Everything is loving integration….and being as aware of that integration as possible.
Steve Hummel 09/27/2016
Author: chdwr
What Is The Significance and The Possibilities of The Cosmic Code
It brings consciousness of the process of Wisdom to our modern intellectually and systemically fragmented world.
As The Cosmic Code applies to all spheres of human experience and activity and Wisdom is acknowledged as a supreme good its application is a stable and general path toward individual improvement and excellence, and human cultural maturity as well.
Understanding the true value and usefulness of Wisdom, the Cosmic Code can serve as the impetus for the formation of a new ethic of Wisdom.
As The Cosmic Code establishes that nothing and no one can remain static and unchanging while in the temporal universe, it also establishes that if you do not utilize Wisdom to improve and strengthen yourself….you WILL get worse….and so it is a rational motivation to use it to do so.
As Will-Intention is the beginning of action and is intensified by emotion, Grace is the pinnacle joyous and freeing experience of Wisdom, the mental and emotional precursors to Grace are Faith as in Confidence, which enables action, and Hope, which excites and encourages future action, so do these linked states foster, synergize and build the beginning of intention and so action for and toward Wisdom.
Posted In Reply to a Poster on the Social Credit Google Group
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/social-credit/HNnTcGLgVvs
GM: “How? Does such an accounting system exist today?”
Me: Yes, the money system is digital in nature which means that money, whether it is issued as debt or as a gift is able to liquidate prices. Social Credit does not destroy the system simply integrates monetary gifting into it via a universal dividend and reciprocally to both the individual and businesses at point of retail sale.
GM: Maybe. Imputing intentionality is somewhat problematic. “Finance” is not a monolith, and it does not act with the monopolistic intent o, for example, Microsoft squelching competitors and potential competitors, as it was convicted of doing with its Explorer browser. Most bankers simply look to maximize their personal gains in the very short term, and have strong incentives to do so. Too many such incentives, and there is one reason why Wells Fargo is now in dutch with Elizabeth Warren. So the idea of “Finance” trying to deliberately protect a long term monopoly runs rather counter to what we have learned about how the financial markets work. Institutions often do what is contrary to their long term interest in order to maximize short term gains. That astonished Alan Greenspan, who thought the markets were rational until the GFC showed him how banks had destroyed themselves by irrationally chasing short term gains instead of protecting their long term prospects. See this New Yorker piece (http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/elizabeth-warren-and-the-wells-fargo-scam) on Senator Elizabeth Warren grilling the Wells Fargo CEO over the latest frauds there.
Your analysis seems to presuppose “Finance” to be a rational albeit malign, agent seeking to maximize its long term competitive position. There is scant evidence to support that presupposition, and less after the GFC, IMHO,Thanks again.
Me: While the individual banker/loan officer is not a co-conspirator there is actually a lot of evidence for conscious efforts on the part of the major too big to fail banks to make sure that politicians and governments tow the line of Finance’s interests, for instance all of the revolving door of former banking executives becoming secretaries of the treasury and other strategic governmental positions. And even if one doesn’t want to confront these facts the truth is the system is set up to empower the Banking system anyway. For instance, while the Banks don’t own a complete monopoly on credit creation….97% of it is a virtual monopoly. That plus their claim to ownership of the credit they create reinforces their power. And that’s not even considering their dominating paradigms of loan only and for production only that put a straight jacket on the types of vehicles allowed for the distribution of credit…..when what specifically is required to balance the system is monetary grace as in gifting.
Sure the large corporations with global reach play the game “with extreme prejuidice” and that also needs to rectified by the same concept that will transform the economy, but what they do only proves they know that in order to survive and thrive the current system basically requires them to be ruthless with power…..instead of just profitable in an actually humane and freeing system.
GM: YES, money is digital. So what? If the accounting system exists, what is the Social Credit of the USA now, and how much dividend could the recipients expect, for example, this year, if SC were in place? How is Social Credit measured in that accounting system you aver to exist, and how distributed?If there is a reliable accounting system to calculate the dividend, it should be rather simple for a mathematician or econometricianto produce an algorhithm that would calculate in near-real-time. Then we could put up an online tool something like the “Debt Clock” telling people”This is what you would have today with Social Credit– now write your Congressman and tell her/him you want to claim your dividend.”
