Letters to the Editor - Social Credit Home Page

Social Credit
FOLLOW US ON
We'll put in place an economic system that works for people
and the planet
Northern Lights
Go to content

Letters to the Editor

To see letters that made it into print click HERE
Reserve Bank funding
Hawke's Bay Today - November 17th
The consultation on how to fund Napier port is, like talkback radio,  impossible to correlate and thereby give us the council the facility to  ignore the submissions in favour of advice from vested interests.
To sell a half share in a thriving business may be in the best  interests of potential purchases but decidedly not for the Hawke's Bay  ratepayers.
In a few years the same issue would recur, leading to a further sale or higher rates.
Instead, as we  monetary reformers have been saying for many years, the council should  be joining others to petition the Government to make funds available  through the country's central bank as recommended in a 2012 report from  the International Monetary Fund
Reserve Bank funding  could be provided add a nominal interest charge, with repayments  matched by the income an expanded port would provide.
As it happens, the government has already signed off on interest free loans of $158 million for Tauranga, $339 million for Auckland, and $181 million for Hamilton, the money coming from taxes or borrowing.
If the money was sourced from the Reserve Bank the result would be a "fit for purpose" port that would assist with the expansion of economic activity in the region at no cost to ratepayers or taxpayers.
So  there is a better way to proceed, that does not require selling our  assets and does not require borrowing money from overseas banks, which in  any case have invented that loan for no cost to themselves whatever.
Dick Ryan - Havelock North

Credit creation
NZ Herald - November 16th
Tim Hazledine stated in his article; "We don't save enough to finance all our mortgage debt internally.”
This is a common misconception even amongst academics.
However it is very important to make the distinction: banks are not intermediaries.
Case in point, the Bank of England says, “The majority of money in the modern economy is created by commercial banks making loans, and, “Banks do not act simply as intermediaries, lending out deposits that savers place with them”.
It is time that the actual function of banks was understood properly.
Our entire money supply is loaned from banks except for our notes and coins.
We should be taught this clearly in universities, then we can have a proper conversation about whether this is the best way to structure our affairs.
Do we want the big four Australian banks to continue to drain as much as they do (a few billion dollars each year) out of our economy to them?
We need to come from a place of knowledge to make better decisions about whether we should change the law so that banking works as it is erroneously taught now, where banks are truly only intermediaries.
Amanda Vickers - Waikanae
Fear interest rate rise
Northern Advocate - October 19th
Tuesday’s editorial said we shouldn’t fear a rise in interest rates.
Bunkum!
We most certainly should, if only because of the dangerous misconceptions of most economists about the relationship between interest and inflation.
Inflation is measured as “rising costs”, so that’s what it is.  No more no less.
It can have two causes:
Too much money in circulation resulting in too much demand, which economists almost always accept as the sole cause, and,
Increasing costs in the manufacturing to retail stream which must be charged into prices.
An additional dollar cost at the manufacturing level is compounded by successive steps on the way to shop shelves. At every stage the effect on prices is greater than the increase in interest rates.
So we can get a spiral. Increase interest rates; prices rise.  Blame it on “too much money” and increase rates more; prices rise higher still. And so on.
Economists never appear to recognise this compounding effect, except when workers want better pay.
Why can’t they see the obvious trend that putting up interest rates causes?
Is it because they think business people are “exploiters” who should really absorb the extra charges?
And who benefits?  Well, bank revenues increase for a start!
It might be instructive to guess where the funding for most schools of economics comes from.
Instructive too, to know that the “Nobel” prize in economics is funded by a Swedish Bank, not the organisation founded by Alfred Nobel.
Chris Leitch - Whangarei
DHB's Underfunding
Whanganui Chronicle - October 19th
Tuesday’s editorial on health board debt hit the nail squarely on the head.
"If it costs more than some person in a suit thought it would, it doesn't mean we're overspending, it means your stupid guess was wrong".
What it didn’t address however, is where the extra money could come from.
It would it have to come from government - taxpayers actually. So that means more tax (no thanks we’re taxed enough), or be taken from some other area of government expenditure – education? roading? pensions?????
No.
The first port of call should be the interest on government borrowing, which already consumes $4,700,000,000 ($4.7 billion) dollars every year.
That taxpayers money, supposedly going to pay for public services, is actually going to pay interest to overseas owned financial institutions the government borrows from.
Why so, when the government owns a bank it could borrow from without paying interest?
The Reserve Bank (the country’s central bank) funded government expenditure in Michael Joseph Savage’s time. Forty thousand houses were built with money from that source.
It’s a solution Social Credit has long promoted.
