|
--- Sponsor's Message --------------------------------------
Get a NextCard Visa, in 30 seconds! Apply NOW!
1. Fill in the brief application
2. Receive approval decision within 30 seconds
3. Get rates as low as 2.9% Intro or 9.9% Fixed APR
http://click.topica.com/aaaajhbz8R5mbAlKkQa/NextCard2
------------------------------------------------------------
To: Citizen's Income Online at URL
http://citiinco01.uuhost.uk.uu.net/discussion/index.shtml,
World Bank's Globalization list at URL
http://vx.worldbank.org/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=globalization&text_mode=0,
and friends on several mail lists
Good day folks,
Mr. Stuart Duffin, director CISC, has set the topic for May on the
Citizen's Income Discussion web site by asking the question:
"To what extent do you believe the introduction of a Citizen's Income
would help to alleviate the problems caused by Globalisation?"
This May topic confirms the favorable impression I received from
the topic posed by CISC for February, when the list was first
established, which reads:
"Should a CI be introduced to all demographic groups simultaneously?
Or are there valid arguments for a piecemeal introduction of a
Citizen's Income?"
My favorable impression, from the February topic, was that the folks
at the Citizen's Income Study Centre (CISC) were serious about
exploring technically valid departures from the status quo in the public
policy of the UK and the USA.
It does not matter very much that I firmly believe an adequate
Citizen's Income in each nation (similar to the post WW-II level in
Europe and Japan which paid for each dependent in a household,
one-fifth of the national per capita GDP) would eliminate nearly all
of "the problems caused by Globalisation," and preserve the
sovereignty of each nation in an efficient, just, and sustainable
global society. What matters to all of us is whether, or not, I (we)
can persuade the powers-that-be to evaluate a "piecemeal
introduction of a Citizen's Income" which is the only technically valid
and politically doable solution to the problems caused by Globalization.
Now a few minutes though on this topic will persuade the great
majority of thinking folks that the wealthy, healthy, intelligent, and
powerful people in each nation already enjoy all of the real, and
imagined, benefits of a Citizen's Income. The WHIPs are free to
work as much, or as little, as they think is appropriate. They may
volunteer their services to any cooperative venture which meets
their heart's desire, without worrying about earning their board
and room. The American WHIPs are quite comfortable at the
pinnacle of the income distribution in a national economy which has
operated for more than a century with 4-10% of their workforce
unemployed, for more than a century with a 2-3%/year decline in
the value of their medium of exchange (M1), and formore than a
century with a net 5% of GDP deficit of purchasing power in the
lower income half of their workforce. Is it any wonder that the status
quo enjoys such a vigorous and in-depth defense by the WHIPs in
the UK and the USA? Will anyone step up to the podium and tell
the world why a 5% of GDP deficit of purchasing power in the lower
income half of their workforce has been accepted as the keynote
of the US economy for more than a century?
We have an interesting competition in "wishful thinking and pious
exhortation" taking place during the month of May on the Internet,
between two mail lists which have focused their attention on the
problems of Globalization. Since May 1, the Citizen's Income
Discussion list, an unmoderated list, received only two messages
in sixteen days. The first was titled "That Part of CI which is a
RIGHT" by Alfred F. Andersen on 05/01/00. The second was titled
"Progress on the Citizen's Income discussion" by Wesley S. Burt
on 05/06/00. Mr Andersen, who is 81 years old and my senior by
only five years, reminded me by his message that the twelve tribes
of biblical Israel had received an inheritance in the land, a "right"
which modern man has lost and must restore if he hopes to live in
a stable and prosperous society. At the same time, the thirteenth
tribe of biblical Israel (the Levites) claimed that they had received
an inheritance in the Law, which has been handed down intact as
a "Secret Of The Temple" to the WHIPs of every nation. And they
say, one to another, as it is written in the Sanhedrin (59a), page 400:
"Moses commanded us a law for an inheritance, it is our inheritance,
not theirs."