Thanks again,
Thanks again,
Me: I thought Wally mentioned already that an assessment of the nation’s capital value would be part of the process of sizing up a dividend. Douglas said that attempting to balance the books of an economy was flawed because it assumes that we depreciate/destroy our capital at the same rate that we create it. Some may disagree here, but it is my opinion that the dividend should be relatively abundant approaching a middle class living standard and the retail discount percentage significantly higher than any rate of inflation. This would reverse the individually austere and cost inflationary nature of the economy into an individually abundant and systemically cost deflationary one. One of the aspects of the philosophical concept of grace, upon which Social Credit is based, is abundant/abundance. A mere statistical equilibrium IMO is actually an orthodoxy to overcome. Therefore, the dividend and discount, so long as they reflected abundance and avoided stimulating profligacy, could be “ball park” estimates. If the dividend approached a middle class level, say $1500/mo. and the discount 40% that could translate into as much as $2100/mo in purchasing power for an individual and $4200 for a household, and any pay from employment would be additional. This would also enable taxes paid by both individuals and businesses for unemployment insurance, welfare and eventually even Social Security to be eliminated due to their then redundancy.
The dual policies of Social Credit effect more of the alleged agendas of the left (economic democracy) and the right (governmental frugality and downsizing) than either of their advocates have been able to deliver since forever. Also, because they are direct, costless and placed at the terminal end of the productive process they are naturally and automatically balancing. They would change the unstable disequilibrium of austerity and inflation into “the higher disequilibrium” of individual abundance and price deflation. And this is how it should be “sold” to the general public and the small to medium sized business community.
JS: Actually, I see what Greg is getting at here. I think in order to “sell” Social Credit, there has to be a multi-pronged approach. Those of us on this list tend to be intellectuals and academics, so we tend to want to appeal to that group. I think what Greg is saying is that this method is not going to appeal to the average person. William Aberhart won an election guaranteeing a $25/month dividend. I’m not sure if Greg knows this, but William Aberhart and the Social Credit party were elected to power in Alberta with the promise to implement Douglas Social Credit.
Me: Yes I see the value of having an integrated approach where both altruism and self interest can be communicated to awaken the general population and the business community to the economic necessity and the ethical difference that Social Credit’s policies would effect.
The idea that a dividend would elicit suspicion and rejection more than perhaps a momentarily surprised acceptance is very probably an unhealthy cultural phenomenon as the normal and healthy response to a gift is gratitude and joy. In my opinion the overwhelming majority of people would have the latter response….especially if they just ignored their “intellectuals’ habituated skepticism and obsessive contention.
GM: Yet, many of the voters will be looking for material benefit, which seems to make them “crude and animalistic” and not worth bothering about in the view of some Social Crediters.
Me: Well I think that is a misconception as the dividend and discount are available to all. It is however true that ignoring or discounting an unhealthy/unwholistic viewpoint when a healthy and holistic one is available…is Wisdom.
GM: Nobly put. However, ambassador Adlai Stevenson II said it most succinctly, and I have quoted him in earlier correspondence: “Unfortunately, Mdm., we need a majority.”
Me: Okay. But I would simply say that selling faith and hope for the future with monetary Grace is a more effective way to overcome cynicism and scepticism. We even saw/see it in both Obama’s and Trump’s political strategies. All you really have to do differently….is make the policies reflect the philosophy and follow through.
JS: We do need a majority, but we don’t necessarily need to convince the majority of people. As Soren Kierkegaard once wrote:
“Truth always rests with the minority, and the minority is always stronger than the majority, because the minority is generally formed by those who really have an opinion, while the strength of a majority is illusory, formed by the gangs who have no opinion — and who, therefore, in the next instant (when it is evident that the minority is the stronger) assume its opinion..”
Me: That makes perfect sense to me and dovetails with recent sociological research that indicates that if as little as 10-12% of a populace gets the idea that a change is necessary it becomes difficult to keep such change from being implemented. A committed 10-12% will sway the remainder who will then enthusiastically embrace the change or even merely glom onto it.
GM: I suppose that the judgment of the best way to win an electorate is best made by competent professional politicians who know how to win. I know that in order to interest an editor in the subject of Social Credit, I would have to point to something in reality that made it now especially worthy of attention from the readers of that particular magazine or newspaper. If I were to talk only about Grace and Giftedness, I would expect a deaf ear, even from most “Christian” publishers. “Grace” is not, I confess, immediately apparent to me in the Trump campaign, as you seem to suggest. In fact, you are right that Pres. Obama did earn his title by promising somewhat vague “hope”, with the slogan “yes, we can!”, but has disappointed and even alienated many of the idealists who supported him. Guantánamo is still operating, for example, and disappointment among African American voters is threatening Democratic prospects in this election, see http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article24775147.html. “Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me,” rather well captures the attitude among many voters.
