Bernard Hickey Recommends Using Social Credit Economic Policy

3
196

In May last year Treasury suggested the government and the Reserve Bank might have to consider ‘unconventional tools’ like Quantitative Easing and helicopter money, both of which are similar to Social Credit economic ideas.

The Reserve Bank this week announced that it was preparing to undertake QE, and today on National Radio, economic commentator and Newsroom Pro editor Bernard Hickey claimed the government needed to introduce a modified version of helicopter money – a Universal Basic Income, similar to National Superannuation, for all citizens.

Social Credit terms its concept a national dividend – under normal circumstances a payment to every citizen to replace income lost by the advancement of computerised workplaces and artificial intelligence (driverless taxis, robots as carers, automated factories).

Under today’s extreme circumstances it could be used, as Bernard Hickey recommends, as a short term measure to replace income lost through job losses, workplace closures, and business failures, ensuring that people have money to put food on the table, pay their bills, and keep the economy ticking over, to avert an even worse economic collapse.

The European Central Bank has just announced it will be doing $750 billion Euros of QE immediately, buying government bonds from banks and pension funds.

TDB Recommends NewzEngine.com

Our Reserve Bank could go one step further and purchase newly issued government bonds directly, rather than existing bonds from banks, to provide the government with a source of debt-free, zero-interest money at no cost to taxpayers to fund a basic income as part of the economic rescue package.

Using that method, taxpayers will not have to pick up the long term tab for billions in interest payments and the repayment of the debt which under standard QE simply provides bigger profits for the overseas shareholders of banks and other financial institutions.

Central banks buying government bonds directly is a common occurrence in Canada, Japan and China.

The Commonwealth Bank (Australia’s central bank at the time) supplied the Australian government with funding for major infrastructure development.

The first Labour government financed the building of thousands of state houses with Reserve Bank money.

Social Credit’s economic policies are now in demand, and we’re ready to assist the government in its efforts to help New Zealanders through the current crisis and to build a better long term future for Kiwis.

3 COMMENTS

  1. Q+A Excerpts

    Without massive government intervention, there will be several economic collapses.
    ….

    Q. How would the crisis continue?

    A. Effect number one is the collapse of much of the consumption of all kinds of services.

    A. Effect number two is the devaluation of equity. This will lead to massive restrictions on long-term purchases – indirectly through the devaluation of the pension rights and generally due to the loss of value creation.

    Q. Because people don’t buy a new car, for example?

    A. Yes, just like in 2008/2009, you postpone buying a car and all other long-living capital goods. This will affect some industries very specifically and massively.

    Q The next step would be that the companies can no longer sell their products and therefore release or dismiss workers?

    A. For sure.

    A. But there is a third factor that plays a role: the oil price, which has dropped to an extremely low level not only because of the Corona virus, but for other reasons as well. This will put an additional limitation on trade because some exports to the oil producing countries will collapse.

    A. But the low oil price – contrary to what one would expect – would also be catastrophic for some GHG reduction schemes.

    Q. Why this? Will CO₂ emissions not drop massively when no aircraft is flying and the industry is idle.

    A. For sure. But in the long term, such a low oil price would mean that many of the wonderful projects, such as emission trading schemes would have no chance of realization.

    A. Why? They are all based on limiting CO₂ emissions either through a CO₂ tax or through emissions trading.

    A. However, the latter would no longer be able to set price incentives that would be sustainable if the price of oil fell in this way, especially if it remained so for a long time, because the drop in oil prices would counteract everything.

    Q+A Excerpts of an interview with economist Stephan Schulmeister, Austria, (The Friday, 12/20). Free translation.

    • Many of the basic assumptions used are fraught with reductionist conclusions.

      Bank loans are not too different to quantitative easing by the RBNZ except NZ doesn’t have to pay the RBNZ back. The profit goes to NZ.
      With bank loads also made with fresh air, the profit from this loan money generation goes to private bank shareholders plus added interest on the money”loaned” that the banks didn’t have until the made the “loan”. When the loan is “paid back” they have the money.
      The biggest racket run by a global cartel of banksters and powerful wealthy agencies that can bring down non complying governments. We imported the system from Westminster.

      Good on you Bernard

      • Fincancializarion since ruthinasia and rofernomics was always about separating you from your money. The banks have become the masters withs it’s To-Big-To-Fail-Doctrine. It’s time to make the masters of the banking clans the servants again. No bail outs of banks, it’s time to nationalize or buy stakes in them.

Comments are closed.