To: Timid Advocates of Change and Determined Defenders of the Status Quo (DDotSQ) on several mail lists. Hi folks, For the past several weeks I have neglected my correspondence, listened to the hot debates on lists <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, and surfed the internet in an effort to refresh my perspective on our progress to date toward a sustainable global society. It seems to me, that nothing has changed since Hilaire Belloc declared on page 200 of his 1912 book, THE SERVILE STATE, that only two solutions to the "capitalist anarchy" were available to us: "a reaction towards well-divided property, or the reestablishment of servitude." I keep hoping that the "reaction towards well-divided property" will once again find a sponser in the U.S.A. After World War II the industrial nations, except the UK and the US, surged toward a social order of well-divided property in the form of financially adequate family allowances in the order of 1/5 of the average wage per child, and by 1970 these industrial nations had achieved GNP/capita parity with the United States, with varying total national tax rates ranging from the Biblical 30% of GNP in the United States, Japan, and Switzerland up to the 55% of GNP in Sweden, as shown in Figure 1 of the global model at URL: <http://www.freespeech.org/darves/bert.html>. But since the 1970s, the world-wide trend under influence of the DDotSQ has been toward the capitalist UK/US model with more welfare, workfare, less property, more unemployment, lower incomes for the great majority, and higher incomes for the fortunate few. This trend leads ultimately to that "Third World" condition which has been the common lot of mankind for most of our recorded history. Or at least, that is the impression I get, based on data provided by the American media, data provided by frequent posters on e-mail lists, data provided by web sites on the internet, and the total absense of any public dialogue on the status of those post War family allowances today.. Of the seven URLs listed below which address our common interest in change, five were mentioned by John C. Turmel in his posts to list LETS in support of John's contention that a global network of Local Area Trading Systems (LETS) is the type of global network most likely to evolve, after the defects in the existing global financial system are corrected, when and if corrections are demanded by an informed public opinion. Informing the public is always the primary, but thank-less, task of serious reformers. Blowing smoke in the public's eyes is always the primary, but well-paid, task of Determined Defenders of the Status Quo (DDotSQ). URLs 1, and 2, share common ground with the five URLs from John C. Turmel in their faint praise of an interest-free medium of exchange at the national and global level, together with (1) a national dividend, (2) a basic income, (3) a "family" wage, or (4) an open line of interest-free credit, with any one of these four instruments of social policy to be the property of every person at birth. Notice that the "open line of interest-free credit" is the most comprehensive approach, in that it satisfies all of the technical requirements and achieves all of the objectives of the other three policy instruments; the National Devidend, the Basic Income, or the Family Wage advocated since 1981 by the encyclical letters of the Catholic Church. 1, New Indicators of Progress, UK Policy list at URL: <http://www.foe.co.uk/progress> 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (SA New Economics Foundation), 99-05-17 at URL: <http://sane.org.za> 3, Time Dollar Institute , 90517JCT.L-C at URL: <http://www.timedollar.org/> 4, Local Economic Trading Systems,90517JCT.L-C at URL: <http://www.gmlets.u-net.com> 5, Ithaca Hours, 90517JCT.L-C at URL: <http://www.lightlink.com/hours/ithacahours/> 6, E.F. Schumacher Society , 90517JCT.L-C, at URL <http://www.oneworld.org/schumachersoc/> 7, Bank of Good Will, "Markus Helendahl" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, JCT,99-05-17 at URL: <http://www.bgw.net> The following few excerpts, from #7, the 'Bank Of Good Will' web site, clearly indicate the direction and manner in which many serious reformers hope to move public opinion. >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "a paradigm shift, working together beyond money, powerstructures and hierarchies!" >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "However, some vital elements still seem to be missing! We believe that we will never find the promised land�, as long as we depend on the play-rules of the present political and economical power-structures!" "We believe that the missing part is co-operation!!!" >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "But trying to unite all those wishing for a change and all those already active, one way or another, can indeed be very tricky. Since everyone has their own agenda and/or personal needs. And as long as we keep pulling in all directions, the world will stay the same!" >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "What we are suggesting is that, if we really want to create a change in the world, it is imperative that we find the smallest unifying common factor, beyond all ideologies and beyond all differences, where we can unite on something that we all share� � the wish for a change!!!" >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "What we are not trying to do. We are not trying to figure out all the practical details. We will not try to create all the solutions, since we are not trying to create a new system, a party or a new religion!" >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "Thirty years ago, in the dawn of the environmental movement, no one questioned how it started. The important thing was that it started. Also, at that time no one had all the answers." >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "We will never fight the 'old world�. How will it be possible to achieve a lasting peace, if we always have to fight? Nothing can be gained by fighting!" >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>> End excerpts from the 'Bank Of Good Will' web site <<<<<<< On list Futurework, in a debate Re: Destruction of Albania (Part I), Ray E. Harrell, artistic director, The Magic Circle Opera Repertory Ensemble of New York, wrote: >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "Thus far cooperation has only come about as a result of violent revolution which destroys over a million years of wisdom and culture every time it happens, or the creation of an enemy to mobilize public attitudes and join the disparate sections of the nation. Like the creation of Germany in the 19th century, the UK, Spain, Italy, Yugoslavia and yes the United States of America in 1776. In my opinion we suffer from a poverty of workable non-violent models and imagination." And Christoph Reuss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> promptly replied to Ray E. Harrell on list Futurework: "IMHO Switzerland offers such a model and has offered it for a long time now (even _before_ it was rich), not only internally but also externally (Red Cross etc.), but it seems that the powers-that-be are more interested in tearing down this model and (dis)"integrating" it into the imperialist EU, instead of adopting this model. It is "in the way" of the "New World Order", like the Yugoslavian model of non-aligned socialism was." >>>>>>>>>>> End observations from list Futurework <<<<<<<<<< On list [EMAIL PROTECTED], in an ongoing discussion of the Demon, "Globalization," a brief excerpt from a LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE - May 1999 article on TRANSATLANTIC WHEELING AND DEALING, speaks also to our common interest in some kind of Change: >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "So there seems to be nothing to prevent the transnational corporations taking possession of the planet and subjecting humanity to the dictatorship of capital. Almost all of them are based in the most powerful countries of the North (the US, Canada, the EU, Japan) where large-scale mergers and concentrations continue apace with the unconditional support of governments and international bodies given over to their cause. Controlling virtually all the means of information and communication, they meet with only localised and sporadic resistance as they compete relentlessly for monopoly control of the markets. Making people submit to the implacable logic of profit is now the only policy of the great powers and the organisations they control, especially the OECD, IMF and WTO. The havoc they cause is terrible and they do it with impunity: accelerated impoverishment and destruction of the social structures of entire populations, who are deprived of the most basic rights, driven from their homes and left fighting for survival; the weakest states collapse under the weight of structural adjustment policies and debt, unable to guarantee their people's security or provide a minimum of working public services. The consequences are a return to barbarism and ethnic conflict; ever more crises bringing plummeting living standards and soaring unemployment (5); a widespread increase in inequality and poverty, even in the supposedly richest countries, especially that shop window of liberalism, Tony Blair's Britain (6)." >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>>> End observations from list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <<<<<<<<<< On list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, William B. Ryan recently challenged John C. (The Engjneer) Turmel to "a debate among friends," and argued that interest (usury) was not the primary cause of our social disorder, while JCT and many other serious reformers believe that it is the only and root cause of our social disorder. This following brief excerpt from "a debate among friends" should remind us that this debate has not yet achieved a "sense of the meeting" in which both parties agree on the primary cause, or causes, of our social disorder. WBR is explaining C. H. Douglas' A/(A+B) 1922 theory of corporate finance and the causes of the perennial deficiency of purchasing power in industrial societies. >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< "WBR: The following argument requires the acknowledgement of simple concepts from differential calculus: A: The rate-of-flow expressed in terms of dollars per unit time of all payments firms make directly to people as final consumers. B: The rate-of-flow of ALL payments firms make to firms and equivalent accounting entities, including government. JCT: Here we again have stated my fundamental disagreement with Douglas� B flows. I only accept the interest and none of the others. After eight previous exchanges, Bill still hasn�t once faced our