Me: Actually I don’t think Trump is “selling” Grace either. If he were aware of Social Credit’s philosophy and policies he would be doing so. He IS selling change, a kind of change that you correctly point out was not followed through with by Obama. Again, what is needed is the economic and monetary philosophy and policies of Grace. Social Crediters are not talking “only about Grace and Giftedness” they are talking about integrating both a philosophy of Grace and the direct, pinpointed and valid economic policies that will resolve the deepest problems of modern economies.
GM: If banks were indeed the ultimate source of all credit, as you seem to be suggesting, they would certainly not be so worried about “dis-intermediation” as they have been since the 1970s. The Eurodollar market probably put the first and biggest nail into the coffin of bank intermediation, as companies found it economical to raise funds in the European capital market instead of from US banks that were subject to regulation that make credit costlier. Disintermediation is just a fancy term for “cutting out the middleman”. Banks are middlemen, a.k.a. “on lenders” in so far as they “get” funds from corporate and consumer depositors and, after reserving a fraction at the central bank, lend funds to borrowers. Therefore their role and function is not distinct from other major institutional investors in that respect. As far as the ultimate source of monies going to borrowers by means of the junk-bond market, banks were not it. There is a lot on the record about those investors. The most important institutional investor group is, it is fair to say, pension funds, the like of Calpers, TIAA-CREF, etc. Banks can only wish they were as important as Social Creditors seem to think. They aren’t, and lending is no longer their main business. Obsessing over the power of banks now seems something like obsessing over the power of the Luftwaffe. That also may have made great sense during the 1930s, as Mr. Churchill insisted at the time.
Me: No one here “obsesses” over the power of Banks. They do correctly look at and point out that a handful of too big to fail banks dominate the system and also correctly point at policies that would end that domination so that Finance would take its proper, non-dominating and so ethically correct place in the economy along with all of the other business models.
As re-distribution of a systemic scarcity (socialism) doesn’t resolve that scarcity, so economizing by “cutting out the middleman” (conservative orthodoxy) won’t actually solve that same systemic condition. Social Crediters have no problem with economizing, but you can’t economize your way out of an inherently cost inflationary system. The only way to do that is to awaken to the necessity of a new economic idea that creates abundance where there was once systemic austerity and that idea is the costless and freeing concept of monetary grace as in gifting. It’s really a pity that so many modern intellectuals are so habituated to doubt and contention which tends to make them obsess over problems and palliatives in favor of actual solutions. A better way would be to first “become as little children” that is truly open and accepting and then utilizing Wisdom to combine truths, workabilities and applicabilities.
GM: However, the growth of shadow banking has made it difficult for policymakers to use the old tactics based on the idea that by influencing bank money creation using such tactics as adjustment of the reserve requirement they can control the money supply. People and institutions have somewhere else to go beside banks: the shadow banks.
Me: The big Banks facilitated the growth of shadow banking largely by their promotion and selling of derivatives like MBS (mortgage backed securities) CDS (credit default swaps) etc. etc. And they now hold many times the entire world economy’s actual money volume with these same “weapons of financial mass destruction” and so attempt to extort things like bail outs and bail ins. Ellen Brown who is a member of this group has written extensively about this as well as Mary Fricker of REPO Watch. The problem is still the business model of Finance, and the solution is still a new paradigm of monetary and price grace.
GM: Jim, you may not have noticed that what you think I wrote came directly from the Fed. It is counterfactual or at best hyperbolic to say, as you did, that, “This is totally untrue. Savings has NOTHING to do with deposits.” The source you cite, by contrast, says that saving by itself does not increase deposits and lendable funds. So there are other sources too, but saving assuredly has something to do with deposits and lending
Me: “saving assuredly has something to do with deposits and lending”
Yes, saving can increase deposits….for savers. But regarding lending ability, the essential nature of the money system and monetary and economic transformation/reform…it has absolutely no significance whatsoever.
Forget the FED. The FED is actually the hand maiden of the too big to fail banks. This was especially so during the folly of the recent financial crisis where a combination of greed and false orthodoxy regarding general equilibrium theory, the Banks and their creation the shadow banking system took leave of their moorings and created titanic amounts of bogus products and debt responsibilities. And unless we demand that derivatives be cancelled/responsibly unwound and implement ongoing policies that actually make the system serve man and the entirety of the business community, at best the system will limp along for another 25-30 years and at worst enable Finance to bully and/or buy unimaginative, ignorant and compliant politicians…into further enslaving the individual with bail-ins and further austerity. And that’s if we avoid a major war in an era of modern weaponry. And all one really needs to do to avoid this is actually look at the beauty, validity and economically encompassing nature of the philosophy and policies of Social Credit….instead of actually not looking at them and also not recognizing their wisdom, work-ability and applicability. This is not dogma. It is confronting stark and historically reflective tendencies….and perceiving the holistic and transformative nature of Social Credit’s policies.
