing machine for her.
But how can a man say “thank you” when he has been liberated from work by a machine, when he finds to his consternation that he has no money? (See the cartoon on the previous page, where workers are laid off and replaced by a robot.) This is precisely where our economic system has become defective, in that it has not adapted its financial mechanism to its productive mechanism.
In the measure that industry or production passes out of human hands, so too should purchasing power, in the form of money, be channeled to consumers through some other means than just recompense for employment. In other words, the financial system should harmonize with production, not only with respect to volume, but also with respect to the manner in which it is distributed. If production is abundant, then money should be abundant. If production is liberated from human labour, then money should be liberated and separated from employment.
Money is an integral part of the financial system, and not a part of the production system, strictly speaking. When the production system finally reaches a point where it can distribute goods without the aid of salaried individuals, then too the financial system should reach the point where purchasing power can be distributed by some other means than salaries.
If such is not the case, it is because, unlike the production system, the financial system has not adapted itself to progress. And it is precisely this difference which has given rise to grave problems, when in fact progress should make all problems of such a nature disappear.
Replacing men by machines in production should lead to the enrichment of men, to their deliverance from purely material worries and cares, permitting them to give themselves over to human pursuits other than those which are related solely to the economic function. If, on the contrary, such a substitution leads to privation, it is because we have refused to adapt the financial system to this progress.

Technology should serve every man

Is technology an evil? Should we rise up and destroy the machines because they take our jobs? No, if the work can be done by the machine, that is just great; it will allow man to give his free time over to other activities, free activities, activities of his own choosing. But this providing he is given an income to replace the salary he lost with the installation of the machine, of the robot; otherwise, the machine, which should be the ally of man, will become his enemy, since it deprives him of his income, and prevents him from living:

“Technology has contributed so much to the well-being of humanity; it has done so much to uplift the human condition, to serve humanity, and to facilitate and perfect its work. And yet at times technology cannot decide the full measure of its own allegiance: whether it is for humanity or against it… For this reason my appeal goes to all concerned… to everyone who can make a contribution toward ensuring that the technology which has done so much to build Toronto and all Canada will truly serve every man, woman and child throughout this land and the whole world.” (John Paul II, homily in Toronto, Canada, September 15, 1984.)
In 1850, manufacturing as we know it today was barely started, with man doing 20% of the work, animals 50%, and machines accounting for only 30%. By 1900, man was doing only 15%, animals 30%, and machines 55%. By 1950, man was doing only 6%, and machines the rest — 94%. (The animals have been freed!)

And we have seen nothing yet, since we are only entering the computer age, which allows places like the Nissan Zama plant in Japan to produce 1,300 cars a day with the help of only 67 humans — that is more than 13 cars a day per man. There are even some factories that are entirely automated, without any human employee, like the Fiat motor factory in Italy, which is under the control of some twenty robots who do all the work.

In 1964, a report was presented to the President of the United States, signed by 32 signatories, including Mr. Gunnar Myrdal, Swedish-born economist, and Dr. Linus Pauling, winner of the Nobel Prize, entitled “Social Chaos in Automation”. This report said in brief that “the U.S., and eventually the rest of the world, would soon be involved in a ‘revolution’ which promised unlimited output… by systems of machines which will require little co-operation from human beings. Consequently, action must be taken to ensure incomes for all men, whether or not they engage in what is commonly reckoned as work.”

In his book The End of Work, U.S. author Jeremy Rifkin quotes a recent Swiss study which said that “in thirty years from now, less than 2% of the present workforce will be enough to produce the totality of the goods that people need.” Three out of every four workers — from retail clerks to surgeons — will eventually be replaced by computer-guided machines.

If the rule that limits the distribution of income to those who are employed is not changed, society is heading for chaos. It would be plain ludicrous to tax 2% of workers to support 98% of unemployed people. We definitely need a source of income that is not tied to employment. The case is clearly made for the Social Credit dividend.

Full employment is materialistic

If we must blindly persist in keeping everyone, men and women alike, employed in production, even though the production to meet basic needs is made with less and less human labour already, then new jobs, which are completely useless, must be created. And in order to justify these useless jobs, new artificial needs must be created, through an avalanche of advertisements, so that people will buy products they do not really need. This is what is called “consumerism”.

Likewise, products will be manufactured to last as short a time as possible, with the intent of selling more of them and making more money, which brings about an unnecessary waste of natural resources, and also the destruction of the environment. Also, we persist in maintaining jobs that require no creative efforts whatever, jobs that require only mechanical efforts, jobs that could well be done by machines, jobs where the employee has no chance of developing his personality. But, however mind-destroying this job is, it is the condition for the worker to obtain money, the licence to live.

Thus, for all wage-earners, the meaning of their jobs comes down to this: they go to work to get the cash to buy the food to get the strength to go to work to get the cash to buy the food to get the strength to go to work… and so on, until retiring age, if they do not die before. Here is a meaningless life, where nothing differentiates man from an animal.
Mme Gilberte Côté-Mercier

In his 1936 movie Modern Times, Charlie Chaplin gives an example of dehumanizing work, by playing a machine worker who suffers temporary derangement, as he tightens the bolts on a factory treadmill at a frantic pace.

Free activities

What differentiates man from an animal is precisely that man has not only material needs, but also cultural and spiritual needs. As Jesus said in the Gospel: “Not on bread alone does man live, but in every word that proceeds from the mouth of God” (Deuteronomy 8:3.). So to force man to spend all his time in providing for his material needs is a materialistic philosophy, since it denies that man has also a spiritual dimension and spiritual needs.
But, then, if man is not employed in a paid job, what will he do with his spare time? He will spend it on free activities, activities of his own choosing. It is precisely in his leisure time that man can really develop his personality, develop the talents that God gave him, and use them wisely.

Moreover, it is during their leisure time that a man and a woman can take care of their religious, social, and family duties: raising their family, practising their Faith (to know, love, and serve God), and help their brothers and sisters in Christ. Raising children is the most important job in the world. Yet because the mother, who stays at home to raise her children, receives no salary, many will say that she does nothing, that she does not work! (Ask any stay-at-home mother if she does not work!)

To be freed from the necessity of working to produce the necessities of life does not presume growing idleness. It simply means that the individual would be placed in the position where he could participate in the type of activity which appeals to him. Under a Social Credit system, there would be an outburst of creative activity. For example, the greatest inventions, and the best works of art, have been made during leisure time. As C. H. Douglas said:

“Most people prefer to be employed, but on things they like rather than on the things they don’t like to be employed upon. The proposals of Social Credit are in no sense intended to produce a nation of idlers… Social Credit would allow people to allocate themselves to those jobs to which they are suited. A job you do well is a job you like, and a job you like is a job you do well.”

Full employment is outmoded

John Paul II

This exactly what Pope John Paul II said on November 18, 1983, when he received in audience the participants in a national conference sponsored by the Italian Episcopal Conference’s Commission for Social Problems and Work. Here are excerpts from the Pope’s address:

“The primary foundation of work is in fact man himself… Work is for man and not man for work… Furthermore, we cannot fail to be concerned about the opinions of those who today hold that discussion of a more intense participation is now outmoded and useless, and demand that human subjectivity be realized in so-called free time. It does not seem just, in fact, to oppose the time dedicated to work to the time that is free of work, in so far as all man’s time must be viewed as a marvellous gift of God for overall and integral humanization. I am nevertheless convinced that free time deserves special attention because it is the time when people can and must fulfil their family, religious, and social obligations. Rather, this time, in order to be liberating and useful socially, is spent with mature ethical awareness in a perspective of solidarity, which is also expressed in forms of generous volunteer services.” (Taken from L’Osservatore Romano, weekly edition in English, January 9, 1984, p. 18.)

Alain Pilote

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
aplinCharlieMy Autobiography, Simon & Schuster, 1964


Charlie Chaplin and Social Credit
Most people have heard of Charlie Chaplin
(1889-1977), probably the most popular screen
comic of all times with his character of the tramp
that captivated audiences all over the world. But
did you know that Chaplin was in favor of Douglas’s
Social Credit? He mentioned it himself in
his autobiography, published in 1964:
“During the filming of City Lights, the stock
market crashed. Fortunately, I was not involved
because I had read Major C. H. Douglas’s Social
Credit, which analysed and diagrammed our
economic system… I was so impressed with
his theory that in 1928, I sold all my stocks and
bonds, and kept my capital fluid.”
On another page, Chaplin wrote: “I was discussing
Major Douglas’s book, Economic Democracy,
and said how aptly his credit theory
might solve the present world crisis.”

Source:

[PDF]

“In God’s family, no one ought to go without the necessities of life”

Format de fichier: PDF/Adobe Acrobat – Version HTML
Social Credit and the Kingdom of God. By Eric D. Butler 4 to 7. Charlie Chaplin and Social Credit. 6. Full employment is outmoded. JP II 
www.michaeljournal.org/english-june-july-august-06.pdf – Pages similaires – À noter

page 6….

Further Reading

ChaplinCharlieMy Autobiography, Simon & Schuster, 1964 


More:


Chaplin also had a genius for many things besides filmmaking. According to his biographer, David Robinson, “he was particularly fascinated by economics.”
After reading “Social Credit,” by Major H. Douglas, Chaplin “was so impressed by its theory of the direct relationship of unemployment to failure of profit and capital” that he took growing U.S. unemployment as a warning and “in 1928 turned his stocks and bonds into liquid capital, and so [was] spared at the time of the Wall Street crash” of 1929.
In “Modern Times,” which he began filming in 1933, Chaplin anticipated the droll humor of Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot.” Two tramps on a park bench solemnly discuss the world economic crisis and their fears about going off the gold standard: “This means the end of our prosperity–we shall have to economize.”
In the 1930s and ’40s, the protean artist became a target for ultraconservatives who reviled his morals–all four of Chaplin‘s wives were teenagers when he married them, including two who were 16–as well as his left-wing politics.
During the McCarthy period, while on a trip to London for the 1952 world premiere of “Limelight” with his fourth wife, Oona (the daughter of Eugene O’Neill), and their children–the 63-year-old Chaplin was barred by the U.S. attorney general from reentering the country. (He subsequently moved to Vevey, Switzerland, but returned in triumph in 1972, invited back by the Film Society of Lincoln Center in New York.)
Many of the pictures in the Port’s mini-retrospective, “Between Laughter and Tears,” are readily seen on video. (“Limelight,” incidentally, has a scene with Buster Keaton, the only time the two greatest comedians of silent pictures appeared together, Robinson notes, “and the only time since 1916 that Chaplin had worked with a comic partner.”)
But this is a chance to catch Chaplin where he truly belongs–in a movie house on a screen that offers the proper treatment of his larger-than-life vitality and pathos.

Social Credit – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

– [ Traduire cette page ]

Names associated with Social Credit include Charlie Chaplin, William Carlos Williams, Ezra Pound, T. S. Eliot, Herbert Read, Aldous Huxley, Storm Jameson,




Avec mes meilleures salutations.

François de Siebenthal
14, ch. des Roches
CH 1010 Lausanne
Suisse, Switzerland

Jean-Paul II a notamment comparé le rapport sexuel chaste entre les époux chrétiens à l’adoration eucharistique.
Admiration.
http://www.union-ch.com/file/portrait.wmv
à faire circuler largement, merci, le monde est déjà meilleur grâce à ce simple geste de solidarité.
Krach ? Solutions…
Local Exchange Systems in 5 languages
www.easyswap.ch
http://pavie.ch/?lng=en
http://michaeljournal.org
http://desiebenthal.blogspot.com/
http://ferraye.blogspot.com/
skype siebenthal
00 41 21 652 54 83
021 652 55 03 FAX: 652 54 11
CCP 10-35366-2

http://non-tridel-dioxines.com/
http://m-c-s.ch et  www.pavie.ch
http://ktotv.com/
Please, subscribe to be kept informed.
Pour nous soutenir, mieux résister aux manipulations, rester unis et recevoir des nouvelles différentes et vraies, un abonnement nous encourage.  Pour la Suisse, 5 numéros par année de 16 pages par parution: le prix modique de l’abonnement est de 16 Sfr.- par année (envois prioritaires)
Adressez vos chèques à:
Mme Thérèse Tardif C.C.P. 17-7243-7
Centre de traitement, 1631-Bulle, Suisse
Vous avez reçu ce texte parce qu’une de vos relations a pensé que notre esprit pouvait vous intéresser et nous a suggéré de vous écrire ou vous a personnellement fait suivre ce message. Si vous ne désirez plus rien recevoir de notre part, nous vous remercions de répondre par courriel avec la simple mention « refusé ». Si cette adresse figure au fichier, nous l’en ôterons de suite. Avec nos excuses.

