The way I see it is that the monetary, economic and political systems (there’s another trinity for you) must simultaneously be reformed/transformed otherwise one or the other will be used to subvert the process. This is why I believe Public Banking is so important both structurally and as the hierarchical and yet simultaneously economically decentralizing agent of a central banking entity whose specific policies are the variable dividend amount and discount percentage…and also (the hierarchical aspect) as the ultimate and first creator and distributor of ALL credit and whose policy for that distributing is basically whether or not it serves a constructive, stabilizing and ethical purpose. Private Banking can be a part of this system, but it must be restricted, watched and basically neutered. It is problematic and engendering of Mammon/Greed and Leviathan/governmental tyranny…so how can one realistically allow it to be the entity in control of the entire system(s)???

Douglas foresaw this and that is why he suggested the NCO/National Credit Office/Central Bank operating truly in the interest of the individual. I owe tremendously to the members of the Social Credit google group for their economic knowledge and insight and no real reform/transformation will occur or long prevail without the insights of Social Credit….but some of them IMO do not see that Private Banking must be so completely diminished. They correctly indicate that a governmental monopoly on credit would be just as bad as the present private one….unless of course it had BOTH the specific policies above AND guided by an ethic of Wisdom and Grace…was also the originating source and authority for the creation and distribution of credit.

Douglas also recognized the short comings of secret balloting and the subversion of the political process by the financial system, and suggested a decentralized electors process.

******************************************************************************

Posted later

Excellent article indeed. I knew Richard C Cooke was a monetary reformer who advocated Douglas’s Social Credit, but I had never read this very good combination of Social Credit, Banking reform which dovetails perfectly with Public Banking’s agenda and all of the historical background as well. Thanks very much for posting it. Again, an integrated approach by Public Banking and Social Credit which could also include some other reform movements like Positive Money and MMT is precisely what is needed.

********************************************************************************

Liam,

Thanks for the reply. I can understand your concerns about the use of the term trinity. It is a traditionally religious/Christian term, but, being an agnostic myself, I do not mean it to specifically refer to the Christian concept of the Trinity. Neither do I discourage others from relating to it in the traditional way either. One’s religion or secular beliefs are their complete right. I use the term in its naturally intellectual and general spiritual sense. Natural philosophy and natural spirituality don’t have to be dogmatically religious nor do they have to exclude people whose religion is supposedly based on the same ideas.

I also use the term Trinity because, if one looks a little closer, nature is replete with it. For instance a leaf is two symmetrical sides…and the stem from which they both emerged, are/were nourished and are a unitary whole. A tree is its trunk and branches….and its roots from which they both emerged and are a unitary whole. Electro-magnetism is two opposite charges interacting/integrating and the electric charge which is the seamless unitary result.

My use of the term and reference to the experience of Grace is also a completely natural one although the experience of Grace to me is the pinnacle of the integrative process and is a trinity-unity itself. The only thing above Grace/Trinity-Unity as an experience is what I refer to as Quadrinity which is simply an Ethic of Wisdom-Integration, Grace-Trinity-Unity and Flow/Change/Process.

My view of the size and percentage of the dividend and discount aligns largely with yours because I believe that a sparse, pecuniary dividend and discount is a good way to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory for Social Credit, especially as innovation and AI disruptively eliminate the need for employment. An economic and monetary equilibrium can be accomplished by the twin mechanisms of Social Credit at levels much higher than orthodox equilibrium theorists rigidly, dogmatically and unimaginatively conceive. Why? Because the discount takes effect at the correct place and time in the productive process (the end of the process itself and at retail sale where every item/service’s costs are summed) hence it does not have to just reduce retail prices some smallish percentage which is an incomplete, largely fudged governmental description of the inflation rate, but can actually be utilized to create positive price deflation…even within a profit making economy….of which IMO Social Credit is the best evolution thereof. Guys like John Rawson, are entitled to their opinions on equilibrium etc, but they have the stench of the scarcity mindset and intellectual rigidity which are the hallmark of orthodox thinking hanging around them rather heavily.

**************************************************************************************

Stuart,

I’m sure this was an oversight, but you forgot to include what I said after the pause in that sentence which was……unless of course it had BOTH the specific policies above AND guided by an ethic of Wisdom and Grace…was also the originating source and authority for the creation and distribution of credit.

What those policies mean is the immediate fulfillment of economic democracy i.e. a dividend sufficient to guarantee a virtual middle class lifestyle for every individual or family and a discount to retail prices right along with it that further increases their purchasing power.

And what I mean by “the originating source and authority for the creation and distribution of credit” is that the central Bank must ALSO operate truly in the public interest and be the originator of ALL credit…INSTEAD of the private Banks who endogenously do so now.

So you see I’m not only for structural/State Public Banking…I’m for a truly Public central Bank as well. One whose mandated policies are a “right now” guarantee of economic freedom to everyone, and “guided by a philosophy of Grace” is the diametric opposite of tyranny. Without those policies and that philosophy any Banking system public or private will inevitably degenerate into what we currently have. You’re very astute, and anything but naive Stuart. You can see that. Liam has his ideas about further preventing such from occurring and that is fine, but having policies that guarantee individual freedom and also guarantees a centralized public source of credit that takes away the private banks control…..that’s what you and Ellen and everyone else here wants, no?

*************************************************************************************

Posted in response to a contrarin poster:

“Douglas proposed that the banks could retain their ability to create money. but should lose their  monopoly  of the process.”

Me:  After 5000 years of automatic and inevitable destruction of economies I’ve decided to disagree with that. The Central Bank should create all credit. It should be a fourth branch of government with full separation of powers precisely like a supreme court except it would deal only with monetary and Banking policy. Along with the dividend, the discount and ultimate source of money creation “guided by an ethic of Wisdom and Grace”, I thought I made that rather clear. If the personnel of such a bank are fuzzy on Wisdom and Grace they can always consult any of the major wisdom traditions’ descriptions of their characteristics in men and their applications in Life and policy stripped of any attending pre-scientific dogmas so that they are temporally relevant. Having written a book on those characteristics and applications so stripped and minutely examined I’d gladly provide the curriculum.

I’m all for a debt jubilee so long as the policies of a dividend and discount are also implemented simply because it quickly resets and unburdens the western economies. I don’t see how your insistence that governments never borrow presents any actual problem. Such costs would be dealt with by the dividend and discount regardless. Having said that I’ve also suggested before that IMO governments on all levels could be funded/directly gifted by the NCO/Public Central Bank relieving citizens of the outmoded burden of taxation for same in a Distributive money system, or funded from the very small interest rates charged by the structural/state Public Banks on loans to consumers, businesses and governments. Either way could work and if the latter is chosen such costs would be compensated for by the dividend and discount mechanisms anyway. And guided by “Wisdom and Grace” such requests to build wasteful and unnecessary “bridges to no where” etc. by private entities or pols in search of election…would be refused such requests. If anyone truly thinks such was a good idea they could always go to the private banks and aggregate already earned profits and savings to build/invest in it. Wisdom and Grace by definition being both the ultimate dedication to The Good and the ultimate pragmatic application of whatever subject or endeavor is under review….essentially will handle the situation. And if other specific regulations are found to be necessary…fine. Transformation first! Rational and ethical regulation….right along with it.