Now those of us who still read the Bible, our oldest and most widely
published history book, know that Moses commanded only the
second tithe to be the inheritance of the Levites, and that the Law
was originally promulgated to all nations at Mount Sinai. It is always
a wonder, to me, that the Bible contains any truth at all, after being
compiled, edited and translated by Jews, Greeks, Romans and
members of Oxford for 2500 years.
Mr. Andersen speaks for many thoughtful authors on the Internet
when he proposes each citizen's natural "right" to an inheritance
in GAIA which would be collected as an "indirect tax" (Tobin Tax,
excise tax, sales tax, value-added tax, etc., etc.) on individuals and
institutions which are extracting or exploiting the earth's non-
reproducible natural resources. This common inheritance, would
then be used, as Thomas Paine proposed two hundred years ago,
to fund the Citizen's Income (BI, UBI, Citizen's Dividend, etc.) in
each nation. This approach to funding a CI would not need to
raise the direct taxes of each nation above their present levels,
as shown in Figure 1 of the ten figure global model which is hosted
at URL http://www.freespeech.org/darves/
My message of 05/06/00, and previous messages, on the other
hand, invites your attention to a systemic defect of omission in
English and American public policy which has biased the American
economy for a century to an abnormal condition of 4-10%
unemployment, 2-3%/year inflation, a perennial 5% of GDP net
deficiency of purchasing power in the lower half of the workforce,
and a dog-eat-dog competitive environment which affects every
actor, person or corporation, in the global economy. So much for
a slow month on the CI list.
In marked contrast, the World Bank's Globalization list at URL
http://vx.worldbank.org/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=globalization&text_mode=0
a moderated list, evaluated and posted 148 messages in sixteen days.
Now the list moderators at the World Bank have done their best to
establish their reputation for fairness by posting several messages
which were quite critical of the World Bank's operating policies and
practices. My 05/06/00 message to the CI list was not approved by
World Bank moderators for posting to the Globalization list, so we
cannot know how the 3600 subscribers to the list would have
responded to the opening sentence of the introduction to the global
model at URL http://www.freespeech.org/darves/bert.html, which reads:
"WELCOME, you have found the only technically valid global model
on the Internet, a global model which fairly illustrates both the macro
and micro aspects of the present condition of our global
industrial society."
In hopes of gaining a little more insight into the world view of
Globalization subscribers, I posted my above 05/06/00 message
also to Mr. Barry Coates, the first respondent to the Globalization
list, and again to the next thirty respondents to the Globalization list,
including many who were openly critical of World Bank policies.
None of the thirty-one Globalization subscribers had any thing to say
about the systemic defect of omission in English and
American public policy. So much for a slow month on the World
Bank Globalization list, with its 148 messages in sixteen days but
not a word or sentence about the systemic defect of omission in
the public policy of industrial nations, which, if corrected in each
nation, would eliminate the problems caused by Globalization.
This excerpt from Noam Chomsky, on
http://www.cat.org.au/vof/versions/goals.htm
describes a world view by using only buzz words like "libertarian,"
"totalitarian" and "capitalist:"
"The 'humanistic conception' that was expressed by Russell and
Dewey in a more civilized period, and that is familiar to the
libertarian left, is radically at odds with the leading currents of
contemporary thought: the guiding ideas of the totalitarian order
crafted by Lenin and Trotsky, and of the state capitalist industrial
societies of the West. One of these systems has fortunately
collapsed, but the other is on a march backwards to what could be
a very ugly future."
Would that Noam Chomsky had pointed out that the keynote feature
of "state Capitalist industrial societies" was a 5% of GDP deficit of
purchasing power, and, that the keynote feature of the "totalitarian
order crafted by Lenin and Trotsky" was that 92% of the public
revenue was collected by indirect taxes which raise the price of
necessities rather than by direct taxes which are proportioned
according to ability to pay.
The sullen silence on this topic has followed the observation of the
late David Lawrence, Editor of the US News & World Report, who
told me in 1971:
"I cannot publish or comment on your topic until some prominent
person discusses the topic, and makes it newsworthy."
Oh well, Noam Chomsky and Wes Burt can still publish on the same web site
at
URL http://www.freespeech.org/darves/ even though we are not published by
the
mass media.
Kind regards to all,
Wes Burt
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