Incinérateurs : “Les études prouvent une augmentation des cancers” . Suisse, études truquées, oublis des nano-particules et des nouvelles molécules, poissons toxiques…


Incinérateurs : "Les études prouvent une augmentation des cancers, notamment du pancréas…"

15 contributions

Publié le vendredi 6 février 2009 à 11H42

"Toutes les études de l'Institut national de veille sanitaire concluent à une augmentation des cancers chez les populations, qui se trouvent sous le panache des usines d'incinération".  Alors qu'Eugène Caselli, président de MPM, vient d'annoncer la mise en service en 2010 de l'incinérateur de Fos, le docteur Patrice Halimi, cofondateur de l'Association santé environnement France (Asef), fait état des conséquences sanitaires inquiétantes.  "L'impact a été estimé à 40 km autour des sites d'incinération avec une augmentation des cancers du sang (leucémie et lymphomes), des cancers du sein et du pancréas, poursuit-il. C'est le cocktail de trois émissions qui font le danger. Alors quand on explique que le taux d'émissions de dioxines est moindre sur les nouvelles installations, cela ne suffit pas. Il faut aussi prendre en compte les rejets de microparticules, de métaux lourds (mercure et chrome) et de dioxyde de soufre". Et de dénoncer "l'absence de  normes sanitaires". "L'Organisation mondiale de la santé n'a pas établi de seuils d'émissions en-dessous desquelles on peut dire que les populations ne risquent rien. On a fait l'inverse : on a demandé aux usines jusqu'où techniquement elles pouvaient baisser leurs émissions et on en fait une norme.  Alors que les habitants de l'étang de Berre sont déjà soumis à de la pollution industrielle, implanter un incinérateur, c'est ajouter un facteur de risque supplémentaire". Alexandra Ducamp

LA PROPAGANDE HONTEUSE CONTINUE !

http://news.google.ch/nwshp?hl=fr&tab=wn&ncl=1283784109&topic=m   http://www.tdg.ch/geneve/actu/etudes-cheneviers-claires-risque-sante-2009-02-05    


Avec mes meilleures salutations.

François de Siebenthal
14, ch. des Roches
CH 1010 Lausanne
Suisse, Switzerland

Jean-Paul II a notamment comparé le rapport sexuel chaste entre les époux chrétiens à l'adoration eucharistique.
Admiration.
http://www.union-ch.com/file/portrait.wmv
à faire circuler largement, merci, le monde est déjà meilleur grâce à ce simple geste de solidarité.
Krach ? Solutions…
Local Exchange Systems in 5 languages
www.easyswap.ch
http://pavie.ch/?lng=en
http://michaeljournal.org
http://desiebenthal.blogspot.com/
http://ferraye.blogspot.com/
skype siebenthal
00 41 21 652 54 83
021 652 55 03 FAX: 652 54 11
CCP 10-35366-2

http://non-tridel-dioxines.com/
http://m-c-s.ch et  www.pavie.ch
http://ktotv.com/
Please, subscribe to be kept informed.
Pour nous soutenir, mieux résister aux manipulations, rester unis et recevoir des nouvelles différentes et vraies, un abonnement nous encourage.  Pour la Suisse, 5 numéros par année de 16 pages par parution: le prix modique de l'abonnement est de 16 Sfr.- par année (envois prioritaires)
Adressez vos chèques à:
Mme Thérèse Tardif C.C.P. 17-7243-7
Centre de traitement, 1631-Bulle, Suisse
Vous avez reçu ce texte parce qu'une de vos relations a pensé que notre esprit pouvait vous intéresser et nous a suggéré de vous écrire ou vous a personnellement fait suivre ce message. Si vous ne désirez plus rien recevoir de notre part, nous vous remercions de répondre par courriel avec la simple mention « refusé ». Si cette adresse figure au fichier, nous l'en ôterons de suite. Avec nos excuses.

Le livre confession du procureur Bertossa, la corruption en Suisse…

http://michaeljournal.org/images/Veau_d_Or.gifBernard Bertossa se dévoile: morceaux choisis «A 45 ans, j’ai compris qu’à un certain niveau la justice n’existait pas» – «En 1987, en tant que magistrat président de la Chambre d’accusation genevoise, j’ai dû statuer sur une première série de recours déposés par la famille Marcos et j’ai vraiment pris conscience de l’énormité de la situation! (…) On avait, d’une part, un Etat asiatique de cinquante millions d’habitants, confronté à des difficultés économiques et sociales considérables; de l’autre, un potentat et sa famille qui, profitant de manière éhontée de leur pouvoir, avait accumulé, en vingt ans de règne, une fortune colossale à laquelle ils s’accrochaient sans le moindre scrupule (…) Et, pour «faire justice» dans ce contexte, un attirail de dispositions obséquieuses, l’évocation de principes formels et dérisoires face à l’enjeu, l’interdiction de faire ceci ou cela. J’avais alors 45 ans et quinze ans de magistrature civile et commerciale derrière moi, et j’ai soudain compris qu’à ce niveau la justice n’existait pas, et que des procédés archaïques lui servaient d’oripeaux.» «Mon fils veut-il poursuivre mon combat?» – Affaire Kadhafi: «Si j’en crois ce que la presse a rapporté, il y avait manifestement des raisons suffisantes pour procéder à l’arrestation de ces personnes. Je suis donc très heureux que la justice genevoise n’ait pas hésité à agir comme elle l’aurait fait à l’encontre de personnes moins «puissantes». C’est la preuve qu’elle est indépendante. (…) Après dix ans de pratique du Barreau, mon fils a décidé d’entrer dans la magistrature (…) Il se trouve que, par un pur hasard, il était de permanence lorsque cette affaire a éclaté, et c’est lui qui a donné le feu vert à la police pour qu’elle appréhende le fils Kadhafi et sa femme. Il a ensuite ordonné l’ouverture d’une information. Je l’ai d’ailleurs moi-même appris en lisant le journal. Mon fils n’a pas le droit de m’entretenir des affaires qu’il traite (…) Mais, bien sûr, quand nous discutons de manière générale de justice, et en particulier de justice pénale, nos convictions sont proches. Quant à savoir s’il veut, comme vous dites, poursuivre mon combat, il faudrait lui poser directement la question.»


http://viplift.org/

Avec mes meilleures salutations.

François de Siebenthal
14, ch. des Roches
CH 1010 Lausanne
Suisse, Switzerland

Jean-Paul II a notamment comparé le rapport sexuel chaste entre les époux chrétiens à l'adoration eucharistique.
Admiration.
http://www.union-ch.com/file/portrait.wmv
à faire circuler largement, merci, le monde est déjà meilleur grâce à ce simple geste de solidarité.
Krach ? Solutions…
Local Exchange Systems in 5 languages
www.easyswap.ch
http://pavie.ch/?lng=en
http://michaeljournal.org
http://desiebenthal.blogspot.com/
http://ferraye.blogspot.com/
skype siebenthal
00 41 21 652 54 83
021 652 55 03 FAX: 652 54 11
CCP 10-35366-2

http://non-tridel-dioxines.com/
http://m-c-s.ch et  www.pavie.ch
http://ktotv.com/
Please, subscribe to be kept informed.
Pour nous soutenir, mieux résister aux manipulations, rester unis et recevoir des nouvelles différentes et vraies, un abonnement nous encourage.  Pour la Suisse, 5 numéros par année de 16 pages par parution: le prix modique de l'abonnement est de 16 Sfr.- par année (envois prioritaires)
Adressez vos chèques à:
Mme Thérèse Tardif C.C.P. 17-7243-7
Centre de traitement, 1631-Bulle, Suisse
Vous avez reçu ce texte parce qu'une de vos relations a pensé que notre esprit pouvait vous intéresser et nous a suggéré de vous écrire ou vous a personnellement fait suivre ce message. Si vous ne désirez plus rien recevoir de notre part, nous vous remercions de répondre par courriel avec la simple mention « refusé ». Si cette adresse figure au fichier, nous l'en ôterons de suite. Avec nos excuses.

“Social Credit” , favorable articles recently in the British journal New Science, as well as by the University of Ottawa.

The Wanderer, January 8, 2008


Should “Social Credit” Be Taken Seriously?


By PAUL LIKOUDIS


In his new book, *In Defense of Human Dignity: Essays on the Just Third Way: A Natural Law Perspective* (reviewed three weeks ago in From the Mail), Michael D. Greaney devotes a chapter to “A Critique of Social Credit,” arguing that the economic theory or “system” developed by English Major C. H. Douglas in the 1920s is not compatible with Catholic social doctrine.


And yet, the Douglas’ “scheme,” especially as further developed by the great French Canadian Catholic lay activist Louis Even and a host of his disciples, including a former mayor of Montreal, is an idea that is growing in popularity around the world, has been adopted by such countries as the Philippines and Madagascar, and was enthusiastically endorsed and recommended as a viable solution to the economic chaos engulfing much of the world now by His Eminence Bernard Cardinal Agre, Archbishop Emeritus of the Archdiocese of Abidan, Ivory Coast at a social action conference in Quebec this past summer.


“Social Credit” has also been the subject of favorable articles published recently in the British journal New Science, as well as by the University of Ottawa based Centre for Research on Globalization.


In an address this past June to the members of the lay action movement founded by Even, the Pilgrims of St. Michael in Rougemont, Quebec, titled “The Social Credit Lessons Are Based on the Social Doctrine of the Church,” Cardinal Agre, who serves on the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, explained how the doctrines of Social Credit are in complete accordance with the teachings of the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church, and said he would like to see the Pilgrims of St. Michael have a permanent residence in Rome.


Cardinal Agre was one of four cardinals entrusted by Pope John Paul II to write the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church.


“When you take the ten lessons on Social Credit,” the cardinal said,” they directly originate from the thought that was condensed in the Compendium of the Social Doctrine of the Church; you can fully sense the content of the Social Doctrine and the application of the Gospel in these ten lessons. I believe that we must pay much attention to this.


“You have a goldmine in the Compendium that assembles all what the great Popes spoke and said about society, starting with those who spoke most: Pius XI, Pius XII, John XXIII, Paul VI who also wrote a lot, and John Paul II. It is all of this together that makes the Social Doctrine of the Church. We must remember this.


“Money is not to be rejected, but earned honestly, and one must be careful. I leave you with this phrase: ‘We must dishonor money earned through evil.’ This means that today all the banks create money, but there is clean money and dirty money. Dirty money creates nothing, dirty money of prostitution, of all kinds of evils that we cannot name. It exists, the banks create money. All money that the banks receive is money that is clean and earned, but the money that banks create out of nothing is dirty money…


“Dishonor money that is ill­gained and ill-employed as well, because money that is ill-employed becomes noxious. That is what you read in the Ten Lessons on Social Credit and other teachings.


“Like everyone else, I came looking for hope. My hope is that no matter what, by dint of talking, educating, creating study circles, we will finally manage to break this law of iron and fire of money, of an international financial house that controls all of us; we will succeed, it is certain…”


To further show his support for the Social Credit movement promoted by the Pilgrims of St. Michael, Cardinal Agre agreed to write the forward for a new edition of the Polish language edition of Louis Even’s book on Social Credit.


In fact, the Social Credit ideas of Douglas and Even almost became law in the United States in 1932, through legislation known as “the Goldsborough Bill,” after Maryland Rep. T. Allan Goldsborough, passed by the House of Representatives, but it was defeated in the Senate after stiff opposition by President Roosevelt and the directors of the Federal Reserve.


As W. E. Turner wrote in Stable Money: A Conservative Answer to Business Cycles ( 1966): “An overwhelming majority of the U. S. Congress (289 to 60) favored it as early as 1932, and in one form or another it has persisted since. Only the futile hope that a confident new President (Roosevelt) could restore prosperity without abandoning the credit money system America had inherited kept Social Credit from becoming the law of the land. By 1936, when the New Deal (Roosevelt’s solution) had proved incapable of dealing effectively with the Depression, the proponents of Social Credit were back again in strength. The last significant effort to gain its adoption came in 1938…”


One supporter in the Senate was Robert L. Owen, Oklahoma from 1907 to 1925 (a national bank director for 46 years), who testified in the House on April 28, 1936: “…the bill which he (Goldsborough) then presented, with the approval of the Committee on Banking and Currency of the House — and I believe it was practically a unanimous report. It was debated for two days in the House, a very simple bill, declaring it to be the policy of the United States to restore and maintain the value of money, and directing the Secretary of the Treasury, the officers of the Federal Reserve Board, and the Reserve banks to make effective that policy. That was all, but enough, and it passed, not by a partisan vote. There were 117 Republicans who voted for that bill (which was presented by a Democrat) and it passed by 289 to 60, and of the 60 who voted against it, only 12, by the will of the people, remain in the Congress.