It’s now being backed by establishment heavyweights such as Professor Richard Werner, Director of the Centre for Banking at the University of Southampton, Adair Turner, former chairman of Britain’s Financial Services Authority, and Max Kumhof, Senior Research Advisor in the Research Hub of the Bank of England, to name just a few.
Even NZ’s own Bernard Hickey, who wrote “Isn't it better for our Government to be borrowing from its own central bank than from foreign banks and pension funds?”
We can have more funding for health, without the need to take more money out of taxpayer’s pockets.
I just needs politicians with the will to make it happen.
Kellee Bartlett - Whanganui
Public credit without interest
Whanganui Chronicle - October 19th
Thank you for your recent interview with the new Leader of the Social Credit Party, Chris Leitch.
There  is growing interest in the idea of public credit without heavy interest  demands.
For example, eminent New Zealander, Bryan Gould, has called  for using Reserve Bank credit to fund the current government's  Provincial Development Fund. He also attributes the housing crisis in  Auckland with the private banks gladly providing the funds with compound  interest for the rising cost of houses.
The  state of North Dakota has had a public state bank for over a century  now, and during the 2008 Great Recession, the state was hardly touched  by the financial collapse.
The city of Los Angeles has a charter  amendment that could establish a public bank in LA.
Putting Los  Angeles' finance in public hands with no compounding interest could save  as much as $170 million in interest in a year, more money than it spend  on road maintenance.
Instead of nurses and  teachers going on strike for poor wages and lack of support services,  funding for these essential services could come from the publicly owned  Reserve Bank with no interest charged, only a small administrative fee.
At present each year $6 billion in taxpayers' money goes to pay  compound interest when it could go to pay essential services.
With much of public services in debt, it is time to think outside the box to new ways of funding legitimate services.
Donna Mummery - Whanganui
Dam burst
Northern Advocate - October 18th
Your cartoonist’s depiction of a market trend was impressive, but based on the good old orthodox economist’s superstition that the market is itself a living entity with unfathomable reasons for its behavior.
The truth is much simpler.
Social Credit points out that industry does not pay out enough wages, salaries etc. to cover all the costs built into the prices of its products.
Many economists now recognise, without realising that they agree with this analysis, that governments should put into circulation more money than they take in taxes.
“Balanced” government budgets result in increased private debt and, if this is continued, recession.
This is why prosperity now follows war or preparation for it, when governments are forced to borrow heavily.
Otherwise, the economy relies for its health on growth. Growth depends on business confidence to borrow, which controls how much banks can lend.
High debt levels reduce confidence, resulting in a downturn in the economy, causing less confidence and so on.
A side effect is that, as businesses become less prosperous they are open to takeover.
This explains the growth of our increasingly big conglomerates and monopolies.
In this, small investors are competing with large banks that can create money to purchase assets. (Report of N Z Royal Commission on Monetary{etc.} systems, 1956.)
Similar pressures can be put on governments, as shown by recent propaganda that we should sell more of our national assets.
When the downturn does come, it is unlikely to be from a crack in the whole wall.
More likely from special little doors in the structure, only visible to and operated by big business with the right key - which is their monopoly of the right to manufacture our money and claim it as their own.
John Rawson - Whangarei
Use our own currency
Whanganui Chronicle - October 18th
I hope your columnist, Kate Stewart, is sitting down when she reads this - as I have some good news for her, incredible as it may first seem.
"Ideally, monies allocated for the like of health and education would be bottomless", wrote Kate in a recent article.
Well, this ideal is more practical than most folk realise.
Not a bottomless money bag for those "obscene pay packets" and  the bureaucratic wastefulness she describes but one containing enough for our social
and environmental needs - not too much and not too little (the "Goldilocks" principle).
Recently an Australian apolitical group (www.fairmoney.org) asked the Reserve Bank of Australia" Can the RBA ever, under any circumstances, run out
of Australian dollars?"
The answer must be the shortest official answer on record.
It was: No.
What is more, the same answer would be the response from our own Reserve Bank.
Indeed I have been personally assured by a former top Treasury official that our RBNZ has the power to credit-fund our public needs.
Sadly Finance Minister, Grant Robertson, announced earlier this year, at a bank-sponsored breakfast meeting, that he intends running a budget surplus - a
promise enthusiastically approved by Moodys of New York. 
Means the private owners of our government debt securities can relax under the assurance they will continue to profit - knowing they have first call on
government revenues.
The demands of public health and education would continue to have much lower priority.
Monetary sovereign governments can actually run deficits for necessary spending - and can lawfully balance the books using their own currency.
