The Model

NEW AGE MONETARY & ECONOMIC MODEL
Presented by David Boese
To Comer
March 1, 2005
*Troubling Saskatchewan debt—200 years to recover
This is only one sample of the “debt” problem we have in this
country and the world. It was brought to attention at a political,
economic forum in Saskatchewan that if they took the gross agricultural
income on an annual basis, it would take 200 years to eliminate the
current Provincial debt. This means that some fat banker could sit at
his/her desk and not lift a finger for 200 years and get filthy rich in the
process, not the worst of all, that all this debt had been created out of
thin air!
*Monetary reform will most likely not occur in our lifetime, but will
happen when we have the complete collapse of our present system.
Investors around the world are beginning to lose faith in the U.S
dollar and we’re not very far off from this collapse. As we all well know
by now, money hasn’t any intrinsic value, only the faith placed in it at
any given time.
*Very revolutionary—model could actually be used worldwide
This does not predispose that every country in the world would
work with the same currency. They could continue to print and use
their own currency, thus maintaining their sovereignty.
*Only two things that empower people—money and or guns—which
would you rather give out?
*Money not invented by God not even sanctified by God—but an
invention of man.

*Good invention–problem is how and by whom it is created and how it
is distributed. Money makes the world go round!
The right amount of money (sufficient to purchase 100% of the
GDP) is the most important commodity in the world. It’s sort of a
necessary evil in that it “trumps” everything, including restraint,
respect and all morals.
*Eliminate—poverty-government pensions-old age securityunemployment
insurance-welfare payments-workmen’s compensationall
taxes save one (income tax) including property-sales tax-GSTCertain
user fee taxes could stay e.g. gasoline tax for road repairs etc.
*If this model could do this you would say that I’m a genius or a nut
case!
*100% of all money created would be by the Bank of Canada
In a democratic society it is immoral and unjust to allow private
individuals or corporations such as banks to create money out of
nothing and to put it into circulation as a debt, creating wealth unto
themselves by just a few strokes on the computer. It is also ludicrous to
have people go into further debt in order to pay off existing debts. The
debt system of creating money puts borrowers into a form of slavery.
*Every citizen over the age of 18 would receive 25,000 credits (not
money) every year of their life. These credits would be entered on a
Debit-like card. These credits could only be used for the purchase of
food, clothing, drugs, rent or mortgage payments, light heat and water
payments, transportation and other necessities for comfortable living.

This figure is based on todays living standard of a household of two,
receiving the purchasing power that only slightly exceeds the poverty
line.
*Every registered employer with two or more employees would also
receive 5,000 credits for each employee on their payroll. These credits
could only be used to pay for wages and or salaries.
This is a carrot for employers to hire workers instead of laying off
workers or not hiring at all.
*These credits when spent on the necessities of life would then be
banked, at a regular bank and the Bank of Canada would then print the
money to offset the credits. Initially each credit could be valued at $1
and the Bank of Canada would print $1 for each credit spent. In order
to keep prices stable, at the first sign of inflation, these credits would be
downgraded. For every full 1000th of a point upwards (inflation rate)
for example, the value would decrease by one hundredth or 1 cent.
Because you can only purchase with credits the necessities of life
and that it takes “real dollars” to purchase so called luxuries, prices
would remain relatively stable as registered businesses that receive
credits for their sales, would want to turn the credits into the maximum
amount of cash. If this formula eventually comes to zero, that would
mean there is enough money in the system and that the Bank of Canada
would stop printing until the situation reversed itself.
*At the end of each month any credits not used for the essentials
specified, could be deposited in their bank and turned into cash,
allowing for the purchase of non-essentials or investments etc.

Again, this would encourage frugality and savings as people
would want to maximize the amount of cash they can accumulate in
order to purchase the so-called finer things in life or build a more
substantial retirement savings nest-egg.

*Legislation for Banks or any financial institution—no one could charge
more than 6% annual interest fee. Savings interest would stay floating
so that Banks could adjust to the demands on the money supply. Banks
could not create money, by creating debt, that is to say that by
legislation they would only be able to make loans as a percentage of
actual cash savings on hand, arbitrarily I would say no more than 80%.
Capping the interest rate at a maximum of 6% would go a long
way in curtailing inflation. Also, I am not a religious person, but I
believe that somewhere in the Bible it states that any interest in excess of
6% is called usury and is sinful. I have been told that somewhere in the
Bible it also says that every 7 years all debt accounts should be erased.
What this really tells me, is that society has been grappling with the
issue of money and debt for thousands of years and it’s about time that
we got it right!
*Taxation for individuals would be at the rate of 50% of any income
earned over and above the 25,000 credits received. If they earned
$20,000 from their employment or investments for example, they would
pay $10,000 in taxes, leaving them with a net income of $35,000.