“It was defeated by the Senate, because it was not really under­stood. There had not been sufficient discussion of it in public. There was not an organized public opinion in support of it.”


No More Debt


The fundamental doctrine of Social Credit is that money is supposed to be servant, not a master, and it is the responsibility of governments to ensure there is sufficient and stable money in circulation. As Louis Even wrote in his masterpiece, In This Age of Plenty:


“Social Credit tears away the veil which has kept money some­thing almost sacred and untouchable. It makes money a simple ser­vant, and not a master — a god who dictates, permits, or forbids.


“Social Credit maintains that: All that is physically possible and legitimately requested must, by this very fact, be made financial­ly possible.


“If it is possible to build houses, roads, and construct sewage systems, it must be financially possible to pay for the necessary work and materials to build these things. If this is not possible, then one must admit that it is the monetary system that masters man, and not man who masters his monetary system. And since money consists of nothing more than engraved or printed figures, or else handwritten figures in a bank ledger, it is more than stupid and absurd, it is criminal to let families go homeless, towns without public utilities, simply because of a lack of figures…”


In the Introduction to *The Social Credit Proposals Explained in Ten Lessons And Viewed in the Light of the Social Doctrine of the Church,* available on line, Alain Pilote wrote: “Social Credit would neither create the goods nor the needs, but it would eliminate any artificial obstacle between the two of them, between production and consumption, between the wheat in elevators and the bread on the table. The obstacle today — at least in the developed countries — is purely of financial order, a money obstacle. Now, the financial system neither proceeds from God nor nature. Established by men, it can be adjusted to serve men and no more to cause them problems.


“To this end, Social Credit presents concrete propositions. Though very simple, these propositions nevertheless imply a real revolution. Social Credit brings the vision of a new civilization, if by civilization one can mean man’s relationship with his fellow men and the con­ditions of life making easier for each one the blossoming of his personality.


“Under a Social Credit system, we would no longer be struggling with problems that are strictly financial, which constantly plague public administrations, institutions, families, and which poison relationships between individuals. Finance would be nothing but an accounting system, expressing in figures the relative values of goods and services, making easier the mobilization and coordination of the energies required for the different levels of production towards the finished good, and distributing to ALL consumers the means to choose freely and individually what is suit­able to them among the goods offered or immediately realizable…


“Each citizen would be presented with this economic security as a birthright, as a member of the community, enjoying throughout one’s life an immense community capital, that has become a dominant factor of modern production. This capital is made up of, among other things, the natural resources, which are a collective good; life in society, with the increment that ensues from it; the sum of the discoveries, inventions, technological progress, which are an ever increasing heritage from generations…”


The Appendix of Louis Even’s In *This Age of Plenty: A New Conception of Economics”: Social Credit, contains the full report of a committee of nine theologians who were asked to judge whether any of its elements were tinged with socialism or communism. After considerable deliberation, the nine theologians found that Social Credit was not tainted with Socialism nor Communism, and was worthy of close attention.


In the introduction to the 1996 Polish edition of Even’s work, Bishop Zigniew Jozef Kraszewski, wrote: “What Catholics learned in the social doctrine of the Church is the way between socialism and capitalism. For many years, this doctrine has been diffused in Canada, and known as the Social Credit theory. Louis Even’s book, In *This Age of Plenty”, that I introduce to the Polish readers, is an exposition of the Catholic social doctrine that is good not only for the Canadians; this book contains a lot of instructive topics for any person who reads it and who is open to social problems. This book has not been written only for great theoreticians and scholars, but for everybody. That is why this book is precious to the Poles, especially at the time of the second miracle of the Vistula River that we are presently experiencing. (The miracle of the downfall of Communism.)” Poland miraculously succeeded in gaining its freedom and sovereignty. After the
 devastation of Communism that had been keeping us captive for so many years, we have the duty to choose the right path of social justice, based on Catholic doctrine. I think this book will largely help in achieving that. I entrust all the readers to the protection of Our Lady Victorious, who reigns in the cocathedral of Kamionku, in Warsaw.”


To learn more about Louis Even and Social Credit, see “The Michael Journal” at: http://michaeljournal.org, which is available in French, English, German, Polish, Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity


Comments from Joe Thomson


This is the article from Paul Likoudis in the Wanderer that Greaney objected to.
http://www.geocities.com/socialcredit/greaney-01-30-09.txt


“Its only aim is to remove from these banks the privilege of controlling
credit and money in order to confer that privilege to the State; this is the
only nationalization required.”

Bill, that sentence  above was taken from the piece “Social Credit and
Catholicism”  that was forwarded in your previous post….


From the way some of the Pilgrims’ literature I’ve seen is written, for
instance, it could easily be taken that “Social Credit” wants to centralize
ALL credit issue into the hands of Government.   The quote above could be
interpreted that way, too.  This could certainly lead, as it has already
often lead other authors trying to understand Social Credit and explain it
in print, to believe that it is contradictory in its desire to empower the
‘individual’, since a “State” (government) in complete control over all
‘credit’ issue seems inherently ‘socialistic’.


When I read that passage quoted  in the Levesque essay, and other material
expressed in a similar way in that essay;  and similarly in other sources as
varied as Tutte’s book,  Alf Hooke’s “30+5”,  and Vic Bridger’s latest “Good
Sense Journal” (pages 11-12, as it could be taken, and has, by John Rawson,
for one), it strikes me that we have got to have some finality over what
such passages really mean.


Either the “State”, as in “Government”, DOES HAVE complete control over ALL
credit issue, i.e. the power to create credit has been completely removed
from the private Banks and vested in some centralised agency, such as a
Reserve Bank, and the private banks are only to be “on-lenders”.


Or, we view the “State”, as I think Douglas intended it to be viewed, as the
“community” of individuals.   Where credit-issue remained with the private
banks as now, under public oversight and regulation as with any other
monopoly, of course,  but where,  within the overall banking system,  there
existed an agency to ascertain the necessary ongoing macro-economic
accounting corrections, and a means of distribution of the appropriate
credits to Consumers.


And that this, of itself, would be sufficient to restore the financial
system to proper functionality, with increasing benefits to all.


Until this is settled, I think we’re going to continue to have people like
Greaney, even more ‘honest’ ones than him,  trying to reconcile what seems
like a serious contradiction. Or using it against us.


And invariably, as I’ve seen written elsewhere by authors who have no reason
to be prejudiced against it, their view of Social Credit will be that it is
a form of  impossible contradictory crankism.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subsidiarity


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributism


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_credit





Avec mes meilleures salutations.


François de Siebenthal


skype siebenthal
00 41 21 616 88 88 or 652 54 83

CCP 10-35366-2

Corruption, la Suisse pire que la Bulgarie

Corruption en Bulgarie et en Suisse
Scrutin sur la libre circulation, l'incertitude reste selon La Liberté .
Les partisans de la libre circulation et de son extension à la Roumanie et la Bulgarie sont très inquiets.
Voir la Tribune de Genève et de 24 heures avec un investisseur suisse installé là-bas depuis 8 ans.
On raconte comment, après avoir acheté des terres au bord de la mer pour des villas, il voit des soldats, kalachnikov à la main, qui affirment que le terrain est zone militaire, pour un ministre désireux de les vendre à son compte.
Deux possibilités: verser des dessous de table ou porter l'affaire devant la justice.
C'est ce qu'il a fait. Au bout de cinq ans, il obtient enfin gain de cause.
En Suisse, il aurait tout perdu… voir www.pavie.chVoir par exemple…




Avec mes meilleures salutations.

François de Siebenthal
14, ch. des Roches
CH 1010 Lausanne
Suisse, Switzerland

Jean-Paul II a notamment comparé le rapport sexuel chaste entre les époux chrétiens à l'adoration eucharistique.
Admiration.
http://www.union-ch.com/file/portrait.wmv
à faire circuler largement, merci, le monde est déjà meilleur grâce à ce simple geste de solidarité.
Krach ? Solutions…
Local Exchange Systems in 5 languages
www.easyswap.ch
http://pavie.ch/?lng=en
http://michaeljournal.org
http://desiebenthal.blogspot.com/
http://ferraye.blogspot.com/
skype siebenthal
00 41 21 652 54 83
021 652 55 03 FAX: 652 54 11
CCP 10-35366-2

http://non-tridel-dioxines.com/
http://m-c-s.ch et  www.pavie.ch
http://ktotv.com/
Please, subscribe to be kept informed.
Pour nous soutenir, mieux résister aux manipulations, rester unis et recevoir des nouvelles différentes et vraies, un abonnement nous encourage.  Pour la Suisse, 5 numéros par année de 16 pages par parution: le prix modique de l'abonnement est de 16 Sfr.- par année (envois prioritaires)
Adressez vos chèques à:
Mme Thérèse Tardif C.C.P. 17-7243-7
Centre de traitement, 1631-Bulle, Suisse
Vous avez reçu ce texte parce qu'une de vos relations a pensé que notre esprit pouvait vous intéresser et nous a suggéré de vous écrire ou vous a personnellement fait suivre ce message. Si vous ne désirez plus rien recevoir de notre part, nous vous remercions de répondre par courriel avec la simple mention « refusé ». Si cette adresse figure au fichier, nous l'en ôterons de suite. Avec nos excuses.

Les avaricieux alcooliques au pouvoir…

Mais le gouvernement fédéral a tout prévu ! 

Les avaricieux alcooliques au pouvoir…

La FED, la banque centrale US, qui est une banque privée (sic), pousse le gouvernement des USA,…à racheter ses propres obligations avec de nouvelles dettes.

Madoff est devenu un modèle….

Les Etats-Unis veulent le copier dans une escroquerie planétaire. Ils ont le projet de racheter leur propre dette en émettant une autre dette plus chère tout en poussant à l'inflation, qui est un vol des plus faibles.

En plus, ils fournissent des milliards de bonus aux financiers et d'autres milliards pour pousser à la faillite les petites banques et concentrer tous les pouvoirs dans de moins en moins de mains aux doigts crochus et avides.

La cupidité et l'avarice sont des passions coupables pire que l'alcoolisme car elles tuent à distance des millions de personnes innocentes par des escroqueries légales honteuses et des spéculations sans morale.

Donneriez-vous de l'argent ou de l'alcool au tenancier d'un bar alcoolique invétéré   ???

Donneriez-vous la gestion d'une banque à un cupide invétéré ???

Les étapes des avaricieux anonymes sont les mêmes que celles des alcooliques anonymes…AA

Il suffit de remplacer le mot alcool par le mot avarice ou argent…et le mot alcoolique par avaricieux…

Voici les douze Étapes faisant partie du programme de rétablissement suggéré par les AA, chacune pouvant être utilisée de façon personnelle:

  1. Nous avons admis que nous étions impuissants devant l’alcool ( l'argent ) – que nous avions perdu la maîtrise de notre vie.
  2. Nous en sommes venus à croire qu’une Puissance supérieure à nous-mêmes pouvait nous rendre la raison.
  3. Nous avons décidé de confier notre volonté et notre vie aux soins de Dieu tel que nous Le concevons.
  4. Nous avons procédé sans crainte à un inventaire moral approfondi de nous-mêmes.
  5. Nous avons avoué à Dieu, à nous-mêmes et à un autre être humain la nature exacte de nos torts.
  6. Nous étions tout à fait prêts à ce que Dieu élimine tous ces défauts.
  7. Nous Lui avons humblement demandé de faire disparaître nos défauts.
  8. Nous avons dressé une liste de toutes les personnes que nous avions lésées et nous avons consenti à réparer nos torts envers chacune d’elles.
  9. Nous avons réparé nos torts directement envers ces personnes dans la mesure du possible, sauf lorsqu’en ce faisant, nous risquions de leur nuire ou de nuire à d’autres.
  10. Nous avons poursuivi notre inventaire personnel et promptement admis nos torts dès que nous nous en sommes aperçus.
  11. Nous avons cherché par la prière et la méditation à améliorer notre contact conscient avec Dieu, tel que nous Le concevons, Lui demandant seulement de connaître Sa volonté à notre égard et de nous donner la force de l’exécuter.
  12. Ayant connu un réveil spirituel comme résultat de ces étapes, nous avons alors essayé de transmettre ce message à d’autres alcooliques et de mettre en pratique ces principes dans tous les domaines de notre vie.