Kate can now have that glass of bubbly - as long as it's Kiwi-made.
Heather Marion Smith - Gisborne
Port development finance
Hawke's Bay Today - October 11th
Four Port options? There is a fifth possibly beyond the  comprehension of both local and national politicians.
The use of public  credit via our own Reserve Bank at nominal interest to finance port  development will enhance the returns to the HB economy, retain 100%  public ownership and ensure port company profits do not go out of the  area (or country).
The mechanism first used by the Labour  government of 1935-49 to build state housing and largely neglected  (except for a time for seasonal finance for farmers marketing  organisations) ever since.
Why?
Simple on a Soapbox(1963)  by John A Lee at p54 records in July 1962 then leader of the Labour  Party, the Rt.Hon.Walter Nash said "... consistent with the needs of a  sound economy, the State should create and use credit at the cost of  issue for purposes of approved capital development". This principle was  still there in the Labour 1975 manifesto.
Reflecting on  the diffidence of the old guard of that first Labour government, Lee  comments "thus 27 years too late, Nash accepted the policy on which  Labour was elected in 1935". Walter had been finance minister in that  government.
Comenting to Nash's great grandson (the now  Hon.Stuart) at one of his periodic street corner meetings last year I  suggested the use of Reserve Bank credit as the answer to the port  expansion dilemma.
My contribution was greeted with a vacant stare and  then back to his agenda.
Hello! Anybody home?
John Smith - Napier
It's now clear
Northern Advocate - October 6th
"The Prime Minister's address to the United Nations has put her, and the Government's mulit-lateral globalist agenda front and centre. That's not an agenda that Social Credit agrees with", party leader Chris Leitch said in an address to the party's Waikato Regional meeting in Hamilton yesterday.
It's now clear why Labour, and their partner NZ First, despite loud protestations before the election, proceeded apace with the ratification of the TPPA and are negotiating several more similar agreements that threaten NZ's sovereignty.
It's now clear why they've allowed the high level of immigration to continue, and why more refugees are to be let in, despite the needs of NZ citizens not yet being met.
Its now clear why weak-kneed legislation on stopping just a few overseas buyers acquiring houses was the best they could do and why high country stations are being gobbled up by overseas rich-listers and massive chunks of our best farmland sold to Chinese buyers.
Despite the country voting for change, they're following the same agenda as the previous National government.
Social Credit would re-negotiate the TPPA and if necessary withdraw from it completely. The projected benefits from it of $4.6 billion in ten years are less than the $5 billion the government pays every year in interest on its borrowing.
Social Credit would deliver that benefit immediately by funding government from the Reserve Bank like Japan is doing right now, and spend that $5 billion annually on hospitals, roads, rail, and education.
We would dramatically cut the level of immigration, at least until the country's housing and infrastructure had caught up with the needs of New Zealanders.
Rich-listers and Chinese buyers would have to look to some other country for land purchases because such sales would be off the table if we were playing a part in government.
Social Credit would not compromise on New Zealand's sovereignty.
Chris Leitch - Whangarei
Lack of tax foresight
Northern Advocate - September 25th
The interim report of the Tax Working Group is a huge let down for New Zealand.   
It contains stale ideas, lacks vision, and has all the appearances of a National Party tax policy.   
The recommendations, if implemented, would hit farmers, small business and ordinary Kiwis working hard to get ahead the most, without addressing the likes of money market manipulators and speculators.   
There is no indication that a submission from Social Credit on replacing GST with a Financial Transaction Tax was even considered.   
FTT at around 0.25 percent would result in a saving of $14.75 in every $100 resulting in more money for spending by lower paid Kiwi's and more income for businesses.   
Such a small tax would dramatically reduce the cost of items, but not reduce government revenue because the new tax would catch things that GST doesn't, such as currency, bond, and derivatives trading.   
Now that's an idea that does have vision, and an even handed approach.
Callan Neylon - Waipu
Taxation Group Report A Major Disappointment
Westport News - September 24th
The report of Michael Cullen’s Taxation Working Group is a major disappointment.
It is bereft of innovative ideas, signals increasing bureaucracy, and is a regurgitation of outdated tax concepts.
Rather than focussing its attention on speculators, money market manipulators, and those who make money from non-productive sources, it has recommended that small businesses, farmers, and ordinary Kiwi’s trying to get ahead should be hit with yet more tax.
Cullen’s recommendations are exactly what we would have expected from a National Party working group that was intent on protecting the privileged position of its biggest campaign donors.
There is no indication that our submission to the working group that GST should be scrapped and replaced with a Financial Transactions Tax was even considered.