GM: However, it would be equally foolish to dismiss all research without examination, if only because, in order to determine whether the research is “flawed,” we need first to consider it in order to determine whether and how fatally it may be so.
Me: What we really need to do is compare their research and policies (if they offer them up) to Social Credit’s research and policies. That will be basically the difference between flawed and incomplete research and honest accounting, valid economic theory and philosophical and ethical depth. But don’t just take my word for it. If you want a non-social credit source Steve Keen has done a lot of excellent de-bunking of the current monetary and economic orthodoxies you mention. But once one realizes most of the current thinking is wrong they need to actually consider Social Credit. Keen has actually re-discovered some of the things Douglas advocated like the basic, inherent disequilibrium of modern economies.
JS: You have this archaic notion that banks are intermediaries between “savers” and “investors”. This idea has been totally debunked.
Me: Precisely. What matters is the flow of total costs and hence even the minimal flow of total prices (there’s always a tendency and temptation to increase prices in a profit making system) will always tend to exceed the flow of total individual incomes even ideally available to liquidate those prices. This disequilibrated ratio of costs/prices to individual incomes necessitates continual borrowing in order to attempt to stabilize the system. However, because this is the ongoing and inherent state of the system injecting money into the system simply re-initiates the inherent problem. Direct and costless gifts of income to the individual/purchasing power at retail sale are therefore the best and only ways to actually bring equilibrium to the system, and I would say, because time never stands still and nature abhors a stasis, that in order for the system to truly be free flowing a “higher disequilibrium” producing more and more freedom, leisure and independence from Finance should actually be the objective of Social Credit policy. Time is a flow of moments, two of the major aspects of Grace are abundance and flow, Grace is love in action so Grace can only take place in the temporal universe and once again Time never stands still. A philosophy and the policies of Grace are dynamic and abundant flows.
**********************************************
GM: Yes. Would inflation not rise also under SC, with much more purchasing power chasing a fixed supply of goods? It is important to have some idea of what that dividend would amount to.Would it approximate the average or median wage? That is more than $50k in the US, so if people making nothing now or even less than that get topped up by the dividend, but production has not increased, what happens? The marginal propensity to consume is higher among the lower income people.. So their money would chase goods. And there are millions of them.The central banks have been boosting the money supply through QE but inflation has not risen.
Me:You need to understand that the retail discount mechanism is a macro-economic/general one. With it, prices would fall both because of increasing productivity and also because if it was conservatively only say 20% and effected every month, even if we then magically had “normal” 2% inflation it would be dwarfed by the discount. QE is actually just an asset swap not an increase in money/incomes, particularly an increase in individual incomes.
GM: I need to understand how big that dividend would be and how calculated. Without that info we are weaving the wind.
Thanks. With some quantitative info, maybe we can enlist some doctoral candidate to test this in a dissertation. Yes of course 2% <20%.
Thanks,
Me: Okay. I think there are ways to estimate/approximate it that are legitimate even without hard and fast statistics. After all it was Mark Twain who said there were lies, damned lies and then there were statistics. What about estimating a portion of the unnecessary and superfluous costs of our bloated defense budget or the tax costs for individuals and businesses to support welfare, unemployment and even social security that would become redundant and be replaced with a sufficient dividend. If both of these income generating parts of our economy were eliminated the true insufficiency of individual incomes would become much more apparent.
Actually, I think that a statistical equilibrium of individual incomes and costs/prices is just another orthodoxy to overcome. Douglas said that trying to balance a national budget was deceptive folly. Trying to do the same with a dividend is probably not going to actually convince financial, political and scientistic “experts”. “This generation looketh for a sign” so to say. Better that they look at the economy, contemplate how non-economically wasteful it actually is and contemplate how monetary grace as in gifting would accomplish equilibrium more generally and frugally. But that would require faith as in confidence which the orthodoxy of science only has largely eliminated in modern intellectuals and instead habituated doubt.
GM: This could be the time for SC to get a hearing.
Me: I completely agree with that. In fact they need to understand that Social Credit is actually a much better integration of both hard headed economics, i.e. frugality which is a virtue, and also a greater economic democracy accomplished not via the probably well intended but false orthodoxy of re-distributive taxation, but via monetary grace as in gifting.
