Me: Most if not all of the concerns expressed here recently can be eliminated by Douglas’ advocacy of integral accounting (and insisting that it be guided by the various applicable aspects of the natural philosophical concept of grace which I am emphasizing) ….and then using sin taxation on economic vices and tax incentives to encourage economic virtues.
One of the planks of Wisdomics-Gracenomics is that In return for the elimination of virtually all transfer taxation and the lowering of individual and corporate income taxes to much lower rates that only reflect the necessity that the government must be sovereign or chaos will ultimately be the result, especially in a fiat money system like we have now….all enterprise will submit to a monthly rigorous examination of their books and whether or not they are integral regarding numerical accuracy, the rules of accounting themselves and whether things like cost savings which can legitimately be applied to profits but if these cost savings are equal to or exceed any other monthly additional costs….then the “sin” of greed as in price inflation will be taxed accordingly.
Grace is ultimate balance wed to the embrace of a highly refined sense of morals and ethics….and applies to both the individual and to commercial agents. And if commercial agents can’t abide by such a beatific system and vision….they will be punished for it and ultimately not allowed to participate in its benefits. After all grace is an integration of sovereign power and benevolence.
JS: Hi Steve, I just wanted to add some comments in bold.
I’m not sure what you mean by “economic virtues” so you’ll have to elaborate. A “sin tax” tends to mean something in economics that I’m sure Douglas, nor most of his supporters, would support. However, you tend to use terms in your own way, so I might be mistaken as to the meaning of this term.
This is not what Douglas meant by the term “integral accounting” as far as I’m aware. Do you have a reference for this?
I need you to elaborate on this in order to understand what you’re saying here. I’m not sure what you mean when you say these cost savings equal or exceed additional monthly costs that this is a “sin” if it shows up in profit? Are you suggesting that any cost savings by a company that is accounted for as profit is a “sin” that should be taxed?
Me: “I’m not sure what you mean by “economic virtues” so you’ll have to elaborate. A “sin tax” tends to mean something in economics that I’m sure Douglas, nor most of his supporters, would support. However, you tend to use terms in your own way, so I might be mistaken as to the meaning of this term.”
By economic virtues I mean things like thrift, competition and good will. I’m quite sure that Douglas would probably be okay with taxing economic sins like greed as in non-cost caused price inflation, commercial domination and dishonest accounting.
This is not what Douglas meant by the term “integral accounting” as far as I’m aware. Do you have a reference for this?
I should have said integrity in accounting as that is what I meant.
“I need you to elaborate on this in order to understand what you’re saying here. I’m not sure what you mean when you say these cost savings equal or exceed additional monthly costs that this is a “sin” if it shows up in profit? Are you suggesting that any cost savings by a company that is accounted for as profit is a “sin” that should be taxed?”
I’m not saying that. I’m saying if for instance monthly cost saving equals or exceeds any legitimate additional monthly costs…that those savings can be legitimately considered profits and are not an economic sin …but if you raise your prices despite this fact then it would be severely scrutinized as mere greed and subject to sin taxation if chronic.
Part of the intention of my 50% discount/rebate policy is to create such a beneficially profitable situation for businesses from the “Mom and Pop” level to the conglomerate that they must participate or die uncompetitive deaths. It might not be perfectly effective in stopping all non-cost price inflation, but it would be much more effective than simply leaving things as they are. And if say an average rate of 2% inflation did occur all you’d need to do is tack that onto the 50% discount…and again severely scrutinize abusers of the obviously beneficial and more stable system created by the dividend and high percentage discount.
JS: Hi Steve, I want to explore this further, so that i understand what youre saying.
Yes, the profit incentive already rewards this. You’ll have to be SPECIFIC as to how you plan to reward it differently than what already exists under a private enterprise profit system.
I’m not sure he’d be okay with taxing economic sins. You have to define those sins SPECIFICALLY, and then explain SPECIFICALLY how you’d tax them. Greed is very vague. How do you tax “greed”? That’s an emotion. You said non-cost caused price increases (inflation) would be taxed. Why? If there’s a shortage of something, prices rise, profitability rises, which induces more companies to engage in its production, which increases the supply and reduces the price. Why would you tax that? That is the mechanism that increases the supply in order to meet demand. If you tax it, there may always be a shortage. What is dishonest accounting, and how do you specifically propose to find it and tax it? How do you define “commercial domination”? And how do you tax it. I need specifics in order to comment intelligently on what you’re proposing.
Me: “Yes, the profit incentive already rewards this. You’ll have to be SPECIFIC as to how you plan to reward it differently than what already exists under a private enterprise profit system.”
I’m not going to reward it any differently than it already is rewarded….except of course in the instance of the dividend and 50% discount/rebate policies….which would obviously reward it much more than presently.
“You have to define those sins SPECIFICALLY, and then explain SPECIFICALLY how you’d tax them….I need specifics in order to comment intelligently on what you’re proposing.”
I define economic sins as anything other than practicing thrift, competition and good will. And non-cost caused price inflation, commercial domination and dishonest accounting…are obvious examples. There are undoubtedly more such and they’re not that difficult to recognize
I’m not interested in being anal about it, but it’s important to keep an obviously much more beneficial system for everyone stable with the tools, like taxation and various incentives aligned with the concept of grace, for the good of all.
Social Credit/Wisdomics/Gracenomics/ Gracientialism 