Replacing GST with a transactions tax at less than a quarter of one percent (25 cents in every hundred dollars) on all withdrawals from bank accounts would give workers across the board a substantial increase in purchasing power.
It would generate roughly the same in tax revenue as GST, but with a substantial amount coming from the speculative sector of the economy.
That raft of financial transactions such as credit default swaps, debt securities, convertible and exchangeable bonds, currency trading, derivatives etc, currently avoid the GST net.
It would significantly benefit smaller businesses as people would have more money in their pockets.
Additionally businesses would be relieved of the burden of accounting for GST, filing returns, and audits.
The recent introduction of GST to on-line purchases is complicated and messy and will produce minimal tax revenue, whereas transactions tax is simple and would immediately put Kiwi retailers on an even footing with all overseas sellers.
It will be very simple for the banking system to implement FTT, and very difficult for anyone to avoid payment.
Banks would deduct the tax automatically in the same way they already withdraw their own account fees and Resident Withholding Tax, and remit it straight to the IRD.
The removal of GST would also contribute to a reduction in child poverty by putting more money in the hands of lower paid New Zealanders who currently pay tax far out of proportion to their incomes.
Jack Collin - Westport
Thinner Blue Line
Northern Advocate - September 14th
Last week police officers overwhelmingly rejected a pay rise offer of 2% per year for three years.
They’ve endured 0% to 1% increases since the GFC.  Numbers are falling, risky duty increasing, cost of living (especially in Auckland) increasing. They start on $60,000 and within months of graduation are dodging bullets. There's no pay for overtime or proper recognition of shift work.  
Police are supposed to take comfort from the recently announced 1,500 increase in numbers. Northland's share, 87, would indeed relieve the strain locally, IF it happens.
The Police Minister now says it may take 5 years (instead of the original 3) to fulfil that promise. Over-worked and under heavy stress, too many current officers are disillusioned and leaving the force. Too few prospective recruits are inspired to join up.
National's Chris Bishop accused the government of “raising expectations”, hence the police reluctance to settle for less.
Treasury advised any increase in officers was a bad idea because more officers making more arrests would require more expensive prison space. Treasury seems unaware that good cops, face to face with the community, generally results in fewer crimes, fewer arrests and a smaller prison population.
National and Treasury are saying there’s no money so let’s ignore the problem.  
Why not shift some of the $5 billion currently spent on loan interest to provide adequate resources for the problem solvers.  I know using the Reserve Bank is a Social Credit policy.
But I’m sure the police wouldn’t care whose policy it was – so long as it got them the resources they so desperately need.
Gloria Bruni - Kiripaka
Nada to Shane Jones
Northern Advocate - August 31st
The likelihood of success of a Shane Jones visit to the Reserve Bank stopping the Aussie owned banks closing branches in the provinces is zilch, nada.
I would be easier to get vehicle engines to run on water. That would at least save us a bundle on climate change costs, and fuel costs, by allowing us to fill up from our own rainwater tanks, easing the overloading on storm-water infrastructure.
While he’s right that the Aussie banks extract nearly $5 billion in profit each year from the pockets of Kiwis and export it overseas, he would be better off talking to his cabinet colleagues about getting Kiwibank to take over where those banks close up shop.
Even better would be if he convinced the government to do its own banking with Kiwibank instead of with the Aussies.
But the really big win from Mr Jones’ talk with the Reserve Bank would be if he could convince it to become the source of funds for the government, as Social Credit suggests.
That would free up the $4.7 billion in interest paid every year on government borrowing – taxpayer money that could be used for much needed spending on health, education and building infrastructure.
That, Shane, would be something worth making a noise about.
Chris Leitch - Whangarei
Replace GST with FTT
Sunlive News - August 31st
The government could head off the avalanche of wage claims that is coming at them like a runaway freight train by scrapping GST and replacing it with a financial transactions tax.
The wage claims, have the potential to wreck the economy by increasing inflation.        
Private sector employers will likewise be under pressure to raise wages, increasing their costs.
Replacing the 15 per cent GST with a financial transactions tax of a quarter of one percent (25 cents in every hundred dollars) on all withdrawals from bank accounts would give workers across the board a substantial increase in purchasing power greater than they would get from wage rises.
It would generate a similar revenue as GST for government, but with a substantial amount coming from the speculative sector of the economy.
Additionally businesses would be relieved of the burden of accounting for GST, filing returns, and audits.               
It will be very simple for the banking system to implement FTT, and very difficult for anyone to avoid payment.
Replacing GST with an FTT would put more money in the hands of lower paid New Zealanders who currently pay tax far out of proportion to their incomes.               