Me: While it’s a noble effort trying to convince experts in finance, politics and economics I would suggest that a mass movement directly addressing both the general public and the small to medium sized business community detailing the personal and business benefits of a dividend and a retail discount, in other words more money instantly in your hand, more money to buy the businessman’s products and services and compensated lower prices as well. A sufficient dividend and discount percentage would appeal to both the left and right because it would enable both governmental downsizing and increased individual income. If the large constituencies of the small to medium business community….and the individual, that is everybody awakened to both their own self interests and the freedom it would bring to the system….how could the politicians not glom onto it, the financiers resist it and economists argue against it?
Two of the forgotten aspects of Grace are integrated bothness and simultaneity-unity. In other words integrate the best and workable truths of opposing sides and you’ll get a third state/condition that is more unified or a trinity-unity. Actually, Grace and graciousness are their own best reward because it blesses both giver and received at the same time.
GM: Where is the ‘mass movement”? Who said that a committed minority is enough?
Me: Yes, it’s obviously “waiting to happen”, but I intend to include a chapter about the policies of Social Credit as fitting perfectly into the formula in my book called The Cosmic Code of Wisdom and Grace as well as a call for Operation Economic Wisdom and Grace as I outlined above.
GM: It has been. a long wait since the 1930s. Is its real name Godot?
Me: Beckett was a great artist, but unfortunately he worked the opposite side of the existential street. I prefer to stride the fully integrated side espousing faith, hope and love, in other words Gracientialism.
GM: What effects? The failure in Alberta? The failure in the US? in both cases, SC was aborted before delivery. Where has SC actually been implemented and then to what effect? A Social Credit government, once elected, failed to implemented the promised policies. In the United States, legislation introduced by Congressman Alan T Goldsborough of Maryland would have set up a social credit regime (program, economy choose whichever word you please) in the United States. It passed the lower house with overwhelming support but failed in the Senate, according to one account because it was not possible to explain it clearly to the Senators.
Steve asked me to look at the effects of social credit, and the only effects of which I am now aware are those rejections. If Social Credit has ever been implemented anywhere, what are the effects ? We can point clearly to the effects of Keynesianism, Marxism, monetarism, and neoliberalism. But where are the effects of Social Credit? Under the circumstances, telling someone to look at the effects is like telling someone to look at the chimera, isn’t it?
Me: I asked you to actually look at the actual effects that implementing Social Credit policies….would actually have. You’re not doing that. Instead you’re asking us to give you effects….which have never been allowed to happened, and then unfairly and incorrectly judging Social Credit as failed. Look at that. You are either looking for an invalidation of Social Credit or your being (unconsciously) caught up in the obsessive dualistic habit of what modernity falsely thinks is objectivity which can result in a lot of heat but no light….unless an integration of the truths etc. of the opposing sides of the dualism occurs. As the process of Wisdom is the integration of truth(s) and the pinnacle result of such continual integration is a third more unified and graceful state/condition of workability, applicability and ethics….I suggest you actually look and integrate.
GM:Wallace, here is an intriguing essay: http://www.alor.org/Triumph%20of%20The%20Past/DouglasandtheJews.htm
The lead sentence is: C. H. Douglas’s antisemitic reputation is an almost insurmountable obstacle to the acceptance of social credit. This reputation stems especially from his writings of the 1940s, in which he takes a critical attitude toward the role of the German-Jewish elite in the century 1850-1950.
Me:I don’t think Douglas was actually anti-semitic. He objected to the dualistic mindset in finance and economics of “only this for that” which is legalistic, exclusionary of new and/or relevant data-reality and hence neither good and complete science nor good and complete spirituality. The pharisees were criticized by Christ for being exactly these things. Beyond this, I don’t even care whether Douglas may have been actually quasi anti-semitic because he never suggested that social credit’s dividend and discount be withheld from Jews which is the truly relevant fact of the matter. There are probably thousands of arbitrary and/or false ways to invalidate something….and imperfect and non-discerning men may fall for them. Such is the value of recognizing and utilizing Wisdom which produces depth of understanding and clarity.
GM: Note that George Will is not offering an encomium to leisure in that article, but pointing to very negative consequences of choosing not to work. To the extent that Social Credit offers people unearned income, this article would enter a debate as evidence against Social Credit.
OH: On the contrary, I see it as strong evidence in favour of Social Credit. All these men are not working (regardless of the explanation and I do doubt the one he gives – I think the jobs just aren’t there anymore) and yet we still manage to produce everything we need to support these “idle men” and everybody else … fancy that.