Les douze Traditions des Alcooliques Anonymes

Voici les douze Traditions régissant le fonctionnement des différentes structures (et donc des groupes) et activités des "Services" AA

  1. Notre bien-être commun devrait venir en premier lieu ; le rétablissement personnel dépend de l'unité des AA.
  2. Dans la poursuite de notre objectif commun, il n'existe qu'une seule autorité ultime : un Dieu d'amour tel qu'il peut se manifester dans notre conscience de groupe.Nos chefs ne sont que des serviteurs de confiance, ils ne gouvernent pas.
  3. Le désir d'arrêter de boire est la seule condition pour être membre des AA.
  4. Chaque groupe devrait être autonome sauf sur les points qui touchent d'autres groupes ou l'ensemble du Mouvement.
  5. Chaque groupe n'a qu'un objectif primordial, transmettre son message à l'alcoolique qui souffre encore.
  6. Un groupe ne devrait jamais endosser ou financer d'autres organismes, qu'ils soient apparentés ou étrangers aux AA, ni leur prêter le nom des Alcooliques anonymes, de peur que les soucis d'argent, de propriété ou de prestige ne nous distraient de notre objectif premier.
  7. Tous les groupes devraient subvenir entièrement à leurs besoins et refuser les contributions de l'extérieur.
  8. Le Mouvement des Alcooliques anonymes devrait toujours demeurer non professionnel, mais nos centres de service peuvent engager des employés qualifiés.
  9. Comme Mouvement, les Alcooliques anonymes ne devraient jamais avoir de structure formelle, mais nous pouvons constituer des conseils ou des comités de service directement responsables envers ceux qu'ils servent.
  10. Le Mouvement des Alcooliques anonymes n'exprime aucune opinion sur des sujets étrangers ; le nom des AA ne devrait donc jamais être mêlé à des controverses publiques.
  11. La politique de nos relations publiques est basée sur l'attrait plutôt que sur la réclame; nous devons toujours garder l'anonymat personnel dans la presse écrite et parlée de même qu'au cinéma.
  12. L'anonymat est la base spirituelle de toutes nos traditions et nous rappelle sans cesse de placer les principes au-dessus des personnalités.

Ce que AA ne fait pas

  1. A.A. ne mène pas de campagne de recrutement pour convaincre les alcooliques de se joindre à l’association. A.A. existe pour les alcooliques qui veulent devenir sobres.
  2. A.A. ne fait pas de vérifications auprès de ses membres afin de s’assurer qu’ils ne boivent pas. Il incite plutôt les alcooliques à s’aider entre eux.
  3. A.A. n’est pas une organisation religieuse. Chaque membre est libre d’avoir des idées personnelles sur le sens de sa vie.
  4. A.A. n’est pas une organisation médicale et ne donne pas d’avis médicaux ou psychiatriques.
  5. A.A. ne dirige aucun hôpital, clinique ou sanatorium et ne dispense pas de services infirmiers.
  6. A.A. n’est lié à aucune autre organisation, mais coopère avec celles qui s’occupent de l’alcoolisme. Certains membres travaillent pour de telles organisations, mais à titre personnel, non comme représentants des A.A.
  7. A.A. n’offre aucun service social, ne procure pas de gîte, de nourriture, de vêtements, de travail ou d’argent. Il aide l’alcoolique à rester sobre afin qu’il puisse se procurer ces choses lui-même.
  8. L’existence de A.A. repose sur le principe de l’anonymat (comme le nom de l’association l’indique). Les A.A. ne veulent pas que les noms des membres soient cités à la télévision, à la radio ou dans les journaux. Les membres ne dévoilent pas les noms d’autres membres aux gens extérieurs à A.A. Mais les membres n’ont pas de honte à appartenir aux A.A. Ils ne veulent qu’encourager plus d’alcooliques à demander l’aide des A.A. en leur garantissant que leur anonymat sera respecté.

Davos versus Fribourg. Our solution. Concrete figures for the USA !


From: Richard Cook

Date: 2009/2/1
Subject: RE: Concrete figures of dividends for USA ? How to compute now or soon…how much per month this year and every other year for the next years?

Please check my article originally published on Global Research entitled, “An Emergency Program of Monetary Reform for the United States,” which is published in edited form in my book, “We Hold These Truths: The Hope of Monetary Reform.” Also check out the article on “Bailout for the People” on my website www.richardccook.com.

My proposal for a national dividend is, for the first year, rather large; it is $1,000 per capita per month in the form of vouchers that would then capitalize a new system of national savings banks. The total would be $3.6 trillion of the GDP, about 25%. Future dividends would be calculated amounts. Part of the immediate problem is the huge amount of debt due to the need for people to borrow simply for consumption. The debt obviously needs to be paid off or forgiven, not just rolled over.

I admit there is a dearth of data on making such calculations, so what I have come up with is my best estimate. The key figure is the difference between GDP vs. national income which lies in the $3-4 trillion range per annum at present.

Richard C. Cook
Check out my new website at http://www.richardccook.com/

The Cook Plan

What I am calling the ‘Cook Plan’ is to pay each resident of the U.S. a dividend, by means of vouchers for the necessities of life, in the amount of $1,000 per month per capita starting immediately as our fair share of the resources of the earth and the productivity of the modern industrial economy. The money would then be deposited in a new network of community savings banks to capitalize lending for consumers, small businesses, and family farming.

An other answer.

Dear Francois ,
This reply is from the Past President of the N.Z. Social Credit Institute, and Editor of electronz@dominc.net because I am acknowledged as one of the few people with a good understanding of orthodox as well as Social Credit Philosophy and Economics. I am also a past Dominion President of the N.Z. Social Credit Party , which peaked with 20% of political party votes here, some years ago, when the Party was more of a force to be reckoned with.
As you suspected, it is impossible to compute accurately the amount of a National Dividend, or Just Price Discounts if that was the sole
target one was aiming for, because of the complexity of commercial processes. But there are pointers which can give a general idea
of the sort of beneficial results. One modern Economic Researcher , Richard C. Cook, of USA, studied the C.H. Douglas (Social Credit) Analysis System, assessed it as a valid modus operandus, and then applied it to recent U.S. Government Statistics, which he had access to, and reported his results in a research paper, duly published, and then as part of one of his books. In essence his conclusion
was this:
Official U.S. Statistics using rounded figures for the year analysed, showed the total output of all “Goods and Services” nationwide, as
Retail Values, to aggregate $13 Trillion ($13 Thousand – Billion ), and in the same year, the total amount paid out in Wages, Salaries, Bonuses and Dividends from every enterprise , nationwide, was approximately $11 Trillion, producing a gross Deficit or Shortfall between distributed Purchasing Power, and the total provision of all known Goods and Services.
Richard Cook then said that if the C.H. Douglas Analysis had validity, there would be some correlation between this Deficiency and the increase in total indebtedness in the same country over the same period, because the CHD Analysis maintained that for the Goods and Services to be Sold or Consumed, that Deficiency would have had to be filled, and the only financial way for it to be filled would be by allowing a Credit Creating Mechanism, such as the privately owned banking system, which has usurped the national role of creating credit on behalf of the community, to produce the necessary new Debt/Credit, to maintain the ongoing consumption of Goods and Services. He then noted that because of the complexity and nationwide extent and types of debt , it is only possible to establish very approximate calculations, but with that qualification about accuracy, it was obvious that there was a definite relationship between the
ongoing size of the “Deficiency” and the Annual Growth in Total Indebtedness, which supported the C.H. Douglas Analysis.
That is one theoretical answer to your question, assuming a string of assumptions, and so although not able to be claimed as factual, it does give some idea of the vast value involved. One way of illustrating the extent of this is to note that if all the benefit of Social Credit was able to be concentrated into a National Dividend, and directly credited from the Central Reserve Bank, as a Dividend to offset the Income Deficiency , into Citizen’s Bank Accounts, it would theoretically give them a 15.3% Wage Increase as a National Dividend, with
no taxes or offsets.
In practical terms, one would never suggest concentrating all the benefits into cashable bonuses like this, partly because there are lots of other community problem areas which much more desperately need financial support than expanding workers incomes, but this does give an idea of the vastness of the shortfall that is converted into Bank owned Debt, by present practices. This , with its interest charges, is passed on to future generations. It is all owed to the privately owned Banking System, for debts which governments are allowing them to create out of nothing. So in addition to the massive shortfall which communities are being robbed of, many of us consider it immoral that interest on that loss, as a debt burden, should then be charged also against future generations.
An increasing number of monetary reformers, including the writer, believe that the dishonesty of the present system is so blatant that religious leaders of most if not all faiths, should come out openly and condemn it…… If and when you have other questions which you would like to discuss, including ways we could effectively co-operate, I look forward to hearing from you.
Yours in Social Credit ,
Don Bethune.
POST SCRIPT: The NZ S.C. Institute has books available free in N.Z. on request , for people interested in gaining an understanding of the theory behind Social Credit, and how it could be implemented.

PS: The 2009 new deal.

A salary directly to the parents, able to hire helpers in every house, seen as a small enterprise.

First step to give a fast idea, but much more could be produced in a short time. Much depends of the robots and computers producing goods and services.

USA, Real gross domestic product, GDP was estimated as $ 13.8 usa trillion in 2007.

14 545 US billions in 2008 http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

If you pay the parent staying at home to take care of the children,
the future of the country and this is the best place to invest,
you can double this figure, according to studies made in Switzerland.


This is work, the most important one, and has to be rewarded
just on plain justice.

Then you send as dividends income in the country
to increase the demand and curb the crisis.

This will give a direct dividend of nearly
$ 500 per month for each persons in the USA
( 302 074 000 persons in 2007 ).


This dividend has to be created by the US government
without any debt nor interests to anybody,
just as the Abraham Lincoln's Greenbacks
or the J-F Kennedy's dollars have done
just before they were murdered...


This will create no inflation because many goods
are ready to be sold and can be produced in a short while
thanks to robotics.

For population's and pollution's problems, see my interview.


http://ferraye.blogspot.com/2009/01/socialcredit-stop-or-set-aside-by-eric.html


and

http://www.michaeljournal.org/plenty39.htm
and

http://www.michaeljournal.org/monetaryreform.asp

PS: Real gross domestic product (GDP) --
the output of goods and services produced by labor and property

located in the United States --
decreased at an annual rate of 3.8 percent
in the fourth quarter of 2008,
(that is, from the third quarter to the fourth quarter),
according to advance estimates released by the
Bureau of Economic Analysis.
In the third quarter, real GDP decreased 0.5 percent.


fds


Why US presidents are murdered ?
Will Obama follow the same fate ?