This 50% figure comes from what we are currently paying in total
of the myriad of taxes now being collected. Also, since we need real
wealth creating workers and we do need some form of democratic
government (which means a bureaucracy) I look at it as a partnership
and the best partnership is a 50/50 split. Also, don’t forget that with a
guaranteed annual income this amount of taxation would not be a
hardship.
*Taxation for businesses or corporations would be at 50% of the actual
net cash generated. It would be based solely on cash flow, cash received
minus cash paid out. No more fancy voodoo accounting fancy writeoffs,
accruals and deferred payments etc. No escaping paying taxes.
*All taxes from income only would be collected by the Federal
Government and be distributed as follows—50% of all taxes collected
from a region would go back to that region—30% of all taxes collected
from a province would go back to that province—20% remaining would
go to the Federal Government.
The reason for this kind of split is that it is at the municipal level
where most of the money is required and spent. It would also, with this
ratio prevent governments from making extraneous fiscal decisions and
if one segment of government misspent their funds, it wouldn’t have a
huge negative impact on the rest of the country.
*To make all this affordable and logistically workable, once the
framework was in place, a date would be chosen and on that date all
debts, individual, business and corporate would by legislation be erased.
This would include mortgages, credit card debt, everything. People
would not lose any of their possessions, starting with a clean sheet and
equal to all. Legislation would also be passed that would disallow any
foreign country or corporation to foreclose on any business in Canada.
If you think erasing all debt at a given point in time is too radical,
think of this analogy. When a company such as G.M. files for
bankruptcy protection under chapter11, creditors quite often are very
lucky to receive 10 cents on the dollar. This brings us to 90% of
forgiveness of the debt incurred. I ask, why not go all the way and
instead of cherry-picking the companies that receive this generous
treatment, make it available to everyone and equal to all?
*We should enact a Federal Law that eliminates the minimum wage law
and substitute it with a maximum wage law, that limits the top wage
earners to 50 times the lowest paid employee.
There shouldn’t be a need for an explanation for enacting this
type of legislation. If you follow the news today you will see the legalized
extortion taking place by CEO’s and government officials.
*We should enact a Federal Law that makes it illegal for manufacturers,
wholesalers and distributors to give volume discounts, enabling small
business to compete with large multinationals.
This would create a lot of new jobs and “ma & pa” operations and
would help keep inflation in check. We all know what happens after the
multinationals put all the small businesses out of business, they
naturally are left with no competition and consequently keep raising
their prices at will.
*We should enact a Federal Law that requires companies that do
business in Canada to produce a minimum of 50% of the finished
product in Canada. This would prevent companies like Hershy and
CanGro to shut down their factories and leave Canada for foreign
countries, for their manufacturing functions, while still selling their
products in Canada.
*Also the Government of Canada should scrap NAFTA and any other
trade agreements that are detrimental to Canadians.

This is not to say that we wouldn’t still trade with other nations,
however, it would be on our terms. As it exists, I don’t believe we have so
called “free trade” as all existing trade agreements have so many loop
holes in them, which allow the larger, stronger nations to bully their way
to their advantage, often completely ignoring the terms of the
agreements. In their place would be individually negotiated “fair” trade
dealings.

*How could Canada afford this? Canada could afford this, because it is
the only country in the world that can be completely self sufficient in
every way, energy, food production, manufacturing, raw materials etc.
This is not to say that we wouldn’t trade with any other countries, but
that we would do so on our terms and not be bullied by larger countries
into agreements that we can’t afford.
*Should this model be adopted, it would initially put a number of
employees who work in the various government agencies out of work.
How would they cope with this? First of all they would have enough
credits to continue living a normal life and secondly if they were the
least bit ambitious and resourceful, they would find a meaningful
occupation, or if entrepreneurial would start their own business.
*This model would eliminate poverty, but would not impinge in any way
on people becoming wealthy. We would still have a class system but it
would have to be earned. As a matter of fact, I predict that with more
spending power in the hands of more people, the opportunity to become
wealthy would actually increase, but not at the expense of the well-being
of the rest of society. My interpretation of equality is not that
everything in all aspects of life be equal, but that there is equal
opportunity for all. This model has in it the tools to make this objective
possible.

*We know that all the “isms” tried have not worked and this model I
don’t believe can be called an “ism” simply because it is a well rounded
social program, embraced with an entrepreneurial spirit.