It would be fitting that Labour, the party that first introduced GST and unleashed the neo-liberal economic experiment on the country were the ones that finally scrap it.
Tracey Livingston, Whakamarama
Building assets not selling them
NZ Herald - August 21st
Upon reading Fran O’Sullivan’s piece on selling down crown assets to fund infrastructure, I took a long hard look at the calendar.
No, I decided, it’s not April fools day, it’s actually August.
Might as well have been though, because here’s the logical conclusion to her argument.
So we sell down assets to fund infrastructure. As we’ve seen with the National government sell-offs she mentioned, prices have risen – an extra “tax”, on, for example, power consumers (here read all of us!).
Previously we were funding profits to government for spending on health, education, etc, but now we’re funding profits for corporate owners.
Government income has therefore dropped so it’s now forced to borrow more or tax more to do those things – costing us again.
But, infrastructure funding sorted for now.
Great!  ……..until we need more.
So let’s sell off some more assets.
Oops, sorry, we’ve sold all we have.
Now what?
We might be forced to look at what the Japanese government has been doing for several years, and what the first Labour government did in 1936 – source funding from the country’s central bank.
In Michael Joseph Savage’s case it allowed the building of 40,000 state houses at no cost to the government or the public, and in Japan’s case it has slashed its interest payments by half – money being spent instead on its citizens. In both cases, building assets not selling them.
Some might call it Social Credit, but most would say it’s common sense.
Chris Leitch, Whangarei
Better methods than 1080     
Gisborne Herald - August 21st
Forest and Bird Gisborne branch chairman  Grant Vincent (August 18 letter) needs to learn what the “eco” in  economics stands for. It’s from a Greek source meaning “good  housekeeping”, ie the wise use of resources. It does not mean kowtowing  to neo-liberal nonsense such as National’s Fiscal Responsibility Act  (1994) designed to gear budgets to artificial debt levels just to please  Wall Street’s credit-rating firms.
Pity Finance Minister Grant Robertson  is so devoted to that legislation. No wonder the Department of  Conservation is severely underfunded and finds aerial drops of 1080 as  “most effective”. Too bad about collateral damage.
Accusing anti-1080 protestors of being  influenced by pseudo-science is an affront from someone who calls on  pseudo-economic notions to support his defence of 1080. A sovereign  government does not need credit-ratings and can fully fund in its own  currency what is socially and eco-logically good for the nation. There  are better methods than 1080 drops available for pest control. The  Government just needs the political will to use them.
Heather Smith - Gisborne
Trucks off road
Northern Advocate - August 18th
News that the hauling industry is in distress over another 500 trucks pulled off the road shouldn't really surprise us. Their towing connections had not been properly inspected and no driver wants a loose logging trailer rolling down on them!  Only half the 1,500 trucks recalled in April are back in business. One unhappy manager of a transport company estimated lost business is costing him $10,000 a day.  The cost of re-certifying one tow connection is aprox. $1,000. These are losses the industry expects Government to help cover.  Ouch!
New Zealand's 180 engineering certifiers ensure that all truck towing connections are strong and safe.  The Government, as the Transport Agency, has 'kept costs down' for years by employing only one auditor to oversee those certifiers, ensuring they do their important job properly. Transport industry voices complained that a single auditor was inadequate.  Now chickens have expensively come home to roost; two certifiers have been discovered to have wrongly certified 2,000 trucks. NOW the Transport Agency (under a new government) is recruiting 3 more auditors and 2 engineers.
Unpack this and you find a National Government pretending to be 'business-friendly' by keeping taxes down.  But real business sense knows that penny pinching is expensive.  Deferring maintenance is expensive. Scrimping on bio-security is expensive.  Any farmer, dairy-owner or house holder would recognise that as a recipe for running New Zealand Inc. into the ground.
Whangarei and Northland have been spared business disruption from the missing trucks-- in part because companies like Mainfreight use rail and coastal shipping to spread risk. Northland's dozen professional certifiers are under no shadows.  But we will not be spared the cost of trucking companies' legitimate damages claims against the Government. Like PSA and Micoplasma bovis-- these are losses caused by a National Government failing to govern responsibly.
They had the option of raising taxes to cover their legitimate costs.  Better still they could have chosen to slash our $4.5 billion annual interest bill by using the Reserve Bank-- as Social Credit continues to advise.  But they did neither.
If the business community is feeling nervous now, they need to face up to the very un-businesslike management they supported for the last nine years. Perhaps they should have been more nervous and more vocal while it was happening.