Part 1: Abraham Lincoln The British have killed U.S. Presidents in the past. To aid in a competent understanding of the present threat, we offer in this series a summary of how and why they have done it. The “British” authors of these murders are not the English people, but the oligarchy ruling Great Britain–the “Venetian party” feudalist aristocrats and bankers, headed by the Royal Family, and the European princes intermarried with the British Royals. American Presidents who have been assassinated, were advancing U.S. interests in fierce conflict with British geopolitical aims. In each case, the killing, and the accession to office of the Vice President, hindered or reversed the policy direction of the murdered President. This is true of those shot to death–Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy. It is also true of the two 19th-century Presidents who died abrupt and surprising deaths in office, purportedly of natural causes, William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor. The interrelated Lincoln and McKinley murders, with their sharply defined strategic issues, will figure in the first two articles of this series. Then we will review, in light of those cases, the other presidential murders and suspicious deaths, the attempts against Ford and Reagan, and …. threats to President Clinton and Obama. – The 19th-Century View – John Wilkes Booth shot and mortally wounded President Abraham Lincoln on April 14, 1865, five days after Robert E. Lee’s Confederate Army surrendered in the Civil War. In their biography of him, Lincoln’s two private secretaries, John G. Nicolay and John Hay, brought up the question of Booth, the Confederate Secret Service headquartered in British Canada, and how the murder plot was financed: “[O]ne of the conspiracies, not seemingly more important than the many abortive ones, ripened…. A little band of malignant secessionists, consist[ed] of John Wilkes Booth, … Lewis Powell … a disbanded rebel soldier … George Atzerodt, …a spy and blockade runner of the Potomac, David E. Herold, … Samuel Arnold and Michael O’Laughlin, Maryland secessionists and Confederate soldiers, and John H. Surratt [a Confederate spy and dispatch lander]…. “Booth … visited Canada, consorted with the rebel emissaries there, and at last–whether or not at their instigation cannot certainly be said–conceived a scheme to capture the President…. He seemed always well supplied with money, and talked largely of his speculations in oil as a source of income; but his agent afterwards testified that he never realized a dollar from that source; that his investments, which were inconsiderable, were a total loss.” The Confederate Secret Service was headed by the Virginia-based Confederate Secretary of State, Judah P. Benjamin, who had been born a British subject in the West Indies, and the London-based James Bulloch, uncle of the later U.S. President Teddy Roosevelt. They coordinated the supply of British rifles and British naval vessels to the Rebellion, and the transfer of gold through the then-British colony of Canada. Some months before he shot Lincoln, Booth deposited funds in the Montreal bank used by Benjamin’s operatives. John Surratt, who confessed in 1870 to plotting with Booth to abduct Lincoln, admitted to using that Montreal bank for the secret service funds. Surratt told of the days preceding the murder, and of his trip to Montreal carrying money and messages from Judah Benjamin. At Ford’s Theater, where John Wilkes Booth shot Lincoln, the U.S. National Park Service now displays a decoding sheet found by police in Booth’s trunk, and a matching coding device found in Judah Benjamin’s Richmond office. Benjamin fled to England immediately following the assassination and became a wealthy Queen’s Attorney. Booth was shot by pursuing U.S. troops, and four co-conspirators were hanged. James G. Blaine, a Lincoln-allied Congressman and later U.S. Secretary of State, wrote that Judah Benjamin sought to create “a confederacy whose … one achievement should be the revival and extension of English commercial power on this continent…. Benjamin took quick refuge under the flag to whose allegiance he was born…. [T]he manner in which he was lauded into notoriety in London, the effort constantly made to lionize and to aggrandize him, were conspicuous demonstrations of hatred to our Government, and were significant expressions of regret that Mr. Benjamin’s treason had not been successful. Those whom he served either in the Confederacy or in England in his efforts to destroy the American Union … eulogize him according to his work.” – Why Lincoln Was Killed – Henry C. Carey, creator of the nationalist economic platform of Lincoln’s Republican Party, wrote just before the 1860 election that the British Empire waged continual political and economic “warfare … for discouraging the growth of manufactures in other countries … for compelling the people of other lands to confine themselves to agriculture … for producing pauperism.” During his presidency, Lincoln defied British Free Trade doctrines and revolutionized the United States economy. Lincoln’s 50% tariff started the American steel industry, while his transcontinental railroads, subsidies for mining, science-educating Agriculture Department, free land for family farmers, free state colleges, and full-scale immigration policy forced the transformation of a bankrupt, cotton-exporting country into the world’s greatest industrial power within 25 years. In a brutal conflict versus the Wall Street firms representing Britain’s Rothschild and Baring banks and the British Crown, Lincoln fought to reassert the national government’s control over credit. He put through anti-usury and other strict federal banking laws, sold bonds directly to the people, and issued hundreds of millions of national currency. He was seeking to crack down on the Anglo-American manipulation of gold when he was killed. – * * * – PART 2 – William McKinley Vice President Andrew Johnson succeeded Abraham Lincoln in 1865, and promised rewards for the arrest of the “rebels and traitors … harbored in Canada” who had “incited, concerted and procured” Lincoln’s murder. Johnson was himself a free trader. But Lincoln’s nationalist political legacy was revived by Presidents Ulysses S. Grant (1869-77) and James A. Garfield (assassinated in 1881). Despite the tightening grip of British-run banking over U.S. finances, America persisted in Lincoln’s nationalist measures and became the world’s economic superpower. The “McKinley Act” of 1890 was the great protective tariff law of the last generation of American nationalist leaders. Its author, Ohio Congressman and former Union military officer William McKinley, said that “the law of 1890 … gave work and wages to all such as they had never had before. It did it by establishing great industries in this country…. It had no friends in Europe.” McKinley was elected to the presidency in 1896 on a platform of high wages and defiance of British free trade doctrines. McKinley’s first act as President was to push through a law heavily taxing British and other imports, so as “to preserve the home market … to our own producers; to revive and increase manufactures; to relieve and encourage agriculture … to aid and develop mining and building; and to render to labor in every field of useful occupation the liberal wages and adequate rewards to which skill and industry are justly entitled.” – McKinley Versus T.R. – In the 1900 election campaign, the only serious issue was who should replace Vice President Garret Hobart, who had died in 1899. President McKinley and his leading adviser, Sen. Marcus Alonzo Hanna, bitterly opposed the nomination of Great Britain’s fanatical political ally Theodore Roosevelt, or “T.R.” (When Roosevelt sent Nicholas Murray Butler to sound out McKinley about T.R., McKinley laughed, and Hanna cursed and banged on the table). Teddy Roosevelt’s identity had become clear to American patriots in 1883 when James D. Bulloch, Teddy’s uncle, hero, and later military-history ghostwriter, published his famous anti-U.S. historical work, “The Secret Service of the Confederate States in Europe.” Bulloch, in permanent exile in Britain, had been one of the two coordinators of the secret service whose operatives killed Abraham Lincoln. But, under immense pressure, the McKinley faction capitulated to the naming of T.R. as vice presidential candidate. The McKinley-Roosevelt ticket was elected. The President was shot to death by anarchist assassin Leon Czolgosz less than six months after the inauguration, and Teddy Roosevelt became President. The attack had been fully expected. McKinley’s chief of staff, Sen. Hanna, had requested in a security report the previous year “that proper safeguards be thrown around the person of the President,” because the government had been informed that “anarchists or Socialists through their various organizations resolved to rid the earth of a number of its rulers [starting with] the Empress Eugenie of Austria … the King of Italy … [and] then the President of the United States … and … the first two calls … have come to pass as predicted.” After the election of the McKinley-Roosevelt ticket, the New York City Police Commissioner, through his detective Lt. Joseph Petrosino, had issued a warning: that the Henry Street Settlement House in New York City, then the U.S. political headquarters for anarchist leader Emma Goldman, was a center of assassination threats to the life of President McKinley. The assassin Czolgosz told police after his capture that he was a disciple of Emma Goldman’s, and had heard her lecture on the destruction of government two weeks before he killed the President. Emma Goldman, who had helped plan the murder attack against industrialist Henry Frick nine years earlier, was now arrested on suspicion of complicity in the McKinley shooting. She left police custody when charges were not pressed, and immediately launched a public sympathy campaign for the assassin. London: `Breeding Ground for Plots Emma Goldman and the anarchists were sponsored in high style in America and in England. New York’s Henry Street Settlement House was built in 1893 by Wall Street’s Jacob Schiff, in cooperation with his partner Sir Ernst Cassell, personal banker to the British Royal Family and to the Fabian Society. Emma Goldman wrote about a Russian anarchist revolutionary who came to New York and met with the Anglophile elite backing the overthrow of the U.S.-allied Russian government. “I acted as interpreter … at most of the private gatherings arranged for her … among [those participating was Anson] Phelps Stokes” of the Phelps-Dodge Corp. and the Liverpool and London and Globe Insurance Co. “Lillian Wald [head of the Henry Street Settlement House] … arranged receptions … and succeeded in interesting scores of people in the Russian cause.” In 1901, the Russian journal Svet wrote: “Let us hope that the death of [President McKinley] will rouse those lands which … harbor bad elements and become the breeding grounds for plots, to action against the enemies of civilization.” “In England,” Belgium’s King Leopold had explained years earlier, “a sort of menagerie of [revolutionaries] is kept to let loose occasionally on the continent to render its quiet and prosperity impossible.” Emma Goldman wrote in her autobiography about flourishing “Anarchist activities in London…. England was the haven for refugees from all lands, who carried on their work without hindrance.” She described her London headquarters, the home of William Michael Rosetti. There the anarchist journal Torch was published. The brother of Dante Gabriel Rosetti, William Michael had been a senior British government official and the manager of the “Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood,” which openly advocated the return to the feudal Dark Ages of the 14th century. Goldman helped organize Britain’s worldwide Neo-Malthusian League. Following her deportation from the U.S., neo-Malthusian leader Bertrand Russell sponsored her return to England. – Reversing American Revolution – Teddy Roosevelt had been the leading representative of the British Imperial-model war party, whose intrigues had dragged the reluctant President McKinley into the 1898 war against Spain in Cuba and the Philippines. But McKinley had pursued peace, reciprocity, and mutual industrial development with the nations of the Western Hemisphere. As President, Teddy Roosevelt blatantly attacked and intimidated Latin America, blackening the name of the American republic. He broke up the U.S. alliances with Japan, and with Russia, and with Germany. He closed the American West to settlement, canceled all of Lincoln’s economic development measures, and turned over national financial power to the British banking cartel of Rothschild and Morgan.
– The Case of John F. Kennedy – Two newly discovered pieces of evidence point towards a direct role of the British Crown in the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy 31 years ago today. The first piece of evidence, recently publicized in Executive Intelligence Review, is a membership list in the super-secret 1001 Club, listing the late Canadian-born British Special Operations Executive (SOE) official Maj. Louis Mortimer Bloomfield as a charter member of the group founded by Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh. Bloomfield, this newspaper has learned, was also an early leader of the Canadian branch of Prince Philip’s World Wildlife Fund (WWF), even prior to his involvement in the JFK assassination plot. The second piece of evidence, a pair of obscure photographs from a New Orleans Parish weekly newspaper from 1963, showed David Ferrie and Clay Shaw together at a party. Ferrie and Shaw were two critical figures in the Kennedy assassination plot, according to the late New Orleans District Attorney, Jim Garrison. Taken together, the new pieces of evidence for the first time establish an unbroken chain of proof tying the known associates of “patsy” Lee Harvey Oswald to the highest echelons of the British Crown and its Secret Intelligence Services. The relevance of this new discovery to the security of President William Jefferson Clinton should not be missed by anyone. High-level U.S. government sources have told New Federalist that President Clinton is considered to be the most threatened President since JFK. The same sources have also characterized Clinton as the “most anti-British President since Kennedy.” Through agencies like the WWF and the 1001 Club, the assassination apparatus that murdered John Kennedy remains intact today. And this apparatus has already been implicated in at least one threat to the life of President Clinton, a May 11, 1994 public statement by a gun-toting ex-Arkansas state official Larry Nichols. While the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington, D.C. was announcing this past week that Francisco Martin Duran, the man who opened fire on the White House on Oct. 29, would be tried for attempted murder of the President, Larry Nichols was still walking the streets, the apparent beneficiary of protection by “friends in high places” who are opponents of President Clinton’s decidedly anti-British policies. – Critical Missing Evidence – In 1967, New Orleans DA Garrison indicted Clay Shaw, the director of the New Orleans International Trade Mart, on charges that Shaw had conspired in the assassination of JFK. Shaw, a prominent New Orleans socialite, was linked by Garrison’s investigators to a local secret intelligence unit housed at 544 Camp Street, in the offices of former FBI official Guy Bannister. Throughout 1963, the office had been frequented by Shaw, David Ferrie, Lee Harvey Oswald, and other figures linked to the events in Dallas on Nov. 22. During the trial two years later, Judge Garrity ruled inadmissible Shaw’s own statement to the police, in which he linked himself to Ferrie, the man who first recruited Lee Harvey Oswald to U.S. intelligence a decade before the Kennedy assassination. The trial of Shaw came down to conflicting testimony over whether or not Shaw and Ferrie knew one another. Shaw lied on the witness stand under oath that he had never met Ferrie, a notorious homosexual and mercenary who had provably worked under FBI Division Five official Bannister in the New Orleans-based training and weapons supply operation for Cuban exiles that had also employed Oswald. Yet photos that appeared in a local weekly gossip sheet had clearly shown Ferrie and Shaw together at a rather bizarre party. For reasons still unknown, those photographs were never presented by Garrison at the trial. A local reporter for the gossip sheet who covered the Shaw trial, had copies of the pictures in his briefcase throughout the proceedings, but the crucial pieces of evidence never found their way into the jurors’ hands. The jury, under instruction from Judge Garrity, ruled that there was insufficient evidence to convict Shaw, solely on the basis that there was “reasonable doubt” about the Shaw-Ferrie association. Afterwards, Garrity and the majority of jurors said they believed there was a conspiracy to kill the President. On his deathbed, Garrity told a friend that he was convinced Shaw was guilty as charged, and that he was personally shocked when the jury ruled not guilty. – The Crown’s