Even would have approved of the design of LETS
as a Social Credit system.
PRIMER OF SOCIAL CREDIT
p8 Do we lack
anything but money? Yet, money is not real wealth.
p11 Those who control the volume of money control our standard of
p16 The banker claims interest on the money he has created.
p17 Repayment must be greater than the original loan. Therefore,
if I succeed, someone else must fail because all together, we are not
both able to repay more money than has been created.
p18 All money comes into existence as a debt, through the banker,
who claims more than he put into circulation.
p19 Clamping interest on money the moment it comes into existence
is unjust and absurd, harmful to society and contrary to good
arithmetic. Even legalized, such a procedure is both vicious and
p21 There are laws to ensure the money makers are repaid but none
to prevent a human from dying of misery.
p22 The pen of the banker enslaves government and lays a burden
of hardship upon the people. The making of money is an act of
sovereignty which should not be left in the hands of banks.
p26 When you have no food, it is not because the rich eat all the
grain. It is because your share is still lying in the grain elevators.
You've been deprived of the means of getting that grain.
p33 A commission of theologians in 1939 unanimously declared that
in Social Credit had no tinge of Socialism or Communism.
p35 Money born from a banker's pen comes into the world as a debt
owed by man. Money at its birth, is master. (Economists are its
With Social Credit finance, money comes forth as a servant of
man. Each child would have at its birth a right to a dividend, a share
in past capital.
p37 If each had enough to ward off want, we'd witness the birth
of economic security in a country which materially lacks nothing.
p38 From this security is born liberty.
p41 Under a regime where money is nothing more than a means of
fair distribution, amassing it no long confers the means of domination
p42 The result would be a maximum of efficiency with a minimum of
p43 Financial credit, money, would be issued at the rate of new
production and withdrawn at the rate of consumption.
p46 Social Credit requires the devoted efforts of numerous
apostles who are not afraid of ridicule and sacrifice from the spirit
of the Pharisees which reigns among the intellectual classes.
Credit is the correct estimate of capacity to achieve.
IN THE AGE OF ABUNDANCE
p27 If a system
is detrimental to the masses, do we let them
suffer or change the system?
Since money has been created to facilitate production and
distribution, should we limit production and distribution to our money
or put money into sync with the production and distribution?
Under the present banking system, money rules the production and
p32 Economics has a goal: to satisfy the needs of men.
p39 Social Credit philosophy is corporate philosophy unfettered
by financial restraints.
p44 The real problem is not scarcity as decried by economists but
abundance as demonstrated by voluntary destruction of production.
p45 Production is a long way from trying to satisfy needs. It's a
production calculated to satisfy profit motives. Greed.
p51 Under present economic rules, personal participation in
production is necessary to obtain title to that production. Wages. We
must disassociate title to production from personal contribution.
p54 Engineers have harnessed the forces of nature to replace the
forces of man. p55 No one doubts Canada's ability to house, clothe and
feed everyone. Yet, how many are sure to have a part sufficient to
care for them and their families? p56 Real demand arises from real
need. As long as there are hungry people, there is a real demand for
food. Unsheltered? A real demand for housing. Sick? Demand for doctors
and health care. This demand is only effective when it has title to
production, money. Demand is a function of the selling pressure. It
must jive with the prices of the seller, not the needs of the
consumer. The humane solution is to render the money where there is
need, not create need where there is money.
p57 Doesn't it make sense that real demand is the proper
objective of production? And that first and foremost, this real demand
should be satisfied? We must therefore 1) first produce enough for all
the needs of all, 2) institute an economic system that assures
universal and automatic distribution to all. Once this is achieved, we
can concentrate on the production and winning of luxury goods. All
financial difficulties are of a secondary nature. If the financial
system cannot deliver the required service, it has failed and must be
p63 Where did the billions of dollars come from that the
government used to finance the second world war with when, in the
previous ten years, there weren't enough to finance simple ordinary
production? Where were the dollars during the depression that financed
the country so well before the crash?
p64 Why did those who created the money to finance the war not
create it to finance production?
p68 And how was it that the youth who hit the streets for years
because there was no money could immediately be called up, dressed,
housed, armed, and transported to take part in the European butchery?