Gloria Bruni - Kiripaka
A ban here, conversation and review there
Gisborne Herald - August 18th
Can’t agree with Murray Ferris claiming that the campaign against single use plastic bags is based on a “myth” – but he is correct in stating that the whole business is serving as a convenient diversion for a government passing off conversations and reviews as active policy.
In addition to the mental health, Tomorrows Schools, local government and the other 100-plus reviews, we now have one called Trade For All aimed at softening criticism of new trade negotiations
The one we Socreds find particularly ironic is the current review of the Reserve Bank's role in our economy.
Back in 1989 the Lange government yielded to foreign financial influences that the Reserve Bank of NZ should be independent - independent that is of political interference.
Having passed an amendment in 1936 precisely so the Savage government could indeed exert political influence for the public good, this new act was really a vote of no confidence in the ability of our parliamentary representatives to make wise democratic decisions on our behalf when it comes to matters financial.
No wonder financial bills are no longer required to go before select committees.
Wonder when other diversions are being dreamed up by our MPs and their overpaid advisers.
Heather Smith - Gisborne
A bit right to the left of Social Credit
Northern Advocate - August 16th
 Once again Marie Kaire (13.8) was so right on this topic, but her side comments were not quite up to her usual standard.
Salaries these days are not paid in cash that could fit into a bucket, but by nil-volume computer-generated impulses manufactured in the banking system by use of a keyboard.
Sure, our talking heads on TV always represent money by wads of notes, but probably that is just an example of their level of intelligence, or perhaps a deliberate wish to fool people.  Such money is almost insignificant, representing about three percent only of our money supply. Probably less in practice because a lot of that is likely to be bound up in the drug trade.
And she could give the good-ole-Nats a break occasionally. Our present dive into economic neoliberalism (neocolonialism by big business) was started by a certain gentleman of the so-called Left who claimed to know everything about money but didn’t even know banks create it.
Is the moral such that Enzed should stop vacillating between two almost identical regimes labelled “Left” and ”Right” to fool people?  
To give serious thought to progressing forward with Social Credit?
John Rawson, Whangarei
Questions over MP's copter stand
Northern Advocate - August 14th
In an article last week about the re-organisation of the country’s rescue helicopter services, Whangarei MP Shane Reti is quoted as saying “Retaining the Northland Rescue helicopter service and its management in the region is vital”.
Question: Why then did your National Government initiate the review and open up tenders to outside and overseas providers?
Question: As the likely health minister had National won the last election, did you vote against the proposal, and if not why not?
Last year NEST wanted to purchase new modern aircraft, and went to the NRC for loan funding at lower than commercial interest rates so its funds could be used to provide better rescue services, not pay interest to banks.
Question: Did you step in and offer to lobby your colleague the finance minister for funding from the Reserve Bank at no interest? If not why not?
You’ve heard about the concept numerous times. Have you investigated it?
If not why not?
Crying over the fact that the horses have bolted, when you opened the gate in the first place, doesn’t cut it for me.
Chris Leitch, Whangarei
School shouldn't have to lose staff
Northern Advocate - August 2nd
This morning's news tells us that Whangarei charter school, Te Kapehu Whetu, has been approved to move into the state school system as a Special Character school. No doubt their acceptance by the Education gurus is based on their stunning success –achieving the 2nd highest UE passrate in Northland, above the NZ average.
But now they will receive less money for support staff.  Why should moving to our state system mean they have to lose staff who have been instrumental in their success?  Staff who handle administrative details, mentoring, pastoral care, participation in non-teaching activities, leaving teachers free to concentrate on their subject matter, developing courses and programs—teaching!
Raewyn Tipene, CE of the school said their support staff were the heart of their success. And why wouldn't they be?
I want to know why the  Dept of Education does not learn from TKW's success and provide additional funding to ALL schools – or at least lower decile ones-- for TKE levels of support staff?
If the answer is money – we all need to ask Govt when they are going to stop throwing away millions of dollars daily on interest payments.  Interest on loans for projects they could fund interest-free, as Social Credit proposes -- through the Reserve Bank.
Gloria Bruni, Ngunguru
Rules Imposed On Councils Reflect A Loss Of Democracy
North Canterbury News, July 26th
Hurunui Mayor Winton Dalley's opinion piece, ("Demands Draconian”, North Canterbury News, July 19th) regarding rules imposed on our councils illustrate the loss of democracy that has crept in like some insidious disease over the past three decades.
Even the architect of the supposed “reforms", Sir Geoffrey Palmer voiced his exasperation in 2013: “There seems to me in our present situation an inability to pursue long-term vision for the country over time and to assess how we are doing and make adjustments."
