ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
An attempt to hold an undemocratic hustings was made last Tuesday. Luckily it was cancelled due to the Manchester massacre: http://www.klsettlement.org.uk/battersea-hustings-on-23rd-may-open-invitation/ The organisers have been sent the following email:
Quote:I see you had arranged a hustings for Tuesday 23 May to which you invited only 4 of the 7 candidates in Battersea. This is undemocratic. If the hustings is being rearranged simple democracy requires you to invite Danny Lambert, the Socialist Party candidate, the UKP camdidate, and the Independent candidate, Chris Coghlan. Otherwise electors are not being offered a full choice. In any event, please let me know of any new date for the hustings.Thanks.Adam Buick, Election Agent for Danny Lambert, Socialist Party candidatefor Battersea.Even if we are not invited we'll be there, to insist that our candidate be heard.
Proof, from the same source, that Fresco was once a member of the Technocracy Movement:http://teslacommunity.com/page/technocratic-party#.WSgCGzeJhdiInteresting that one of the things he fell out with them, or vice versa, seems to over "Technocracy in One Country (especially America)". It is true, though, that his plan to establish a "circular city" somewhere, isolated from capitalism, was a fantasy.
A follower of this forum has drawn our attention to this obituary in the New York Times:https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/05/24/us/jacque-fresco-futurist-who-envisioned-a-society-without-money-dies-at-101.html?referer=https://www.google.com/
It wasn't actually an election donation but a legacy that happened to be paid into our account during the election period and so has to be recorded as having been received during this period. It is much more than our election campaign will be costing. Not that this will stop the media misinterpreting it of course.
I see the Green Party is promising to introduce a Universal Basic Income. Here's the Daily Wail's typical (and unintentionally amusing) report on this:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4530322/Green-Party-manifesto-plans-universal-basic-income.html
Quote:Green Party unveils manifesto plans to bring in a four day working week and give cash handouts to millionaires by introducing a universal basic incomeGreens want to introduce universal basic income – cash payments for all citizensLeader Caroline Lucas did not say how much the plan would costExperts warned the plan would be expensive and could be a disincentive to work Party also wants to introduce a four day working week and scrap Trident The Green Party wants to give cash hand-outs to millionaires and introduce a four day week, according to their manifesto. The party today laid out plans to to take steps towards introducing a universal basic income – although did not say how much this would cost.If rolled out the radical plan would see every British citizen get money from the state – no matter how rich they are.Some countries have eyed up the plans to introduce a universal basic income in order to deal with fears the rise of robots will lead to mass unemployment and poverty.But the policy would be massively expensive and some experts have warned that it is simply unworkable.It's not just "some experts" who say it's unworkable. So do Socialists or rather that it wouldn't work as intended but would be a subsidy to employers that would lead to wages being reduced all round.
Quite clever. Don't know if it will work, though, i.e. bring in votes for the Green Party. It could be interpreted as an appeal to vote anything but Labour or Tory or, in fact, to not bother to vote at all.
Something interesting in the Jacobin magazine for once, an article on Stephen Jay Gould, author of The Mismeasure of Man which refuted genetic determinism:https://jacobinmag.com/2017/05/stephen-jay-gould-science-race-evolution-climate-change
Yes, he was an interesting person who must be given credit for the spread of the idea of a moneyless world of abundance since the turn of the century (though this is of course an idea whose time has come) via his influence on Peter Joseph and the Zeitgeist Movement. I think the two fell out when Joseph was moving more towards political action of some sort while Fresco was more into technology (promoting "circular cities", etc) and in fact opposed to politics. I've not seen a full obituary of him but I suspect he must have been involved in the 1930s (when he would have been in his 20s — he was 101 when he died) in or around the Technocracy movement which wanted society to be run by qualified engineers not elected politicians, an idea which Zeitgeist used to promote and which still survives to a certain extent in what they argue.He expresses his views on a moneyless world of abundance clearly and succinctly here:http://thezeitgeistmovement.se/files/Books/The-Best-That-Money-Cant-Buy.pdf
Here's what Wikipedia says about him. I've only read two of his other books. One, A Short History of the Russian Revolution, based on the notes of a non-Bolshevik revolutionary is very good. Reviewed in the March 1968 Socialist Standard here. The other is The Unriddling of Christian Origins: A Secular Account which, being a secular account, is ok if I remember rightly. But I think he thought there actually was a historical figure called "Jesus", which is open to serious doubt.
Well (or wel, as they say in Welsh) if they are going to hand them out at the stall in Swansea this Saturday they better do this only to people from Swansea East not Swansea West. Otherwise some of those who want socialism might write WORLD SOCIALISM across their ballot paper instead of voting for the Socialist candidate there.The "I'm voting for World Socialism" stickers are being delivered to Head Office on Monday.
robbo203 wrote:I am currently reading Paul's Mason's book, "Post Capitalism: A Guide to our Future". In it, he makes a number of startling claims such as that "banks have always lent out more cash than there was in the safe" (p.11) and since 1971 no longer have to contend with legal limits in the form of a fractional reserve. What are the facts and figures to substantiate or repudiate this claim?That statement of his is ambiguous. It could mean that banks can lend out more cash than has been deposited with them or that they have borrowed. In which case it would be wrong. Or it could mean that the amount of money banks lend is more (much more) than what they choose to keep as cash. Which would be true but trite. Figures can be produced to show the latter but that's what banks do — re-lend money lent to them; they are not just safe deposits,It is true that in Britain there are no longer any legal or regulatory limits on the amount of money banks must hold as cash. Banks naturally want to re-lend as much of what they have as they safely can because lending brings in money as interest while cash in vaults doesn't. It is up to those running a bank to make a judgement, based on experience, as to what is safe.