Why, because the banks created all the credit necessary to finance the
war but they wouldn't finance the production of wealth.
p69 After all, money is easy for a banker to make. Yet, before
the war, the world was in hell because no government ordered them to
start financing. Since government can't print money and it can't pump
out of people more than was put in, (interest) it is doomed to forever
being in debt because of the interest on the credit created by the
p70 Since winners need extra for interest payments, even with
sharing, there must be losers.
p71 We were are the mercy of those who make and retire money.
Money is put into circulation by lending it out and sticking interest
p72 Multiple bankruptcies of companies, mortgages on mortgages,
and ever increasing public debt are the natural effect of such a
p76 We want a system that puts money into circulation according
to our physical possibilities and needs. The efficient banker's only
function is to put money into and out of circulation according to the
number of ergs in the real game. Money should come out of the
country's capacity to produce and with respect to the demand for
possible goods. The Canadian war effort was made possible by ignoring
the artificial obstacles, the financial ones. Social Credit isn't
Communist because private industry remains as does private property.
p99 There is abundance but it is kept under lock and key because only
those with the privilege of contributing to its production have the
right, via wages, to a part of it. The others, nothing.
p101 The dividend allows the poor to consume products that
otherwise would go to waste.
p109 Price is a mathematical question.
p110 An article's exact price is the sum of the energy expended
in its production.
p115 If a certain product is not wanted, it won't be bought and
its production will cease. The Social Credit banker keeps money in
linear relationship to energy. There will be no inflation because
there will be no absence of products given the demand of money.
p118 We must therefore distinguish between real credit and
financial credit. Real credit grows at the same rate as the productive
capacity of the country. Financial credit should reflect the real
credit. This is not the case. In the 1930s, Canada hadn't lost its
real credit, its capacity to do work, yet it lost its capability of
access to financial credit where required. Real credit is our useful
capacity. Financial credit is at the mercy of the bankers whose
profits are more important than our well-being. It is under
international influence and not representative of our production or
p121 Money, created by banks to represent the real credit, has
one fundamental flaw. From some inconceivable privilege, the banks
treat this credit as their own to be lent out at interest to the
authors of the real credit. Also, the real money credit is only
temporary because it must be retired on a schedule even when the real
credit base continues to exist. The plant increases the real credit of
the country and the money game should reflect that fact. Present
banking doesn't. Social Credit banking does.
p125 Money shouldn't dictate production. It should register it.
So far, money dictates.
SOCIAL CREDIT MONETARY THEORY
1) National control of money;
2) Accurate accounting of the real credit;
3) Creation of new money with new energy;
4) Accurate sharing of automated production.
p135 Social Credit is society as servant to all. We could
imprison those who break windows to get at goods or imprison those who
cause the unbuyable production to accumulate.
p136 The banks have monopolized money and credit and change the
nation's progress into debt.
p137 The economic monopoly and the political monopoly seem to
have a gentlemen's agreement to protect each other at the expense of
p142 The national dividend is the only measure of social security
that neither binds nor humiliates. It also ensures maximum production
by delivering maximum demand. Because there didn't exist the means to
purchase, haven't we before destroyed wealth?
p145 Consumers can properly effect demand when they have the
proper amount of money in hand. It loses its power of dominance since
the financial means exist to get done all that is physically possible.
The national dividend will increase as wage earners are replaced by
more efficient machines.
p164 Isn't the social organization that multiplies the production
possibilities also a common asset? Shouldn't each citizen from the
cradle to the grave, being a capitalist, co-proprietor of the common
capital, not draw a dividend on this common capital when this capital
produces? We will draw the dividend on the common capital.
p172 Social Credit tames money. It is master and facilitates
p173 The industrialist registers the development of his plant and
the banker issues the new dollars.
p176 Without a previous economic crisis, it would be hard to get
the happy working men to go an butcher each other in a war.
p177 Under a system of inadequate money, we can capture an
opponent's market with great calm. This is impossible under Social
Credit. How many businessmen have cheated and stolen because they
couldn't have otherwise survived?
p176 You will kill in order to survive. Business is business. In
this way does the present system enslave man.