He continued "The system of governence seems increasingly concentrated on the short term .. . The domination of public debate by trivia and political pyrotechnics has become debilitating."
Being of the progressive/growth pre-Rogermomics generation, I feel any anniversary to celebrate the last three decades can be calculated by the number of jobs created to build nothing.
I note Environment Canterbury has another100 employees to cope with “water issues".
How much better would it be if those 100 were machine operators cleaning out our neglected rivers instead of moving paper around the office.
Mayor Dalley signals that this "expensive time consuming compulsory cycle" engineered by Wellington apparatchiks should "be reversed to give more local autonomy".
It is worth remembering that what is now the Hurunui District Council was once four county councils - Amuri, Cheviot, Waipara, and Kowhai - and, by contrast to today's mess, they were super- efficient!
It is worth remembering the Upton Sinciair quote: “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his not understanding it“.
If you remember the television series Yes Minister, you’ve got it!
SirGeoffrey again; “There is a long road ahead (full of pot holes?) for New Zealand on Iocal government reform, followed by too many councils and too many officials, too many plans, too little infrastructure, too much wasted money and too little vision. "
I suggest we are mired in a cycle of waste.
To question everything is important, for knowledge is power and ignorance is enslavement.
When we accept power without questioning, we forfeit the power to control our own lives - it is a creeping paralysis happening now!
Come on people, our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.
John McCaskey, Waipara
Political System Open To Lobbyists
Northern Advocate - July 20th
While agreeing with Callan Neylon's comments (Letters,July19), l believe the situation is complex.
My political experience leads me to believe that all or our political parties. with the possible exception of Act, are mainly composed of good well-meaning people, dedicated to serving their country.
So how, in the 1980's, did one that aspires to be the best, come to wreck the egalitanan society it once built and to destroy an excellent apprentice system so that we are still suffering from a shortage of skilled people?
We have a tight adversarial two party system where policy is not decided by debate in the House but in party caucuses behind closed doors.
This set-up provides an open invitation to influence from big business lobbyists bearing party funds.
Our financial system is complex. Its intricacies are concealed deliberately and it is a fact that people tend to become emotionally disturbed when they encounter something about money that conflicts with their previous ideas.
Many MPs have professional training and have a justifed trust of experts within their own profession,which they carry over to the corrupted field of macroeconomics, which uses a first-year text that propagates untruths to students and which has a fake bank-funded ‘Nobel Prize‘ to encourage persistence of outdated ideas. (I can back the first wlth quotes and the second can be checked readily on the net).
There appears also to be a propaganda campalgn deslgned to reduce trust in our elected representat1ves, aimed at favouring wllllng prlvatlsatlon of as many or our assets as possible.
All told, there appears to be only one way out of thls mess.
Election to Parliament of people with the knowledge and determinatlon to fix it.
John G Rawson, Whangarei
What Economic Disaster?
Northern Advocate - July 20th
Keith Hartley lauds the National government’s financial prowess for New Zealand having survived “two very severe financial events” – the Global Financial Crisis and Christchurch earthquake.
While people suffered (and still are) from the earthquake, surely the massive influx of money from insurance payments benefited the economy?
And the reconstruction provided hundreds of jobs, massive sales for building supply companies, engineering firms, earthworks and roading contractors etc.
Wouldn’t that have brought large amounts of PAYE, GST, and company tax into government coffers?
Hardly the disaster for the economy Mr Hartley proclaims.
Had National been such gold plated economic managers, they wouldn’t have been so soft on insurance companies meeting their responsibilities (some people have still not been paid out).
Nor would the rebuild have been delayed by a drastic shortage of qualified builders, plumbers and other tradesmen – a direct result of policies that reduced trades and apprenticeship training.
Under our crazy system, a disaster like Christchurch actually increases GDP and makes economic figures look better.
Mr Hartley appears somewhat confused about economic issues.
Jeremy Steptowe , Ngunguru
Social Credit survived test of time
Sunlive News - July 20th
The demise of the Opportunities Party is another example of a rich entrepreneur having “a go” at politics without any real commitment to a philosophy or core policy.
Gareth Morgan joins a long list of similar people who thought money was going to buy them an easy road into parliament and who gave up when the going got tough.
Bob Jones and Colin Craig were others.
They were, as his party name suggested, “opportunists”, who promised much and didn’t deliver.
There was no solid foundation that people could commit to, that would make them contribute time and money at great personal cost over many years.
While Social Credit hasn’t had rich donors and corporate backing that would have allowed it to buy media time and tour the country like Mr Morgan, it has survived the test of time.
It has done so because of its commitment to reforming the money system to deliver a better life for people – particularly middle and low income earners – rather than bankers, money manipulators, and corporates.