demand that he show one instance where money to government or other firms doesn�t get into the hands of consumers. And he�s repeated the same thing almost eight times despite not answering our question once." >>>>>>>> Snip <<<<<<<<<< >>>>>>>>>>> End observations from list <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <<<<<<<<<< Now folks, do you all get the same impression from all this controversy and debate, as I do? My impression consists of the following elements: 1, many capable contributors are scattered over too many lists and web sites, so they cannot pool their knowledge in a common cause. Eventually, I hope, The Optimum Policy (TOP) will emerge and attract enough contributors to the comon cause to effect a change in the public policy of the U.S.A., which will set the example for the other nations of the global social order. 2, Too many potential contributors believe that a modest presentation of their ideas will be more widely accepted than a forceful presentation such as John C. Turmel makes for his vision of an interest-free global currency. Now false modesty is no part of John C. (the Engjneer) Turmel's makeup and this mechanical engineer named <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, like JCT, admits of no superior but GOD and damned few equals among men! Although I will admit, that electrical engineers and physics majors seem to get a better education in math than mechnical engineers. I did not learn G. R. Kirchhoff's, 1824-87, Laws of networks, "zero-sum potentials around every closed loop," and, "zero-sum (flows + dQ/dT) into every node," until my on-the-job training in the early 1950s. And after 1951, Kirchhoff's Laws were not mentioned to me again for 48 years, until William B. Ryan tried to use Kirchhoff's Laws to argue with JCT in their "debate among friends," but without much success. 3, The public debate on how to achieve a sustainable global society seems to be losing ground to the DDotSQ. Theirs has always been the easier task. And yet, the world has made some progress in social policy since the USA (or Switzerland) was established. The best solution for sustaining a population of reproduceable productive assets (with a long and expensive development stage) has been established and reduced to practice in nearly all of the world's corporations and in quite a few nations. If we truly want a sustainable global society, we only need to teach this knowledge of corporate policy to the public, while at the same time, we must teach the DDotSQ that keeping this knowledge a "Secret Of The Temple" since the 1890s has diminished the effective demand of their national markets for the products and services they produce. The DDotSQ are literally pissing on their own shoes, and digging their own graves by their stiff-necked opposition to every public inquiry the into corporate financial structure. If the public back-lash does not get the greedy bastards, Jay Hanson's ecological "Die Off" certainly will. If Garrett Hardin were a serious reformer, he would have written THE FALLACY OF THE COMMONS about the waste of the world's human resources, as well as about the waste of its natural resources. For this kind of thankless work, bucking the UK/US establishment, a graphical presentation is worth several million words. You lurkers and innocents must not be ashamed to print-out the global model at URL <http://www.freespeech.org/darves/bert.html> and discuss its content and meaning with your friends and associates, even though you or they may have majored in Economics, English Literature, or the Law. The print-out is only 11 pages total; 4 pages of text, a one page macro-model Fig.6, a one page micro-model Fig.8, and 5 pages of supporting charts. I use the model in my 6th grade Sunday School class to give the kids something to think about other than sex and violence, but the model does not always have the same effect on Ph.D. candidates. I am much obliged to Gunnar �yro, of Bergen, Norway for his recent help in finding my files of David C. Korten's writings on this topic. >From "Money as a Social Disease," by David C. Korten A PCDForum Paper Release Date May 20, 1997 "The global corporation is arguably the most powerful instrument for concentrating power and wealth ever devised by humans. Many command larger economies than most countries. Indeed, of the 100 largest economies in the world 51 are corporations. The economy of Mitsubishi is larger than that of Indonesia, the world's fourth most populous country and a land of enormous natural wealth. Without the extraordinary ability of the corporation to concentrate financial wealth the world might well have no billionaires at all." >>>>>>>>>>>> snip <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< "Many of the best minds of our time are engaged in finding ways for the already wealthy to use the money system to claim ever more of the world's real wealth for themselves. Remarkably few are concerned with how we might redesign money to serve a society that works for all people. It is time to change that." _______________ David C. Korten is president of the People-Centered Development Forum and author of When Corporations Rule the World. This is an expanded version of an article that originally appeared in Yes! A Journal of Positive Futures, #2, April 1997. >>>>>>>>>> end excerpt from my Korten file <<<<<<<<<<<<< Now folks, you may have noticed that the macro-model