P177 Under Social Credit, money is born without debt in the hands
of the consumers.
p180 According money the power to grow is unnatural, yet bankers
demand that the money reproduces under penalty of confiscation of
property or of liberty.
p182 The national dividend is perfectly justifiable if there is
plenty of production.
p184 Banks place savings in the hands of profitable business
regardless of utility.
p196 It's irrational to accept a system of rare money in the face
of so much real wealth.
p213 Who are the non-wage earners? The young, the old, the weak,
p217 Production accounting is adequate but the distribution
accounting isn't. Social Credit is the only scientific money system.
p227 If we could freely serve up, with no financial restraints,
bombs for the Germans, why not freely serve up food for Canadians?
Replace destructive devices by constructive ones and keep them.
p231 The industry pledges its acquired assets as collateral.
These guarantees are in the hands of the bankers. He cannot lose. He
is the major beneficiary of progress that he has no part in creating.
Around the sovereign banker or lender are attached the powerful
monopolies that suffocate competition and foul the economic air. The
present money representation of our progress is an injustice. A theft.
IN THE AGE OF ABUNDANCE
The abundance of good, introduced into the world since man
discovered the means of transforming energy and harnessing the forces
of nature to his service, ought to be reflected in economic security
for all which means, at the very least, modest material comfort in
every home and an era of good joyful and peaceful social relations
among individuals and nations.
Unfortunately, the pictures that catches the eyes in all the
civilized counties in the world is quite different.
In front of an abundance of goods that pile up, except when they
are destroyed in wartime, destitution takes place.
Elevators and warehouses are full to overflowing; shop windows,
newspapers, radio and TV announce everywhere a wide range of products
while people in their homes have to do without food, and use fags and
old furniture longer than ordinary.
"What percentage of our population is merely existing rather than
enjoying the use of available and sufficient wealth to live in
reasonable comfort? At least three-fourths of our population" Rev.
Charles Coughlin, Money, page 26.
But quotations are hardly necessary. Most readers have only to
examine their situation and that of their neighbors. So who, today,
has his or her future assured?
No one doubts that, tomorrow, Canada can continue to supply in
plenty what is needed in terms of food, clothing and housing. But how
many7 are assured of having a sufficient share for themselves and for
their families, tomorrow, the day after tomorrow, next year?
The number of unemployed and of laid-off workers should,
logically, show an overabundance of goods and that consumption has
reached saturation point. But this number expresses, above all,
sufferings and desperation.
The goods are there in front of human needs. So shy do these
goods not fill these existing needs? What does prevent the economy
from reaching its ends?
Why is it that the consumers who have so many unsatisfied needs
cannot use these goods made for them?
The existence of widespread poverty in front of so much
production and of a huge unused production capacity is a terrible
accusation against the distributive organism.
Never has supply been so great. In front of this supply, is there
actually no demand?
Demand exists. But the title to supply, the right to have it, is
wanting; this title is money.
REAL DEMAND; EFFECTIVE
On should make a distinction between real demand and effective
The real demand ensues from real needs. As long as there are
people who are hungry, there is a real demand for food. As long as
there are people without proper shelter, there is a real demand for
housing. As long as there are sick people, there is a real demand for
medicine and medical care.
But this real demand becomes effective only if it presents money,
the title to production.
Effective demand exists only where money is united to needs.
Under the present economic system, one usually notices a lot of
real demands without the titles that would make them effective. The
producers, forced to recover their expenses, look for places where
there is still some money left, and then do everything possible to
create a demand. This is to sell under pressure, which no longer
answers the needs of the consumers, but the needs of the producers.
This is a reversal of the economic order. The consumers become
exploited victims and no longer the master to serve.
The humane solution would be to put money where the needs are,
thus making the real demand effective; and not to create artificial
needs where the real demand does not exist.