Permindex Front – Clay Shaw was a member of the board of Major Bloomfield’s Permindex (“Permanent Industrial Expositions”) front company. Had the crucial photo evidence been presented at trial, there is little doubt that Shaw would have been found guilty, and his Permindex links would have formed the basis of a serious follow-on probe. Such a probe would have established the direct hand of the British Crown in the Kennedy murder. Already, by 1967, Bloomfield’s Permindex organization had been thrown out of Italy, France, and Switzerland, after French authorities found it had paid for assassination attempts against French President Charles de Gaulle. A New Orleans-based Permindex spin-off, the Caribbean Anti-Communist League, had funneled several hundred thousand dollars to members of the Secret Army Organization (OAS) in France to kill de Gaulle. What’s more, since World War II, SOE officer Bloomfield had served as the liaison between British Crown Intelligence and the FBI. Under agreements struck between Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt, Bloomfield had served as J. Edgar Hoover’s personnel adviser for the Bureau’s foreign counterintelligence section, known as Division Five. Bloomfield’s early involvement in Prince Philip’s WWF and 1001 Club placed the Canadian spook-attorney even more in the center of the Crown apparatus. Membership in the 1001 Club was drawn from the inner circles of the Duke of Edinburgh and his Dutch counterpart, the former Nazi intelligence operator, Prince Bernhard. A second Permindex figure, Swiss-based Israeli banker Dr. Tibor Rosenbaum, the conduit for Permindex funds into the OAS, was also a charter member of 1001. The WWF, widely misrepresented as a group concerned with the environment and endangered species, was launched by Prince Philip and Prince Bernhard in 1961 to draw together powerful European oligarchical networks into a covert recolonization and One World government scheme. At the center of the WWF effort was the revival of radical Malthusian population reduction programs. John F. Kennedy’s policies represented the antithesis of this Malthusian revival. – Oswald and Hoover – The 20-year intimate collaboration between Bloomfield and Hoover sheds further light on another of the anomalies of the JFK assassination and its cover-up. Why, if Lee Harvey Oswald was the actual assassin of John Kennedy, would he have sent a personal telegram to Hoover 48 hours before the killing in Dallas, warning of a plot against the President’s life? And why, if Oswald was anything other than a patsy, would Hoover have suppressed that telegram and ordered FBI offices all across the country to bury any documentation linking FBI informant Oswald to the Bureau? Up until the moment that Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby inside the Dallas Police Department headquarters, (Ruby had been a Bannister informant back in Chicago prior to the Division Five agent’s “retirement” from the Bureau), he was insisting that he had been a “patsy” and had not shot the President. A trial of Oswald would have been fatal to the Permindex assassins and their vast cover-up apparatus. Jim Garrison’s prosecution of Clay Shaw failed to produce a conviction. Shaw, Ferrie, Oswald, Bloomfield, and Garrison are all dead. Yet, the newly uncovered evidence–31 years after the fact–still provides a basis for getting at the truth, and making sure that no British Crown plot ever claims the life of an American President again. – The Enemy Explains His Crimes – Like Presidents Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley, John Kennedy was killed by the British oligarchy while advancing U.S. interests in conflict with British geopolitical aims. In his foreign and domestic policies, Kennedy had astonished the world by reverting to the idealistic nationalism last seen in those earlier murdered American Presidents. But let us allow the enemy to speak for himself on this. The Encyclopaedia Britannica, “published with the editorial advice and consultation of … a committee of members of the faculties of Oxford, Cambridge, and London Universities,” found the U.S. President’s murder a cause for celebration. The Introduction to the Britannica Book of the Year 1964 began: “That 1963 would be remembered as a year of great beginnings–and of some tragic endings–could not be doubted…. The assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy … was surely the most stunning of the year’s events. Its suddenness and senselessness left virtually all of the civilized world in a state of shock…. “And yet even this monstrous killing somehow pointed to a kind of beginning or at the least, a renewal, of sensibility among Kennedy’s countrymen and among the United States and other nations. The event certainly gave evidence that–like it or not–the world community was in fact a reality. The nations had become too tightly inter-meshed and interdependent through both military and mercantile treaties; too many of the educated people of the world crossed international frontiers too often and accommodated themselves too easily in foreign lands to have any lingering intellectual response to 19th-century nationalism, though an emotional residue persisted and was still exploited in some areas of the world.” Kennedy’s investment tax credit for industrial development; his face-down of J.P. Morgan’s steel price increase; his order for the Treasury to print non-Federal Reserve U.S. currency; his Apollo Moon landing program; his commitment to overwhelming U.S. technological and military superiority, combined with cooperation with the Soviets for Third World development, not “balance of power” wars; his decision to take retired General Douglas MacArthur’s advice and get out of the Vietnam trap: all of these lit the British fuse for his murder. – The Owners of the Circus – District Attorney Garrison’s prosecution on the Kennedy case began with his discovery that the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been based in a New Orleans political operations office at 544 Camp Street. The manager of this office, Guy Bannister, was formerly chief of the FBI in Chicago. Garrison described 544 Camp Street as a virtual “circus”: FBI agents; CIA agents; Oswald, himself a long-time FBI informant, passing out pro-Castro leaflets; flaming homosexual David Ferrie and his anti-Castro Cubans–all of these parading in and out of Bannister’s office. Jack Ruby, who later shot Oswald, was also an informer and intimate of Bannister, from the Chicago FBI days. Garrison was led to the actual proprietors of this New Orleans “circus” by being informed that the internationally powerful Clay Shaw had arranged for legal services for Lee Oswald; he had even personally taken Oswald to get registered to vote. The exotic sadomasochist Clay Shaw was the director of the International Trade Mart in New Orleans. Shaw had made the Trade Mart a subsidiary of a corporation, Permindex, known to the world’s police as an assassination bureau. Bloomfield, Shaw’s superior in the Permindex command structure, co-authored an assassination strategy manual, “Crimes Against Protected Persons: Prevention and Punishment” (Praeger, 1975, New York). Bloomfield’s law firm managed the Bronfman family liquor empire, utilizing global organized-crime capabilities. Bloomfield’s Permindex directors included Clay Shaw, who had fallen in with the British as an Office of Strategic Services liaison man stationed with the office of Prime Minister Winston Churchill; various European noblemen who had been associated with the Hitler and Mussolini governments; and Jean de Menil, owner of Schlumberger Co. of Houston, which had provided weapons for the hit attempts on de Gaulle and for the Carribbean adventures of the Shaw-Ferrie-Bannister group. Perry R. Russo, a Baton Rouge insurance agent and long-time acquaintance of David Ferrie, testified that he had sat in on a Kennedy assassination planning discussion between Clay Shaw and David Ferrie, on the need for triangulation of crossfire, and their intended alibi locations while contracted hit-men were to be killing the President. It was to this corrupted and betrayed U.S. security apparatus, from the homosexuals Bloomfield and J. Edgar Hoover on down, that Oswald turned for help. As a Naval Intelligence agent assigned to the FBI, Oswald sent a telegram from Dallas, warning Director Hoover {personally} of a local FBI cover-up of an assassination threat {live} against the President in the Fort Worth-Dallas area. Hoover’s trashing of the warning was misprision of a felony, or treason. And with the President’s murder, and the public’s acquiescence in what was widely believed to be a cover-up, the nation shamefully betrayed itself.www.michaeljournal.org/octobernovemberdecember2003.pdf – – The Case of James Garfield – Charles Guiteau’s 1881 murder of U.S. President James A. Garfield is treated historically as a senseless act, the perpetrator a “disappointed office-seeker.” Contrary to this “lone-assassin” portrayal of events, we shall show here a murder motive: the Garfield administration’s prosecution of a virtual war against the British Empire; and a murder machine: Britain’s transatlantic financial and political apparatus, and its criminal underground inside America, which included Garfield’s assassin. James Blaine, chosen as Secretary of State by the President-elect, candidly warned Garfield of “the machine in New York” and its allies, within their own Republican Party: “This section contains all the desperate bad men of the Party, bent on loot and booty, and ready for any Mexican invasion or Caribbean annexation, and looking to excitements and filibustering and possibly to a Spanish war as legitimate means of continuing political power for a clique. These men are … harmless when out of power, and desperate when in possession of it” [Blaine to Garfield, Dec. 10, 1880]. Britain’s influence in America had grown ominously in 1879. British bankers, whose Wall Street agents ruled the “desperate” New York political machine, had compelled the resumption of gold (specie) payments to foreign holders of U.S. bonds. This gave the Rothschild-Morgan syndicate a blackmail dictatorship over U.S. finances. Secretary of State Blaine was the de facto “prime minister” in the incoming administration. His political identity was built around his family tradition of America’s resistance against British imperial power. He had lived for some years as a teenager with his close relative, Thomas Ewing, while Ewing was U.S. Treasury Secretary, lieutenant to anti-British nationalist spokesman Henry Clay, and the stepfather of William T. Sherman, the great Civil War general. Garfield was susceptible to the hard-money dogma, but he and his old political comrade Blaine came to power with the high tariff program of Clay and Lincoln. Blaine exhorted Irish-Americans and other workingmen to defend their wages by defeating the economic policy of “Ireland’s oppressors”–“British free trade.” – The Union War Gov’t Revived – Garfield and Blaine took office in March 1881, with Abraham Lincoln’s son Robert as War Secretary. In May, Blaine sent Lincoln’s counterintelligence expert, retired General Stephen Hurlbut, as a special envoy to face down the British in South America. The British-sponsored proxy Army of Chile had invaded Peru and Bolivia, grabbing control of nitrate deposits, and seeking to crush U.S.-allied nationalism in the region. Britain’s diplomats demanded Peru surrender and cede its richest provinces. Peru’s Army had collapsed, relying as it did for military supplies on Britain’s Lima-based merchant king, the W.R. Grace company. Grace controlled virtually all shipping on South America’s Pacific Coast on behalf of British banking and political power. On May 23, 1881, Charles J. Guiteau wrote to President Garfield: “Mr. Blaine is a wicked man, and you ought to demand his immediate resignation; otherwise you and the Republican Party will come to grief.” Guiteau shot President Garfield on July 2, 1881, four months into his term. As Garfield clung to life, Gen. Hurlbut arrived in Peru, clashed sharply with British diplomats, and recognized the regime of Garcia Calderon, who had been chosen by the underground Peruvian nationalist leadership. The U.S.S. Alaska landed a brother of President Calderon in Mollendo, with money and instructions for Peruvian resistance fighters. Britain’s Chilean proxies arrested President Calderon and took him away to Santiago. On Nov. 29, 1881, Secretary Blaine, still in office, called for a peace conference of all republics in the Western Hemisphere, to convene in Washington one year later. The incoming President Chester Arthur replaced Blaine two weeks later with Frederick Frelinghuysen, who canceled the proposed hemispheric peace conference, so as not to invite “European jealousy and ill will.” Congressman Perry Belmont, law partner of Frelinghuysen’s son, chaired a Congressional investigation of the supposed corruption of James Blaine and Gen. Hurlbut. Representative Belmont’s father, August Belmont, the House of Rothschild’s U.S. representative, wrote that “the country might have been plunged into a war with Peru if poor Garfield had not been assassinated. Blaine is about the most unscrupulous politician we ever had.” Blaine told Congress, “The Chilian government … pledge[d] … to pay … into the Bank of England for the benefit of the English bondholders who put up the job of this war on Peru. It … was loot and booty…. The iron-clads that destroyed the Peruvian Navy were furnished by England…. It is an English war on Peru, with Chile as the instrument, and I take the responsibility of that assertion.” – The New York Machine and the Assassin – There was at that time a triumvirate ruling that New York “loot and booty” machine about which Blaine had warned Garfield: 1) Banker August Belmont, Rothschild representative and longtime head of the U.S. Democratic Party; 2) Britain’s W.R. Grace, the Peru-based enforcer, who had moved to the U.S. and was elected Mayor of New York City in 1880! Grace managed Wall Street’s opposition to Blaine’s 1884 presidential bid, and arranged the official 1890 British contract seizing Peru’s land and minerals; 3) Speculator Leonard Jerome, owner of the New York Times. His daughter Jennie had married Britain’s Randolph Churchill, who in 1880, with his partner Arthur Balfour, launched a new ultra-feudalist leadership group in British politics. Leonard Jerome’s grandson Winston Churchill was then six years old. This Balfour circle, Disraeli’s “Venetian Party,” had taken over managing various British Intelligence projects of the occult and the criminal underground, centered in New York State and New England. Assassin Charles J. Guiteau dictated an autobiography to a jail officer while awaiting his execution. His story was printed in the July 2, 1882 (Washington) National Republican. Guiteau’s father, a disciple of New England cult leader John H. Noyes, took Charles as a teenager to live on the commune that Noyes had established on the Oneida Indian Reservation in upstate New York. Noyes was a Vermont “blueblood,” son of a Congressman who had sided with the enemy during the War of 1812 between America and Britain. – Guiteau’s Story – Guiteau said “I went [to Oneida] and got under that influence, and I was unable to get away from that influence…. A man was just as isolated from the world as if he were confined in state’s prison or a lunatic asylum. I suffered greatly in mind and body and spirits during incarceration in that community.” He said he had been “perfectly beside himself” under Noyes’s control from 1858 to 1870. All women in the commune were common property, and all sexual acts were the subject of official community “criticism” sessions. John Noyes himself sexually initiated the girl children of the commune’s inmates, proclaiming this to be the scientific breeding program of Britain’s Sir Francis Galton. The group practiced seances, while preparing for the imminent Apocalypse and Second Coming. Guiteau described how he had gradually left this brainwashing pit, and had come under the care and sponsorship of a new British-run international organization–the Young Men’s Christian Association (YMCA)–which had spread from England to Canada and on into New York in the 1850s. Guiteau was transfixed by the Armageddon sermons of Dwight Moody and other YMCA leaders. Guiteau gave his own Armageddon lectures at YMCAs all over the country, often to tiny groups. John H. Noyes, meanwhile, was about to be arrested for mass rape of young girls–but he fled to British Canada in June 1879. In 1880, while Noyes was sheltered by the British authorities, the Oneida commune converted itself into a joint-stock corporation, eventually achieving fame as a silverware company. In 1880, Charles Guiteau, who had never had anything to do with politics, suddenly began hanging around the Republican National Committee’s New York City headquarters. After the Garfield election victory, Guiteau began loitering in the White House and State Department lobbies in Washington, on the pretext of asking for appointment as a diplomat. He bought a pistol with money from “a gentleman,” and shot the President after stalking him for several days.LLR
PS:Bankers compared to counterfeiters by Nobel Prize in economy Maurice Allais

