Social Credit policy

Press, 18 November 1981, Page 16

Social Credit policy

Sir,—Over the years “The Press” has, with monotonous regularity, run an editorial on the folly of voting Social Credit, and this year has been no exception. The past record, peculiar to both National and Labour, shows that despite the fact that we produce more, we continue to go deeper and deener into debt. In the best years that this nation ever knew, when we were getting a pound for a pound of Merino wool, we still borrowed. Our present foreign debt is $ll,OOO million; our internal debt this year was $2OOO million and we have recently borrowed $lOOO million in Swiss francs. Inflation, unemployment, taxes, rates and crime are increasing. If this is a System working well, let’s try Social Credit.— Yours, etc., JOHN J. FORSTER. November 16, 1981.

Sir,—Congratulations on your politically biased editorial on Monday. It helps to explain the lack of policy releases and the positioning of those that have been published in this paper over the last few months. The league’s finance policy is nonsense? Keynes used much of nolicy in his own system (our present system), the basic difference being that he believed, as both the alternative parties must believe, that inflation was desirable. This is the major differ-

ence between the two finance systems. Of our present inflation of 20 per cent only about 7 per cent is overseas induced as can be confirmed by talking to any economist. The balance is caused by the present financial system. Reserve Bank credit is used by the present Government and was advocated by Walter Nash. In the first five years of Labour power under Savage a Social Credit system was used; it. worked then.— Yours, etc., 808 AUTRIDGE. November 16, 1981.

Sir,—As you well know, it is possible to report selectively from any book, any article, be it the Bible, “Das Capital,” or a manifesto of your choice, to make something appear contradictory. Your editorial (November 16, 1981) is an excellent example of selective reporting at its worst. Even in the first paragraph the prejudice of the writer shows up with, such emotive terms as “curse” and “soft-pedalled,” which are reflected throughout the article. People who read editorials generally look for something written with a little less “bile in the liver,” which is more helpfully reasoned and with greater objectivity. To attack a whole policy on the basis of one part — and that ripped violently out of context — shows wanton editorial bias, which most Social Creditors would be disappointed to see in your paper. “Nihil utile quod non honestum” — “nothing is useful which is not honest.”— Yours, etc., RICHARD BACH, Political Executive, N.Z.S.C.P.L. November 16, 1981.

Sir,—ln your attack on Social Credit financial policies you talk of electors being bamboozled, but you conveniently ignore the real fact that under the present National and Labour financial policies, which you support, the electors are not only being bamboozled but are systematically being ripped off. Instead of attacking Social Credit, why not devote equal space and effort in explaining exactly how the present financial policies function?' You could explain how both National and Labour permit private financial institutions to print and create millions of costless Credit and then lend it out as an interest-bearing debt. Also you should give your reasons for supporting such immoral usury, but please, refrain from attempting to bamboozle the readers by using economic mumbo-jumbo in the process. Give one sound reason why you are opposed to the government exercising its rightfuL prerogative to control the creation and issue of the nations credit.—Yours, etc., H. R. PIERSON. Hokitika, November 16, 1981. [We do not see that discussing a central feature of Social Credit policy is ripping something. out of context. Anyone can read the league’s manifesto and assess the argument for themselves. We believe that the public should be alerted to the nature of the central policies of the league. We do not object to the exercise of government? control over the volume of money in the economy; it is essential. Private financial institutions do not “print” money (credit) and. their lending is based on their own borrowing dr accumulated assets, which are not without cost—Editor]