Major Douglas points out that to reconciliate the real demand and
the capacity to pay, the will-to-power will have to be defeated by the
will-to-freedom, and that this reconciliation involves a modification
of the distributive system. (See Economic Democracy, page 90.)
He adds with a sound of conception of the end of economics:
"No if there is any sanity left in the world at all, it should be
obvious that the real demand is the proper objective of production and
that it must be met from the bottom upwards, that is to day, there
must be first a production of necessaries sufficient to meet universal
requirements; and secondly, an economic system must be devised to
ensure their practically automatic and universal distribution; this
having been achieved it may be followed to whatever extent may prove
desirable by the manufacture of articles having a more limited range
of usefulness. All financial questions are quite beside the point; if
finance cannot meet this simple proposition, then finance fails and
will be replaced."
Since production exists to satisfy the needs of the consumers and
since according to regulations generally accepted, the consumers must
present money to draw upon production, the money in the hands of the
consumers must be in keeping with tier needs, combined with the
country's productive capacity. If this is not so, money works against
the consumers, therefore against man. In this case, a change is
NO TO COMMUNISM
It is because the present money system hinders the satisfaction
of the consumers' needs that certain people propose the abolition of
money. According to them, the State would then seize all of the
production that is not consumed by its authors and would itself
distribute it to all the members of the community.
This is the Communist solution, which nobody wants in our
Yet, one cannot approve of the immobilization of goods and
production in front of urgent needs.
We do not even consider the dictatorial solution, where it is no
longer the consumers who express their needs: a superman dictates to
all what they should have and to production what it should do. IN such
a system, guns may well be produced at the expense of bread.
MONEY FOR ALL
There is another solution, the solution which, in putting money
in all hands of the consumers, of ALL consumers, gives them ALL the
right to choose products. Then the consumers really orient production.
It is the Social Credit solution. It brought a sociologist to write:
"And if you want neither Socialism nor Communism, bring Social
Credit in array against them. It will be in your hands a powerful
weapon with which to fight these enemies."
But you must first study this money question, to understand
whence the shortcomings of the monetary system, and how to make it
work and fulfill its role.;
The situation comes down to this inconceivable thing: all the
money in circulation comes only from the banks. Even coin or paper
comes into circulation only if it has been released by the banks.
But the banks put money into circulation only by lending it out
at interest. This means that all money in circulation has come from
the banks and must some day return to the banks, increased with the
The banks remain the owners of the money. We are only the
borrowers. If some manage to hang on to their money for a long period
of time, or even permanently, others are necessarily incapable of
fulfilling their commitments.
A multiplicity of personal and corporate bankruptcies, mortgages
upon mortgages, and ever-increasing public debts, are the natural
fruits of such a system.
Charging interest on money as it comes into existence is both
illegitimate and absurd, antisocial and contrary to good arithmetic.
The monetary defect is therefore as much a technical defect as a
As our country grows, in production as well as in population,
more money is a must. But it is impossible to get new money without
contracting a debt which collectively cannot be paid.
So we are left with the alternatives of either stopping growth or
getting into debt; of either plunging into mass unemployment or into
an unrepayable debt. And it is precisely this dilemma that is being
debated in every country.
Aristotle and Saint Thomas Aquinas wrote that money does not
breed more money. But the bankers bring money into existence only
provided that it breeds more money. Since neither governments nor
individuals create money, no one creates the interest claimed by the
bankers. Even legalized, this form of issue remains vicious and
DECLINE AND DEGRADATION
This way of creating our country's money, by forcing governments
and individuals into debt, establishes a real dictatorship over
governments and individuals alike.
The sovereign government has become a signatory of debts to a
small group of profiteers. A minister, who represents 26 million men,
women and children, signs unrepayable debts. The banker, who
represents a clique interested only in profit and power, manufactures
our country's money.
This is one striking aspect of the degeneration of power of which
the Pope spoke: governments have surrendered their noble functions and
have become the servants of private interest.
John C. Turmel, B. Eng.
a comment to John Turmel