Me:Correct Oliver. And what George Will misses because his conservative theoretical mind is fixed on employment as an only option to solving the problem are two additional things:
1) the imminent workability of an economic philosophy of monetary grace as in gifting and
2) the fact that positive self determined purpose, whether that is employment or any other positive activity one considers purposeful….is the deeper point and ought be the objective.
GM: You asked me to look at the effects of social credit. I asked you to show them to me, which you cannot do. In fact, until Social Credit is implemented somewhere, we cannot “look at” the effects we can only “speculate about” the “possible” effects. Looking at real effects is grasping reality. Speculating about possible effects is not.
Me: Not correct. I asked you to look at the ACTUAL effects of what the dividend and discount would do. Look at what a dividend distributed monthly would do. It would increase the scarce incomes of every citizen 18 and over without incurring an additional cost to the system. Look at what a general discount to prices at retail sale would do, especially if it was 40% or more. It would eliminate and even reverse inflation which under “normal” conditions is 2-3% and it would also prevent price gauging above that rate from being a problem as well as endanger any business that chronically inflated their prices unnecessarily. The truly beautiful thing about the dividend and discount are that they are gracious and yet “offers that businesses and individuals…cannot refuse/resist.”
You’re simply refusing to look at what the ACTUAL effects would be.
There’s nothing wrong with using your imagination Greg. Especially if it helps you look at facts. And if it helped you perceive and understand facts that would solve the systemic economic effects that are largely responsible for dragging us closer and closer toward war in an era of modern weaponry…..I don’t think it would kill you to try doing so.
GM: Well, he does refer to unemployment as a “catastrophe” and refers to statistics showing that unemployment used to be much lower as “Those statistics were created before government policy and social attitudes made it possible to be economically inactive.” With more than a hint of disapproval for the fact that these people are now not working, and ” the loss of meaning, self-esteem and masculinity that is a consequence of chosen and protracted idleness.
That does not suggest to me applause for leisure and unearned income. Does it to you?
Me: His thinking is entirely orthodox and puritanical. The solution is leisure, i.e SELF determined purpose NOT JUST EMPLOYMENT…..and certainly not idleness. Requiring employment to be the solution will inevitably result in an unworkable and oppressive work state, especially as artificial intelligence and other innovations competitively and within another 10-15 years eliminate the need for human input/employment. Economists and investigators miss this….because they simply are unable to ‘think outside of the box” or refuse to visualize the ACTUAL effects of policy.
Posted To Steve Keen’s youtube Video 09/24/20126
Congratulations, you have re-discovered the costing factor of waste/wasted energy which is a major overlooked economically disequilibrating aspect of “the Gap” in C. H. Douglas’s Social Credit. And as thermo-dynamics shows us that energy is entropic there is no scientific way to balance the economic/productive system….except by implementing policies that are non-entropic-costless, which in a monetary economy means an additional, balancing and gracious gift of money to the individual and a reciprocally gifted discount to prices at the very end of the entire economic process at retail sale that enables the system to become free flowing as well. Just continuously apply your own call for “a modern debt jubilee” which is wisely and philosophically aligned with the concept of Grace as in Gifting and relevant to the current debt overhang….and your iconoclastic theoretical efforts will bring you into agreement with Douglas and be worthy of a Nobel. Perhaps you could posthumously acknowledge Douglas in your acceptance speech. And it’s true you can’t reform away the inherent problems of either capitalism or socialism, but you can transform them away into a third more unified and workable profit making system of monetary Distributism by utilizing strategically implemented gracious policies that align with and more deeply, directly and continuously effect your already stated policy goal of “a modern debt jubilee”.
Posted To Steve Keen’s Debt Watch Site 09/23/2016
I got banned here after repeatedly complimenting Dr. Keen and agreeing with everything he had re-discovered about the disequilibrated state of modern economies. Re-check the threads and it will confirm that this is true. If I mentioned that there were flows of empirical data and their economic significance he was still not considering, others were annoyed about that and complained and Dr. Keen in his haste (I understand he’s a busy person) failed to read and consider all of this then it’s actually just a misunderstanding. I think facts, intellectual curiosity and discourse should trump human emotional reaction as I’m sure Dr Keen does. So perhaps each of us should avoid invective and accusation. After all if there is one thing less accurate than neo-liberal economic theory it is long distance internet psycho-analysis.
Consciousness Itself Is the Expression of The Cosmic Code
Why? Because in its fully focused experience in the present moment it is both unitary and much better able to intensely experience the utter diversity of the environment it exists in. Consciousness is a Trinity-Unity of Space, Time and Self Awareness.