by Jean-Pierre Richard
_______________
_______

In his November 1993 report, Canada’s Auditor general calculated that of the $­­423 billion in net accumulated debt from Confederation to 1992, only $­­37 billion (8.75%) went on actual goods and services, all the rest (91%) consisted of interest charges. this should tell us how we all have become slaves.

A real solution is now having a phenomenal promotion throughout the world. The main facts on which it is based are now being supported and taught by top economists like, for example, Harold Chorney, Assoc. Professor of Political Economy at Concordia University, in Montreal, the late John Hotson, who was Professor of Economics at the University of Waterloo, and Mario Seccareccia, Assoc. Professor of Economics at the University of Ottawa, published a booklet in May of 96: “The Deficit Made Me Do It”. In it they say: “When World War II ended, the national debt relative to the national income was more than twice as large as it is now. but was the country ruined? Did we have to declare national bankruptcy? Far from it! Instead, Canada’s economy boomed, and the country prospered for most of the post war period.

“Why isn’t the same thing happening today? Why was a much larger national debt shrugged off in 1945, while today’s much smaller debt (as a percentage of GDP) is being used as an excuse to let the economy stagnate?

“The answer can be found at the Bank of Canada. During the war, and for 30 years afterward, the government could borrow what it needed at low rates of interest, because the government’s own bank produced up to half of all the new money. That forced the private banks to deep their interest rates low, too.

“Since the mid-1970s, however, the Bank of Canada, with government consent, has been creating less and less of the new money, while letting the private banks create more and more. Today, “our” bank creates a mere 2% of each year’s new money supply, … (p. 4, 5).

“… The conventional wisdom, however, is that inflation is the greatest threat to the economy and must be restrained by raising interest rates. This flies in the face of the commonsense observation that rising prices (inflation) are caused by raising costs, and that interest rates are costs. So raising them will raise prices, not lower them. p. 8).

“… One of the most pervasive myths about the government deficit is that government which spend more than they receive in revenue must borrow the difference, thus increasing the debt.

“In fact, a government can choose to create the needed additional money instead of borrowing it from the banks, the public, or foreigners.” (p.9).

And to those who say that there are only two ways to control the deficit: one being to raise taxes, and the other to cut government spending, they say: “But, in fact, there is a third way: reduce the interest rate. The Bank of Canada can set the rate of interest at which it lends to the chartered banks at any number it chooses, and it can peg the rate on government bonds, too. This was evident during WW II When it set the rate on Treasury Bills at as little as 0.36%, and on longer term bonds at less than 2.5%.” (p. 10).

Maurice Allais, Professor of Economics at the National School of Mining Engineering in Paris, France and the 1988 Nobel Prize Winner in Economics, had this to say, in his book “Les conditions monétaires d’une économie de marché” (The Monetary Conditions of a Market Economy p. 2): “In essence, the present creation of money, out of nothing, by the banking system is, I do not hesitate to say it in order to make people clearly realize what is at stake here, similar to the creation of money by counterfeiters, so rightly condemned by law. In concrete terms, it leads to the same results.”

And finally, let us quote Mackenzie King, while he was campaigning, in 1935, to become Prime Minister of Canada: “Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility, all talk of the sovereignty of Parliament and of democracy is idle and futile.”

So let us work to get the government of Canada to create all new money, cash and credit , by getting our municipal and town councils and all associations to pass a resolution to this effect. And let us circulate petitions on this issue among the general public. A model resolution and petition is available from us upon request, at no cost.

Jean-Pierre Richard



Le Rotary, une annexe de la franc-maçonnerie qui contrôle la justice.

Le Tagi fait des révélations sur le Rotary …et les maçons ? …



Contre la puissance des sociétés secrètes, interdiction des francs-maçons, Suisses, votez oui.





 http://www.fonjallaz.net/Communisme/Memo/Roumanie/Roumanie5.html

 http://desiebenthal.blogspot.ch/2012/11/dans-lhistoire-des-peuples-la-suisse.html

 
http://www.tagesanzeiger.ch/zuerich/kanton/Handelsrichter-wird-man-nur-wenn-Rotary-einverstanden-ist/story/12853515

Les acteurs principaux des crises au Rotary…( Swissair, Subprime, bonus…).

UBS, Credit Suisse, Swiss Life, Zürcher Kantonalbank, Axa-Winterthur-Versicherung, die Zürich-Versicherung ou encore KPMG parmi beaucoup d’autres…


Mgr Gianfranco Girotti a rappelé que la Déclaration sur la franc-maçonnerie de la Congrégation pour la doctrine de la foi, approuvée en 1983 par Jean-Paul II, affirmait « que l’inscription aux associations maçonniques ‘demeure interdite par l’Eglise’ et que les fidèles qui s’y inscrivent ‘sont en état de péché grave et ne peuvent accéder à la sainte communion’ ». Pour le prélat romain, la déclaration de la Congrégation pour la doctrine de la foi était « devenue nécessaire » pour mettre fin à l’opinion erronée qui se diffusait parmi les fidèles, selon laquelle l’adhésion à une loge maçonnique était licite. 
date : 10/3/2007
 
De même pour le Rotary Club condamné par le Vatican notamment le 20.12.1950
 
Naissance du premier Rotary club à Chicago, Illinois. Paul Harris, un juriste franc-maçon de Chicago, envisage une nouvelle forme d’association où les membres pourraient établir des relations d’affaires et nouer des amitiés. Le 23 février 1905, il invite 3 amis à une réunion qui est à l’origine de la création de la plus ancienne et prestigieuse organisation de clubs-service.
 
Paul P. Harris, avocat, tint la première réunion, en compagnie de trois amis, Silvester Schiele , négociant en charbon, Gustave E. Loehr , ingénieur des mines et Hiram E. Shorey, tailleur. Ils étaient d’origine allemande, suédoise, irlandaise, américaine et représentaient les confessions protestante, catholique et israélite. Deux des quatre fondateurs étaient franc-maçons, P. Harris et Gustave E. Lehr, qui d’ailleurs ne restera membre que très peu de temps avant de retourner à la franc-maçonnerie. Hiram E. Shorey quittera également très vite le Rotary, pour semble-t-il, des raisons professionnelles.
 
Dans les années 1920, de nombreuses critiques furent dirigées sur le … rôle de ‘façade’ donné par le Rotary à la franc-maçonnerie. Elles étaient majoritairement causées, selon la littérature rotarienne elle-même, par une loge maçonnique de Londres composée de Rotariens.

Dans le même genre, le groupe Palestinien Hamas déclare dans sa charte que le Rotary est son ennemi, au même titre que la maçonnerie et les organisations sionistes.

Ce sont eux qui ont poussé les lois facilitant les aides aux suicides et à l’euthanasie active notamment.
La civilisation de la mort, cause des crises, ce sont eux.

Article du Tagi, traduction.

Je me permets de vous signaler mon expérience d’ancien maçon (converti à Lourdes) ayant pratiqué de nombreux avortements dans une grande clinique chirurgicale de Rennes. Bien cordialement. Dr Maurice Caillet voir mon site: http://www.cailletm.com et mes livres, notamment le dernier: « J’étais franc-maçon » Ed. Salvator.

Juge commercial ? Seulement grâce au Rotary

Par René Staubli. Mise à jour le 01/02/2009
Le
Tribunal de commerce de Zurich a la réputation de ne pas être très
indépendant. Un livre renforce maintenant ces soupçons avec des faits.

www.wvberlin.de/data/fach/jura.html#C-413

 

Rita Fuhrer, présidente du Rotary Club de Zurich.

Infos

Le
Tribunal de commerce de Zurich et sa composition sectorielle selon son porte-parole – origine, pratique, critique, selon
Verlag Berlin.
 
Ce
lundi, dans le canton, une routine sur l’ordre du
jour, l’élection d’un nouveau membre du Tribunal de Commerce. 
Sont proposés l’ingénieur civil Thomas Huonder et le planificateur de
l’environnement Christopher Terre.
Une double proposition est une habitude pour la Commission qui appartient au ministère des affaires économiques de Rita
Fuhrer (UDC). Dans ce conseil de neuf membres, cinq membres des Rotary
clubs forment la majorité. Le président de la Commission, Rita Fuhrer,
est également présidente du Rotary Club de Zurich. En d’autres termes, un
juge ne ​​peut pas être élu contre la volonté des Rotariens. Cependant, les
chances sont meilleures si vous êtes pris en charge par eux. Selon les
statuts écrits, les Rotariens se doivent mutuelle amitié et assistance
“s’entraider les uns les autres peut se révéler utile.”
 
Où est l’indépendance?
 
Mais
qui sont ceux qui recourent à ces juges à temps partiel? Un regard sur
le système est intéressant. Si une affaire est jugée, décident cinq juges:
deux juges professionnels et trois juges commerciaux. Les trois juges
commerciaux sont généralement du même secteur concerné par le différend. Alors, pour qui se bat contre une assurance,
dans la cour de cinq membres, on se trouve avec une majorité de juges qui sont  des assurances. Les critiques voient
ce que le principe d’indépendance et d’impartialité est bafoué. Selon
l’interprétation stricte de la loi, on ne donne même pas
l’apparence de partialité ou de parti pris des juges.
Le
Tribunal de commerce de Zurich n’ a pas toujours fonctionné selon ce
principe. A l’origine, les représentants de l’industrie ont aussi
régulièrement que possible distribué aux différentes chambres d’apporter
une vaste expertise. Seulement en 1963 a disparu des chambres de
l’industrie cette indépendance, à savoir cette nouvelle situation contraires aux dispositions légales.
Cette information est écrite par l’avocat zurichois Daniel Neuenschwander dans un livre *, publié la semaine dernière.
 
Selon les avocats, le tribunal de commerce est considéré comme favorable aux
entreprises. 
Comme le confirme le syndic de Swissair Karl Wüthrich contre la Banque
Cantonale de Zurich pour le remboursement de 80 millions de francs, le
Tribunal de commerce a rejeté sa demande. Le tribunal fédéral en a décidé
autrement et a critiqué les juges Zurich commerciaux pour leur “action
impossible.” 
Plus tard et à contrario, la Cour fédérale a ordonné aux banques de
passer sur les paiements des fournisseurs de fonds aux clients, “a
précisé” le jugement de la Cour du commerce – avec le résultat que les cinq milliards de francs annuels finissent toujours dans les coffres
des banques.
 