First formed in 1953 it has proved it has stickability and commitment to principle and that’s a rare quality in New Zealand politics.
In doing so it has proved Bob Jones wrong.
His taunts about “Skodas and crimplene suits” have come back to haunt him.
Skodas are now a luxury vehicle, and monetary reform is gaining support internationally from economists, professors and commentators.
Tracey Livingston, Whakamarama
Time For Monetary Change
Northern Advocate - July 18th
I find it difficult to understand why successive governments lament the lack of available funding, yet make no attempt to reform the monetary system in a way that would provide it
There seems to be no willpower amongst parliamentarians to do so, despite ample evidence of how it could be done.
Continuing to borrow billions from private banks is just exacerbating the problem.
I was shocked to learn that the government pays roughly $4.5 billion dollars in interest on loans to private banks every year.
The Government should be utilizing the Reserve Bank to create the necessary credit for public spending.
Instead of repetitively trying the same old stuff and hoping for a different result how about we strive for a change and get some results we can be proud of?
Callan Neylon - One Tree Point
Eyes Opened To Money Creation
Northern Advocate - July 17th
Economic commentator Bernard Hickey said that “money is invented out of nowhere by private banks.”
That opened my eyes. I thought our money supply came from the government.
But apparently I was wrong. Hickey should know.
“It is private banks that print money. They invent money out of nothing whenever they lend,” he went on to say [on Radio Live].
Really?
And then they have the gall to charge us interest on ‘money they invent out of nothing’ sufficient for our Aussie owned banks to make $5 billion dollars in profit after tax last year.
Hickey called it “the dirty little secret of international finance.”
Perhaps it’s time for the creation of new money to go back to where most of us think it happens – with the government.
Gloria Bruni, Whangarei
Sick Policy Affects Health
Gisborne Herald - July 14th
Winston Peters and David Clark must stop telling fibs about funding.
Just because nursing is a female-dominated profession, that’s no excuse for fobbing them off with financial falsehoods about “no more money on the table” or budget constraints.
As Social Credit leader Chris Leitch has pointed out in his message to the nurses union, money would be found immediately should the government be drawn into a war.
He advised that our central Reserve Bank has the powers to issue suflicient funds for what is needed - without having to borrow from overseas banks.
What is diabolical is the way our DHBs are required to pay out multi-millions of dollars to service the 8 percent capital charge.
This on top of servicing other private debt.
How can such a sick policy apply to public health?
Both the Govemment and the unions need to front up to this question.
Heather Smith, Gisborne
Bemused By Money
The Listener - June 9th
Chris Leitch (letters May 26) argues for Reserve Bank funding for infrastructure.
Sounds like Social Credit’s “Funny Money” financial policy.
Apparently, it’s come of age.
Since the global financial crisis of 2008, central banks in Europe, Britain, China, Japan and the USA have been pumping new money flat out into their economies.
Currently the European Central Bank is doing it at the rate of $35 billion Euros per month.
They all call it quantitative easing – a fancy term for what is just money creation.
In reality it’s Social Credit, except they contend the recipients should be infrastructure, health, education, etc, not banks, bonds, and currency speculators.
And despite what the doom merchants proclaimed – not a whisk of inflation to be seen.
If money creation is a viable option for the rest of the world, then why not here?
Gregor Weston, Pukekohe
Paying For Infrastructure
The Listener - May 26th
The May 12th editorial, “No pain, no gain” reckons we are economically literate enough to know that", one way or another, we all pay for infrastructure.”
It then canvasses  public- private partnerships and government debt, both of which have the added cost of a profit for the lenders of the money.
By all means pay the builders of the infrastructure, but there are other sources for the finance - a bank we own for one.
The Reserve Bank, has in the past provided finance for such things, with minimal interest charged, and with profit going back to its shareholders – us – by way of government ownership of the bank.
Fourty thousand houses were built by the first Labour government using this mechanism.
As the Ministry of Works report of 1949 states “This action showed ….that it was possible for the State to use the country’s credit in creating new assets for the country”.
Chris Leitch, Whangarei
             If you want
  - Better Housing            - More Say
  - Better Roads                - Lower Rates
  - Better Health Care     - Less Tax
  - Better Education        - Clean Rivers
                      


© Copyright 2018
Social Credit NZ
Authorised by Anne Leitch, Secretary
42 Reyburn House Lane, Whangarei
If you want
 - Better Housing
 - More Say
 - Better Roads
 - Lower Rates
 - Better Health Care
- Less Tax
 - Better Education
- Clean Rivers
                    
Back to content