The Cosmic Code: Two Within Three That Is One. A Theory of Everything
The Cosmic Code is the very expression of wisdom itself, its process and its pinnacle experience, as well as the temporal systemic result of its continued application. This trinity-unity of abstraction, dynamism and conscious experience/temporal condition is an integration of the elemental aspects of space, time and self (and reflectively any sufficiently integrated systemic state) known as the/a state of Grace. It is the expression of two within three that is simultaneously one, and is universally applicable in all spheres making it a legitimate TOE (Theory of Everything).
The Cosmic Code is so elegantly simple that intellectual vanity is often repelled by it, and simultaneously so inclusive and integrative of the incredible diversity of the universe that it tends to be rejected by the spiritually orthodox. The Cosmic Code is a formula whose application is intended to lead on to the non-formulaic aspects, whether individually or systemically, of what is referred to as the flow state. It also includes the integration of opposites and an ethic of inclusiveness itself which is intended to foster the essence of individual tolerance and open mindedness toward data which is the signature of good science if not scientific breakthrough. It gives objective and conscious expression to what is too often unconscious and considered “merely” subjective instead of what it actually is….always and essentially existent….and hence unscientific not to consider.
Because of its balanced integration of opposites and balancing inclusion of ethics it puts the lie to the historically unbalanced thinking of both unbridled scientism and religious fanaticism.
Response to A Compliment on Ellen Brown’s Forum 09/20/2016
Jan S: Bravo! I fully agree.
The problem is that the society has forgotten how to access the gift.
Good intuition requires a high degree of integration of brain function, enabling the simultaneous non-analytic (holistic) consideration of many different data. It is associated with a high level of broadband EEG coherence and the experience of, and access to, an all-unifying, Transcendent field of consciousness.
Transcendental Meditation, that I practice, has a well documented ability to develop this by enabling, transcendence, a regular experience of this field.
Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, who revived this ancient Vedic technique actually regretted that he called it meditation, because it differs fundamentally from commonly practiced eastern and western meditations. I wanted to mention this, because there is a widespread misconception that all meditations are varieties of essentially the same thing.
From being vague, hazy hunches popping up uncontrollably, my intuitions have evolved to being distinct, though abstract, sources of information that help me to see the underlying connection between a multitude of apparently unrelated data. It has helped me a lot in diagnostics as well as in my scientific research.
It seems to me that Steve has achieved a well developed intuition, enabling profound and valuable insights in the field of economics.
J
Me: Thank you Jan. Yes integration is the very process of Wisdom, ancient Wisdom itself. The world suffers from a lack thereof. This is why I’ve decided to concentrate on my book The Cosmic Code which is a mental action expression of the Wisdom process which if practiced personally and applied systemically leads to/enables one to tap into the pinnacle of Wisdom which is a personal sense/systemic condition of graciousness/graceful flow. Hopefully it can add to and integrate with other disciplines like Transcendental Meditation to help us create an Ethic of Wisdom and graciousness within ourselves and applied to our systems that will help us survive our “interesting times”.
JR: Steve, I believe the first part of your quote is correct and the second part totally wrong.
In Economics, the totally baseless inspired lies put out by orthodoxy are accepted and there is no rational criticism of them. Intuition (inspired or not) on its own leads to uncontrolled fantasy. Rationalism on its own produces pedestrian lack of new ideas and gets nowhere.
This is where Science has it right. Intuition, following study of a problem, suggests answers. Critical destructive appraisal, i.e. trying to prove each one wrong by testing against known facts, sorts out the best answer(s). But, hoiwever well supoported they appear, they remain open to modification in the light of new discoveries. It is the lack of the second process of critical evaluation process, including deliberate suppression of it, that is causing chaos in our economies.
Appealing to intuition alone is usually a result of being afraid to subject shaky ideas to true evaluation. This applies to both sides of present monetary controversy.
Me: I’m assuming you mean the original quote attributed to Einstein.
You’re correct that neither rationalism nor intuition ALONE is likely to have all of the answers, but I don’t think either Jan or myself advocate that. What I advocate is the integration of science and spirituality-intuition with certain pre-suppositions that I call the laws of integration. These are my oft posted insistence that an actual integration consists of only truth(s), only workabilities and only applicabilities AND SO the process of the weeding out of untruth(s), unworkabilities and inapplicabilities.
These are characteristics of both good science and good spirituality. Guys like Gautama Buddha, Lao Tse, Christ etc. were probably some of the most rigorously honest and mentally scientific individuals the planet has seen. Same for Copernicus, Maxwell etc.