Fig. 6 at URL: <http://www.freespeech.org/darves/bert.html> is truly a global model because it does not show the inports and exports which are a vital part of every industrial economy at the national level. Please notice, however, that the magnitude of the three flows of M1 through the capital plant of Fig6 in the global model does illustrate what the economy of Switzerland (with its 1993 GNP/capita of $37,180/year, 1996 World Bank ATLAS) would look like, if there were as many Swiss as there are U.S. citizens. The three flows, of course are: A, the annual flow of M1 through the GNP (four node) closed loop, B, the annual flow of M1 through the purchased material (two node) closed loop, and C, the annual flow of M1 through the speculative (two node) closed loop. Perhaps some of our frequent posters declined to comment on this model because the inport/export feature was not shown, and others because they are not being paid to solve the global problem by emulating the Swiss example. The attached file <FIG4B.GIF> illustrates the correct macro-model for the national economy of the U.S.A., and we should know by now that the several national economies are the only places where we have the authority to take the corrective action needed to stabilize the global economy. There is no need for, and, IMHO, no serious reformer wants a ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT with big balls, sharp elbows, and a loud mouth, to manage the global economy for us. In closing, let me try to move the "debate among friends" back on track. If we assume that the $5,906 billion/year GNP flow of M1 in <Fig4B.GIF> (C. H. Douglas' A flow, according to WBR & JCT) is disbursed at two week intervals for wages, salaries, interest, and dividends the paymaster will need about $246 billion of M1 in his checking account on each pay day. If we allow that purchased material accounts are settled monthly, the $8,853 billion/year disbursement of M1 to other firms (C. H. Douglas' B flow, according to WBR & WSB) can be covered if the purchasing agent has $738 billion of M1 in his checking account at the beginning of each month. The sum of maximum balances in the two corporate checking accounts = $984 billion of M1, which is 95.3% of the $1,032 billion of M1 (the working capital or circulating medium of exchange) shown in the macro-model <FIG4.GIF>. Notice that 4.7% is accepted engineering accuracy, and more than good enough for pro-bono social engineering. I hope William B. Ryan will explain to his readers how today's speculative bubble (flow C, above) can be run on the other 4.7% of M1. If the banks are charging the capital plant 5% interest on M1, that business expense will be included in the gross sales of the U.S. economy which is: (A flow = $5,906 billion/year GNP flow)+ (B flow = $8,853 billion/year disbursement of M1 to other firms) = ($14,659 billion/year gross sales). This makes the cost of M1 = 0.35% of gross sales. That seems a reasonable price for business and government to pay for a stable circulating medium of exchange which completes the production process and creates all of the wealth consummed or saved annualy in the U.S.A. Now we must look at the other money measures M2, M3, & L which add up to the total national debt of $13,408.6, in two components: Federal Debt, July 1995, = $3,614.4 billion at 5% = $180.7 billion/year = 3.1% of GNP. NonFederal Debt, " " , = $9,794.2 billion at 5% = $489.7 bjllion/year = 8.3% of GNP. TOTAL USURY, INTEREST, or DEBT SERVICE = $670.4 billion/year = 11.4% of GNP. That is a larger share of GNP than Moses awarded to the Thirteenth Tribe (the Levites, Num. 18:26-32) after he smashed the two tablets of stone and taught the Twelve Tribes of Israel only Ten of the Twelve Moral Commandments. I hope John C. Turmel will explain to his readers that while the total of usury, interest, or debt service is about double the $5,000.year expense of supporting children, as shown on the micre-model <FIG8.GIF>, the bankers only loan their stroke-of-a-pen money to those members of the workforce with a high probability of paying back both interest and principle. Bankers will not even take children as collateral for a loan! In the micro-model of the U.S. national economy <FIG8.GIF> showing the break-even analysis for every house-hold in the U.S. economy, debt service, as the bankers distribute it, would appear as a managed cost roughly poportional to income, rather than as a fixed and unavoidable expense like the cost of supporting children without adequate tax exenptions, tax credits, or family allowances. Even so, $670.4 billion/year = 11.4% of GNP, is an obscene rake-off for an industry which creates its product out of thin air. This particular mechanical engineer eluded the greedy bastards, to some extent, by building my first home with my own labor and driving second-hand cars for 52 years. If any of you lurkers and innocents want to get even, insread of getting mad, you must support John C. Turmel's drive for a zero-interest global currancy, with perhaps an adequate family allowance as the fall-back position. Then, the great majority of parenting households in the U.S.A. would be able to manage their costs as easily as Gay, Lesbian, and Celibate households manage their costs under our present public policy. Lets hear from all the DDotSQ who want to be on the winning side of this "debate among friends." Kind regards to all, WesBurt
