From:	"Jessop Sutton" <sutton@kingsley.co.za
To: socialcredit@elistas.com
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 16:47:59 +0200
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] Re: more on -- typo in 
para eight (and three): Wally quoting Douglas

On Tuesday 27 Jul 2004 10:45 am, Wallace M. Klinck 
wrote [quoting Douglas]:

> "Depositor No. 10 having happily obtained his 
overdraft, pays it out to his
> employees in wages and salaries.  These wages and 
salaries, TOGETHER WITH
> THE BANKERS INTEREST, all go into costs.  All costs 
go into the price the
> public pays for its goods, and consequently, when 
depositor No. 10 repays
> his banker with 102 pounds obtained from the public 
in exchange for his
> goods, and THE BANKER, AFTER PLACING 2 POUNDS, 
ORIGINALLY CREATED BY
> HIMSELF, TO HIS PROFIT AND LOSS ACCOUNT, sets the 
100 pounds received
> against the phantom credit previously created, and 
cancels both of them,
> there are 100 pounds worth more goods in the world 
which are
> immobilized--of which no one, not even the banker, 
except potentially, has
> the money equivalent."
===============================

But "Depositor No. 10" only received the wherewithal 
to repay his loan from other parties who purchased 
his goods, possibly with money originally created as 
loans by some banks somewhere and which still have to 
be repaid. Is this not so?

Also "depositor No. 10 repays his banker with 102 
pounds obtained from the public in exchange for his 
goods...there are 100 pounds worth more goods in the 
world which are immobilized..." Has the system not 
removed the goods from the world through the process 
of consumption?

Jessop.
-