Unfortunately nowadays there is a lot of rigid and closed minded science and spirituality which become paradigms (generally held beliefs) that stand in the way of actual integrations.
JS: Steve, I completely agree.
The Vedic Science was built on the precise cognition of the Cosmic Code, which required the development of fully integrated and highly refined consciousness, the highest level of enlightenment, called Brahmi Chetana, totality consciousness.
Recent research has confirmed that Enlightenment is not some kind of subjective spiritual self suggestion as commonly believed by contemporary science.
Brain research has found that it is associated with a high level coherence /integration of brain functioning, which is unperturbed by sensory impressions, while in the unenlightened, the low extent of coherence that may appear when eyes are closed, disappears more or less completely when eyes are opened. Also it has been found that the brain is idle, until some action or response is needed, while in the unenlightened, the brain is more or less excited all the time.
So in Enlightenment, the brain can be used as a scientific, precise instrument for exploring the cosmic code, the observations being culture-invariant, always the same, whenever and wherever made.
They are the Eternal, Universal Truth. The Cosmic Code. Compiled most completely in the Veda.
Me: Jan,
Yes I have no doubt that Vedic science and the Cosmic code are basically in agreement about the nature of consciousness itself. In fact I contemplated the various aspects/qualities of several extraordinary experiences I have had and they align with buddhist and vedic descriptions of high states of knowingness. The one thing I hope the Cosmic Code can contribute to is helping to develop mental and temporal action WHILE also attaining/maintaining those high states. The East has the tradition of contemplation. The West’s tradition is action. Integrating them individually and systemically/temporally would be akin to the buddhist tradition of the Bodhisattva. Again, the Cosmic Code is a formula that if practiced tends to result in non-formulaic, non-reactionary and flowing experiences. The modern world is god awfully beset by reaction, obsessive contention without resolution and apparently ignorance of ways to get past such. I say let us have Wisdom and its pinnacle experience, namely the flowing state of Grace, by applying the integrative ethic of the Cosmic Code to ourselves and our systems.
Me: The signature of good science is the dualistic objectivity of the scientific method integrated with an open mindedness toward new/additional data/factors.
The signature of scientific break through is the dualistic objectivity of the scientific method integrated with an aspect of consciousness. For example, the impetus for Einstein’s theory of space-time was his visualization-imagining (imagination being an aspect of consciousness) of a man jumping out of a window of a building and sliding down space-time.
These definitions fit seamlessly within the formula of the Cosmic Code.
An Excellent Explanation of Our Deepest Economic Problem By Wallace Klinck
Banks are chartered to create our money supply by issuing loans both for production and consumption. These are the original source of our money supply and all money issued is repayable and cancelled upon repayment. Any money that is saved is not available for consumption. Company reserves only become incomes when issued for new production which creates a whole new and additional set of costs and prices. Meanwhile they have not cancelled previous costs. That is why Douglas said that all new production must be financed by new credits. The so-called “velocity of circulation” does not create new or additional purchasing power as has been alleged and taught. A dollar is only a dollar and cannot perform the function of, e.g., ten or twenty dollars. Money can re-circulate but in doing so it does not create new purchasing-power but simply adds to costs with each new circulation for production purposes.
The reason that banks are having difficulty in issuing credit is that the economy is starved of effective consumer demand, without which sales slump, making business disinclined to borrow in the face of uncertain or reduced sales. Consumers are loaded with debt which discourages additional borrowing and makes them less well qualified as secured borrowers. That is why the attempt to create more liquidity by providing more reserves for bank lending (“quantitive easing”) for production is failing to stimulate the economy as intended. The price-system is already non-self-liquidating and adding to the debt load only worsens the situation. Outstanding monies are outstanding un-liquidated debts. Here in Canada If only our Federal debt alone were paid off this would cancel virtually the entire money supply. We have a costive financial price-system. Business accumulation of reserves is accomplished by a premature cancellation of credit via prices. One way of describing this is to note that the consumer is rightly charged with capital depreciation but quite improperly not credited with capital appreciation which is much greater than depreciation. The true cost of production is consumption and we should realistically have a rapidly falling price-level and/or an increase in available purchasing-power.
Wallay Klinck
The Real Systemic Business Model Problem
The real economic problem is the dominant and non-integrated position of the business model of Finance, and the solution is an integration of its product credit in the form of loans only with direct Gifting to the individual as well as rationally balanced regulation of its vice ridden urge speculation. Beyond this is Finance’s false claim to sole ownership of their product which is actually a communal resource.
Social Credit/Wisdomics/Gracenomics/ Gracientialism 