And who should start real reforms, if not America?
Switzerland is producing now a lot of robots, and sell them all over the world, spec- to Japan.
Men plus robots can lead us to a better world.
I think A+B is not a theorem, rather it is a diagnosis. Technology gives
us more products for less work, especialy when improved by modern
standards of teleinformatics. How to buy what we produce?
That wise Douglas’constatation is contradicted by present obsertvation
that eighty years after we work more instead of less.
Because we are unable to learn how to pay people without their work.
We are immersed in the paradigm of “money for work” and to change that
global view, new paradigm should be established in all social spheres,
not only in economy.
On the other hand, working model for new economy could be a trigger for
wider new paradigm developments, mostly in education for creativity not
Are we, as civilization, able to open eyes for our new possibilities to
partially free ourselves from our work duty? Maybe…
Now, sadly speaking, our potentially growing freedom is substituted by
growing bureaucracy and police control because we don’t know how to
practically implement National Dividend in a globalized world, where
efficiency is very high. How to pay people for not being policemen or
officers. Are we not paying ourselves?
There are other questions which brings our time, not imaginable in times
of Douglas. Should we have accountants and fiscal offices any more? In
the age of informatics? I seriously doubt. The world with no fiscal
crimes is really possible.
And who should start real reforms, if not America?
Orthodox “economics” presents as an axiom that the act of production
provides sufficient income for the total product to be bought. So
much for this axiom. Social Credit challenges it and denies it. The
Social Credit “axiom” is that this orthodox contention is not true.
The real economy embraces the processes of production and consumption–
pursued according to some humanly conceived desires. The more power
to make decisions about the allocation of a nation’s resources becomes
centralized, the more “political” the economy will become because
consumer desires are more likely to be ignored or minimized.
Production should respond in a genuine economic democracy to broadly-
based consumer demand which may not of course be based on pure
science. It is the business of producers to pursue science so that
they are enabled to deliver, at minimum cost with adequate volume and
quality, to consumers the goods and services they want as expressed
by their “money votes” or purchasing patterns. Unfortunately the
present defective financial system starves the economy increasingly of
effective purchasing-power. This gap makes citizens insecure and
dependent and governments step in to spend more and more thus gaining
control of the deployment of real resources while removing individual
choice as to production policy. The political process thus become
more and more pervasive with governments establishing economic
policy. This is no accident, but the outworking of deliberate policy
designed to weaken all lesser elements of society, including local
governments and nations driving them inexorably into larger and larger
political and economic alliances and politico-economic unions–moving
progressively toward an evermore repressive world state from which
there will be refuge for no individual. Government will be so remote
and entrenched that virtually no effective action to influence it will
be possible for ordinary citizens. Financial reform as advocated by
Social Credit would effectively reverse this trend by restoring to
individuals and lesser governments increasing financial independence
and ability to function with autonomy. This is why Social Credit is
so vigorously opposed by the established power structure–those
misguided idealists, or hypocrites, who seek, or pretend to seek, the
solution of man’s problems in establishment of a World State. (Those
who foolishly look “toward the ends of the earth.”)
The young people want
a new financial system
They want to benefit from the
fruits of modern technology
The young people desire a new financial system; they wish to profit from the fruits of the rich heritage of the real wealth that was given to them by past generations. The heritage of indebtedness that the old financial system has loaded onto their backs does not interest them.
Louis-Marie Roy, 24 years old, is the son of Robert Roy, a sculptor and Pilgrim of St. Michael from St. Jean-Port-Joli, Que. At his employment, Louis-Marie took courses to obtain a college certificate in supervision. The professor asked his students to write an essay on automation. Louis-Marie wrote the following text, and received the mark of 5/5.
by Louis-Marie Roy
Nowadays, new technology is present more and more in industry. But too often, the replacement of man by the machine brings discontent among the persons who are replaced. The introduction of a machine means the loss of jobs. Those who are laid off say, “How will I get the products made by the machine, as I do not receive a wage?” But this reflection is due to looking at the problem from the wrong direction.
The replacement of man by the machine in production should be an enrichment, which delivers man from worries that are purely material, and would permit him to do other activities. Let us say, for example, that I spend about thirty minutes a day washing dishes after meals. If, one day, I decide to buy a dishwasher, I would not worry about what I would do with that extra thirty minutes. No, I know what I would do with my free time. If, on the contrary, the replacement of man by a machine is the cause of worries and privation, it is simply because we refuse to adapt our primitive financial system to this progress.
Why is the present financial system primitive and outdated? To explain it, I will make a simple comparison.
Imagine a primitive world without any technology, where the strength of each and every person is required to produce the goods necessary for the welfare of each person. In this world, a financial system like the present one, where the remuneration is directly related to employment, is justifiable because all the members of this society receive a wage for their work, and it permits them to procure the goods they produce.
On the other hand, imagine a world (fictitious, but possible just the same) where a person would not need to work to produce the necessary goods for the welfare of another, a world where the machine, and only the machine, is capable of furnishing goods. This world, even if it is fictitious, is very desirable. All men would be free and able to do the activity that they prefer without the worry of production. But in this world, the remuneration would be distributed in ways other than in the form of a salary, because man would not participate in production. The remuneration would be distributed in an equitable way in the form of a dividend. This dividend would be justifiable because technology is a common heritage.
No one can deny that technology is a human heritage that belongs to each and every person, because it is the past generations that brought us this technology, which should be at the service of man, and not man at its service. It is a heritage for us, in the same way as solar energy, the formidable power of the waterways that provide us with hydro-electronic dams, the power of the wind, the soil that furnishes us with an abundance of fruits and vegetables, et cetera, are.
Because we live in a world where technology and human effort unite forces in the production of goods, it is desirable that man be paid, in part, with a salary for his efforts in the process of production, and the other part with a dividend for the effort of technology and the machine.
Some will ask: “But who will pay for this dividend?” This dividend should be provided by our governments, and not by our taxes. The Government should take back its right to create the money necessary for the smooth running of the economy; to create money instead of borrowing it with interest from the private banks. Borrowing at interest only has the effect of creating an unpayable debt, because the Government must return more money than it borrowed from the banks.
The public debt in Canada has risen today to over five-hundred billion. Yet, today, Canada is without a doubt richer in goods than it was before the arrival of the first European settlers about four-hundred years ago. After these valiant people planted the cross in the soil, they began to develop Canada. And after them, their successors for three centuries improved the agriculture, made roads, bridges, and industries, All of this lineage of workers should certainly ot have left Canadians to live in the twentieth century with only a heritage of debts. . .
It is the primitive and dishonest financial system that we need to correct and adapt to technology. Then we could applaud the arrival of automation in our industry, instead of complaining about it.
Louis Marie Roy
This article was published in the January-February, 2004 issue of “Michael”.
Avec mes meilleures salutations.
François de Siebenthal
14, ch. des Roches
CH 1010 Lausanne