Social Credit Views

Wednesday, 26 November 2014 06:36

Scotiabank's Profits and Lay-Offs

Written by M. Oliver Heydorn
Rate this item
(0 votes)

One of Canada's big 5, Scotiabank, recently announced that it will be cutting 1,500 jobs. This, in spite of the fact that the bank has, so far this year, earned as much as 5.57 billion dollars in profit ... according to the official numbers ;).

http://www.thestar.com/business/2014/11/04/scotiabank_axing_1500_jobs_twothirds_of_them_in_canada.html

Now I am not suggesting that laying these people off is not the best business decision given the way in which the game is presently played. I am merely pointing out that under the current economic system with its 'monopoly of credit' there are definite winners and losers ... and those of us who are punished by the system, who are disenfranchised by it, cannot help but look at that 5.57 billion dollars in profit with a raised eyebrow.

Furthermore, this reaction is entirely legitimate since, from a Social Credit standpoint, the bulk of that profit is undoubtedly made possible by the gap between prices and incomes, a gap which should not even exist. By extending additional debt-money in the form of bank credit (created ex nihilo) to governments, businesses, and consumers in order to compensate for the recurring disparity, banks can and do garner large revenues via the compound interest that is charged on what tend to be chronic debts, i.e., debts that are unrepayable in the aggregate. The longer these debts are held, the greater are the sums necessary to service them (because the volume of interest due grows exponentially with time). 

In general, the business of finance should be conducted for the benefit of each individual in society and not for the benefit of a few at the expense of the common good. This means that finance ought not to be run just like any other business, i.e., for private gain as an isolated objective. Instead, it should be run for the sake of the public interest: the delivery of goods and services, as, when, and where required, with the least amount of trouble to everyone (even if it remains true that it is best for the day-to-day activities of finance to be privately administered).

 
From Major Douglas' Speech at Dunedin (1934):

http://www.socred.org/index.php/pages/the-douglas-internet-archive

 

"I had a talk with a very pleasant and kind and, indeed, eminently respectable
bank manager in Wellington, quite accidentally, a week or two ago on quite
ordinary matters. The conversation turned on the banking system, and he
claimed that the banking system was a business like any other business, and that
it was run in order to make a profit like any other business, and that the sole
consideration that it had in mind was to carry it on along the successful lines of
any other business.

Well, I do not know whether that is an idea which is prevalent amongst all bankers,
but if it is then it is the final condemnation of the banking system as it stands at the
present time, because it is quite obvious that something which interpenetrates and
controls the activities of the wealth producing organisation on which we all rely,
cannot possibly, whether it is privately administered or whether it is publicly administered
is not the point - but it cannot be run as a private interest. That is incredible. (Applause.)
It simply means that everybody's business is at the mercy of this private organisation,
and we know that it is."

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter all the required information, indicated by an asterisk (*). HTML code is not allowed.

Latest Articles

  • Social Credit and War
    As today is Remembrance Day, I thought it would be appropriate for us to consider one of the implications of Social Credit theory with respect to war: "(...) the financial system (...) is, beyond all doubt, the main cause of international friction. Since, as we have seen, no nation can buy its own production, it is inevitable that there will be a struggle for markets in which to get rid of the surplus. The translation of this commercial struggle in a military context is simply a matter of time and opportunity. "[1]
    Thursday, 12 April 2018 21:36 Read more...
  • Jordan Peterson, Classical Liberalism, and Douglas Social Credit
    Jordan Peterson, the now famous Psychology Professor from the University of Toronto, has sometimes identified himself as a Classical Liberal. With his rise as an internet phenomenon, the social philosophy of Classical Liberalism and the political/economic systems inspired by it appear to be receiving a fresh impetus (or is it merely a final breath of air?) as the modern society in which we live, a society originally based on the principles of Classical Liberalism, sees itself falling deeper and deeper into a post-modern Marxist tyranny, both economic and cultural.
    Sunday, 08 April 2018 21:42 Read more...
  • Dominance Hierarchies and the Monopoly of Credit
    "A hair divides what is false and true." - Omar Khayyam One of Jordan Peterson’s central ideas is the notion that human beings, like lobsters, are naturally disposed to arrange themselves socially in ‘dominance hierarchies’. The fundamental claim is that, based on ‘competence’, human beings, and men in particular, compete with each other to determine who will get the greatest rewards, material and otherwise, that a society has to offer, including the ‘right’ to mate and reproduce.[1] Peterson appears to be keen to emphasize the naturalness and indeed the biological and evolutionary rootedness of this behavior because he thinks that it can serve as an unanswerable argument against the Cultural Marxists who despise the very idea of hierarchy and who would wish to see their idol of a totalitarianizing ‘equality’ ruling everywhere.
    Tuesday, 03 April 2018 00:27 Read more...