Qui à savoir qui forme le tribunal de commerce, çà devient difficile de s’informer à quelles
entreprises ou associations appartiennent les juges commerciaux
concernés. 
Sur le site de la Haute Cour sont simplement inscrit leurs
noms. 
Qui veut savoir où les juges commerciaux travaillent, ils doivent
obtenir un annuaire de l’État. 
Mais même là, il n’ y a en aucun cas de
transparence complète. 
Dans le septième Chambre, par exemple, les juges
de litiges en matière de brevets, on voit le juge commercial Ulrich
Alder ou Anna Menzl. 
Le fait qu’ils appartiennent au cabinet d’avocats de brevet
Zurich Schaad, Balass, Menzl & Partner est passé sous silence.
 
Intéressant
aussi est le fait que certaines grandes entreprises ont depuis longtemps des membres  réguliers au tribunal de commerce. 
Par exemple, UBS, Crédit Suisse, Swiss Life, Banque Cantonale de Zurich, Winterthur
Assurances, l’assurance Zurich ou KPMG. 
Les chefs de ces
entreprises sont aussi bien représentés dans le Rotary. 
Ce qui nourrit
l’impression que chacune de ses sociétés a exercé dans les coulisses de leur propre
influence dans leur intérêt sur ​​le choix des juges de commerce.
 
Le Rotary comme cercle secret…
 
Ces processus restent cachés au public. Pour cela, les
Rotariens gardent leurs listes de membres strictement sous
le boisseau. Selon les articles des statuts, l’ annuaire de l’année peut «seulement
être montré aux personnes qui sont membres de ces clubs.” Chaque
Rotarien doit s’assurer que «
son ancien annuaire est détruit et qu’il ne peut pas
tomber dans de mauvaises mains.”
 
Bien
que depuis 23 ans les Rotariens et les juges commerciaux
sont en collusion à Zurich, cette information est nouvelle pour Robert Ober. 
Le président
de l’Association de la ville de Zurich, par exemple, ne savait pas que les
grandes entreprises ont depuis de nombreuses années des membres réguliers
dans le tribunal de commerce. Il ne savait pas que la Commission a une
majorité de rotariens, ce qui suggère que les
nouveaux juges commerciaux cantonaux sont entre les mains des Rotariens.
 
(Tages-Anzeiger)
  
  1. François de Siebenthal – Wikipédia

    fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/François_de_Siebenthal

    François Vincent de Siebenthal, né le 16 décembre 1955, est un économiste de Il est convaincu de la réalité d’un complot maçonnique mondial d’après un 

  2. Suicide assisté et euthanasie active des francs-maçons

    desiebenthal.blogspot.com/2012/…/suicide-assiste-et-euthanasie-active.ht…‎

    15 juin 2012 – Une
    réduction de la recherche sur le cancer, le sida et autres maladies
    persistantes, connue depuis plusieurs dizaines d’années voire 

  3. Le Rotary, une annexe de la franc-maçonnerie qui contrôle la justice.

    desiebenthal.blogspot.com/2009/…/le-rotary-une-annexe-de-la-franc.htm…‎

    2 févr. 2009 – Le Rotary, une annexe de la franc-maçonnerie qui contrôle la justice. Le Tagi fait des révélations sur le Rotary.

  4. Politique – Famille de Siebenthal

    www.de-siebenthal.com/politique.htm‎

    Tout est dédié à la gloire de cette secte secrète qui est la Franc-maçonnerie : Dès La famille Creux est en lutte avec la famille de Siebenthal depuis des 


Daniel Schwander
Das Zürcher Handelsgericht und
die branchenspezifische Zusammensetzung seines Spruchkörpers.
Herkunft – Praxis – Kritik
ISBN 978-3-86573-413-6
119 S. 19,80 EUR. 2009
Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, Berlin


*) zum zitierten Buch:


Daniel Schwander
Das Zürcher Handelsgericht und
die branchenspezifische Zusammensetzung seines Spruchkörpers.
Herkunft – Praxis – Kritik
ISBN 978-3-86573-413-6
119 S. 19,80 EUR. 2009
Wissenschaftlicher Verlag, Berlin

www.wvberlin.de/data/fach/jura.html#C-413

Die 1877 abgeschaffte deutsche Handelsgerichtsbarkeit, die ihre Wurzeln namentlich in Frankreich hat, lebt noch heute im Kanton Zürich fort. Dieser “kopierte” nämlich diese Institution rund zehn Jahre vor ihrer Abschaffung in Deutschland. Die Zusammensetzung des Spruchkörpers des Zürcher Handelsgerichts ist ein Kuriosum: Er besteht aus zwei Berufsrichtern sowie einer Mehrheit von drei nebenamtlich tätigen Laienrichtern, den sog. Handelsrichtern. Diese stammen jeweils aus dem Bereich, um den es beim konkreten Rechtsstreit geht (z.B. aus dem Bankenbereich bei einem bankrechtlichen Streit). Mit dieser gerichtsorganisatorischen Besonderheit, an der sich in der Schweiz heute kaum jemand zu stören scheint, setzt sich die vorliegende Studie grundlegend auseinander.

Unter Rückgriff auf europäische Rechtsgeschichte und Rechtsvergleichung zeigt der Autor auf, wie und in welchem Kontext sich diese Regelung entwickelte und warum sie gerade in der heutigen Zeit problematisch geworden ist. Im Zentrum steht dabei die Frage, ob und inwieweit der viel gepriesene Sachverstand der Handelsrichter nicht die Unabhängigkeit des Gerichts gefährdet oder zumindest den Anschein von Parteilichkeit erwecken kann. Auch im Zusammenhang mit der Wahl der Handelsrichter sowie der konkreten Ämterbesetzung deckt der Autor “Usanzen” und Einflüsse auf, die rechtsstaatlichen Kriterien unserer Zeit kaum noch zu genügen vermögen und daher neu zu überdenken sind.

 

Handelsrichter? Nur von Rotarys Gnaden

Von René Staubli. Aktualisiert am 01.02.2009

    Artikel als E-Mail versenden

    Empfänger (E-Mail)*
    Absender (E-mail)*
    Nachricht
    Schliessen

    Das Zürcher Handelsgericht steht im Ruf, nicht besonders unabhängig zu sein. Ein Buch untermauert nun diesen Verdacht mit Fakten.


    Rita Fuhrer, Präsidentin des Rotary Clubs Zürich. (Bild: Keystone)

    Info

    Das Zürcher Handelsgericht und die branchenspezifische Zusammensetzung seines Spruchkörpers – Herkunft, Praxis, Kritik; Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Berlin.
    Am Montag steht im Kantonsrat ein Routinegeschäft auf dem Programm, die Wahl eines neuen Mitglieds des Handelsgerichts. Vorgeschlagen sind der Bauingenieur Thomas Huonder und der Umweltplaner Christoph Erdin.
    Der Doppelvorschlag kommt wie immer von der Kommission für das Handelswesen, die zur Volkswirtschaftsdirektion von Rita Fuhrer (SVP) gehört. In diesem neunköpfigen Gremium stellen fünf Mitglieder des Rotary-Clubs die Mehrheit. Die Präsidentin der Kommission, Rita Fuhrer, ist gleichzeitig Präsidentin des Rotary Clubs Zürich. Mit andern Worten: Handelsrichter kann man nicht gegen den Willen der Rotarier werden. Hingegen stehen die Chancen bestens, wenn man von ihnen unterstützt wird. Laut den schriftlichen Satzungen sehen die Rotarier in der Pflege von Freundschaften die Möglichkeit, «sich andern nützlich zu erweisen».
    Wo bleibt die Unabhängigkeit?
    Doch wem nützen die nebenamtlich tätigen Handelsrichter? Ein Blick auf das System lohnt sich. Wenn ein Fall beurteilt wird, entscheiden jeweils fünf Richter: zwei Berufsrichter und drei Handelsrichter. Die drei Handelsrichter sind im Allgemeinen in derselben Branche tätig, in welcher der Streitfall spielt. Wer also gegen eine Versicherung kämpft, bekommt es im fünfköpfigen Gremium mit einer Richtermehrheit zu tun, die selber zur Versicherungslobby gehört. Kritiker sehen damit den Grundsatz der Unabhängigkeit und Unparteilichkeit in Gefahr. Gemäss strenger Rechtsauffassung sollten Richter nämlich nicht einmal den Anschein von Parteilichkeit oder Befangenheit erwecken.
    Das Zürcher Handelsgericht hat nicht immer nach diesem Prinzip funktioniert. Ursprünglich waren die Branchenvertreter möglichst gleichmässig auf die verschiedenen Kammern verteilt, um breiten Sachverstand einzubringen. Erst 1963 verschwanden die branchenunabhängigen Kammern, und zwar entgegen der gesetzlichen Bestimmungen. Diese Informationen legt der Zürcher Rechtsanwalt Daniel Schwander in einem Buch* vor, das vergangene Woche erschienen ist.
    Unter Juristen gilt das Handelsgericht als wirtschaftsfreundlich. Als der Swissair-Sachwalter Karl Wüthrich die Zürcher Kantonalbank auf die Rückzahlung von 80 Millionen Franken einklagte, wies das Handelsgericht sein Begehren ab. Das Bundesgericht entschied anders und kritisierte die Zürcher Handelsrichter für ihr «unmögliches Vorgehen». Als umgekehrt das Bundesgericht die Banken anwies, Vergütungen von Fondsanbietern den Kunden weiterzugeben, «präzisierte» das Handelsgericht das Urteil – mit der Folge, dass die jährlich fünf Milliarden Franken weiterhin in den Kassen der Banken landen.
    Wer es mit dem Handelsgericht zu tun hat, bekommt nur schwer heraus, welche Firmen oder Verbände die involvierten Handelsrichter vertreten. Auf der Website des Obergerichts werden lediglich ihre Namen aufgeführt. Wer wissen will, wo die Handelsrichter arbeiten, muss sich einen Staatskalender besorgen. Aber selbst dort herrscht längst nicht volle Transparenz. In der 7. Kammer beispielsweise, die Patentstreite beurteilt, sitzen die Handelsrichter Ulrich Alder und Anna Menzl. Dass beide der Zürcher Patentanwaltskanzlei Schaad, Balass, Menzl & Partner angehören, erfährt man nicht.
    Interessant ist die Tatsache, dass einige grosse Firmen langjährige Stammplätze beim Handelsgericht inne haben. Zum Beispiel die UBS, die Credit Suisse, Swiss Life, die Zürcher Kantonalbank, die Winterthur-Versicherung, die Zürich-Versicherung oder KPMG. Umgekehrt sind die Chefs dieser Firmen zahlreich im Rotary-Club vertreten. Was den Eindruck nährt, die Firmen übten hinter den Kulissen in ihrem eigenen Interesse Einfluss auf die Wahl von Handelsrichtern aus.
    Rotary als geheimer Zirkel
    Der Öffentlichkeit bleiben diese Vorgänge verborgen. Dafür sorgen nicht zuletzt die Rotarier selber, indem sie ihre Mitgliederlisten strikt unter Verschluss halten. Laut Satzung darf das Jahrbuch «nur Personen ausgehändigt werden, die Mitglied eines Rotary-Clubs sind». Jeder Rotarier solle darauf achten, dass «sein altes Jahrbuch vernichtet wird und nicht in unbefugte Hände fallen kann».
    Obwohl seit 23 Jahren Rotarier und seit 20 Jahren Zürcher Handelsrichter, sind diese Informationen auch für Robert Ober neu. Der Präsident der Zürcher City Vereinigung wusste beispielsweise nicht, dass grosse Unternehmen seit vielen Jahren Stammplätze im Handelsgericht haben. Er habe auch nicht gewusst, dass sich die Kommission für das Handelswesen, die dem Kantonsrat die neuen Handelsrichter vorschlägt, mehrheitlich in der Hand von Rotariern befindet.
    Im übrigen hat Ober kein Problem damit, dass bei Streitfällen drei Handelsrichter aus derselben Branche die Mehrheit im fünfköpfigen Richtergremium stellen. Schliesslich seien die Richter «dazu vereidigt, nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen zu urteilen». Das Handelsgericht funktioniert gemäss seiner Überzeugung «gerade deshalb so ausgezeichnet, weil so viel Sachwissen versammelt ist». So kämen immer wieder «gescheite Urteile und ökonomische Vergleiche zu Stande». (Tages-Anzeiger)


    Avec mes meilleures salutations.

    François de Siebenthal
    14, ch. des Roches
    CH 1010 Lausanne
    Suisse, Switzerland

    Traduction »