A small model in the form of additional comments and question the prospective reader
Suppose a two sectors, sector 1, capital goods, a sector 2 of consumer goods, and a sector breakdown of the "costs" in three parts "amortization (depreciation equipment), "wages" and "profits", ie:
AMOR1 + SAL1 + PROF1 = PRODUCTION1 or PROD1
AMOR2 + SAL2 + PROF2 = prod2
level accountant, was obviously PRODtotale = AMOR1 & 2 + SAL1 & 2 + PROF1 & 2
The net investment potential, still in the accounts, is equal to INV_N = PROD1 - AMOR1 & 2
final consumption in the accounts, is equal to CONSO_F PROD1 = & 2 - INV_N
Question: How does one apply the principles of Social Credit in this situation?
Get rid of the difficult question concerning the duration of the different production processes, sector 1 are more 'long' as Sector 2.
We will work on the shortest time possible between the two processes (this is just for the sake of argument, I do not think it changes much).
That said, how to 'pay' for each process (in sector 1 as sector 2), knowing that the accounting, there is obviously no difficulty in balancing it all.
difficult question is that some funds should be disbursed at the beginning of the process - whatever its length - and that others are only available at the time of completion of the sale.
in my interpretation of Social Credit (so I can be wrong), I start from the standpoint of the producer, so I will examine the "production credit" or better " advance to the production .
Producteur1 needs AMOR1 finance, SAL1 and PROF1 (I could assume that PROF1 is funded after the sale, but it would raise the problem of effective demand, missing PROF1 and PROF2 to buy Production).
It also assumes that there is no residual stock of money: no money available anywhere (not essential, I think, but it simplifies)
ONC (Office National de Credit ) will then advance to Producteur1 the amount needed to buy more AMOR1 SAL1 more PROF1 (Producteur1 it is supposed to determine all these amounts that can be called PrixDeProduction1 , if desired)
same thing vis-à-vis Producteur2.
In fact, money required during the "production cycle" is considered equal to the total turnover (and not only to GDP), this may be what was told that Major Douglas it is still a lack of "means to purchase" the sum of wages are always lower (even with profits) for production. This is, of course, not to confuse Value Added (our GDP "from our production cycle", with our conventions current) and total turnover.
The question that remains, I submit, very tentatively, to the sagacity of the reader, is how the National Credit will recover its advance ( in principle, in case of no growth, we may result in INV_N = 0 - the National Credit must recover all the money issued, but is this the only case? )
Note: involving the public service would not add much to the demonstration, not a third sector (intermediate), but there can be harnessed later in another post.
Let us go then
:
Producteur1 distributes AMOR1 producer of AMOR1 (we'll assume it himself, so he will be able to immediately repay this sum to the ONC) and SAL1 - PROF1 and its employees - to its shareholders.
Producteur2 distributes AMOR2 producer of AMOR2 (assuming it's the producteur1) and SAL2 and PROF2.
SAL1 More SAL2 more PROF1 more PROF2 will be able to buy prod2 plus the difference between PROD1 and AMOR1 & 2 (what we defined as net investment potential, INV_N)
Consider numerical values to illustrate all this:
PROD1 = 2100 = 1100 + 750 + 250
prod2 = 1500 = 700 + 600 + 200 = 300
INV_N = 2100 - 1100-700
Money advanced social production by the NCB will Producteur1 2100, and 1500 to Producteur2
Producteur1 will immediately 1100 (the equivalent of AMOR1) to the CNO, will provide 750 to its employees, and maintain for the time 250 (in store profits)
Producteur2 Producteur1 700 to give (for AMOR2), 600 to give employees, and retain for the time 200 (in store profits)
Turning to consumer demand, that is to say the acquisition of prod2 (In prices of production, 1500 to be purchased)
Effective demand is composed of: 1350 (SAL1 & 2) plus 450 (PROF1 & 2), that is to say 1800. We find that, for accounting purposes, 1800 is sufficient to buy 1500, the remainder (= 300) to purchase INV_N
The only "small" problem is so far ahead in production in early each cycle, this advance being "destroyed", that is to say refunded upon the completion of the sale (assuming of course that the production is in line with the needs - which is another matter , more "marketing" than "financial" or "money")
subsidiary questions relating to the Social Credit:
1) how to bring up the Social Dividend, or REX, or MSY?: easy, simply integrate prices of production a certain amount (which will diminish the profits and / or wages)
2) Do we need to show a compensated discount, or bonus, to get the prices right? I leave the answer - very tentatively-that question the traditional wisdom of the reader, if he wants a break.
On the "fair price" and offset the discount.
In fact, another way to run the funding model AMOR PROF SAL precedent is not to fund a priori AMOR1 & Part 2, but to finance a posteriori, at least that's how I understand the mechanism invoked by Major Douglas , father of Social Credit.
In the example above, the fair price would not PROD1 2100, and the right price would not prod2 1500. What would they be then?
In fact, we must first evaluate the "means of purchase (valued at producer prices, namely SAL1 & 2 more PROF1 & 2, so 1800).
prices of total production (PROD1 & 2) is equal to 3000 (the total turnover), to get the right price, it will take the ratio between "SAL1 & 2 more PROF1 & 2" and "PROD1 & 2," which given by 60% (the discount is therefore 40%).
The fair price will be PROD1 PROD1 * 60% and the right price will prod2 prod2 * 60% (note that the discount factor should be calculated on an aggregate, not by sector, though then it must be applied by sector).
It would thus, with our data, 1260 (= 0.6 times 2100) for JustePrix1, and 900 (= 0.6 times 1500) for JustePrix2. The National Credit Producteur1 have advanced to the sum of 1000 (for more SAL1 PROF1), and have advanced to the Producteur2 $ 800. Buyers of various sectors would have paid the equivalent of SAL1 & 2 more PROF1 & 2, namely 1800 (money that has passed first CNO to producers Producteur1 and Producteur2), and each producer would then "reimbursed" the discount allowed, ie a total of 1200 (= 3000-1800).
Compared to the solution proposed earlier (finance AMOR1 AMOR2 and the beginning of the period), this solution discount offset seems unnecessarily complicated and, moreover, seems to reward the producer with the "organic composition" of the process of production is lower, it ie the producer whose capital is relatively high compared with the least value added. After all, why not.
0 comments:
Post a Comment