Something to consider. I Alberta the winter can be pretty harsh sometime. The Social Credit government established a specific and efficient road building and maintenance program that was owned and controlled by the people through the government. Much later the Conservative government decided that the government should not be in the business and it is better if the highway maintenance was handled by private contractors. The contracts were let.
The contractors together have available 1/13 the number of vehicles and equipment and for the entire province there are very few people on stand by for emergencies and the police, if they get assistance it is a very long wait. When the provincial government controlled the highway maintenance, not only were there 300 people on standby for weather emergencies but there were also always people for police and accident emergencies. The present system of using contractors is almost double the cost and in the winter the highways are closed most of the time as well as being closed whenever there is an accident. When the government did it the highways were always open and only a part of the highway was closed for accidents. The hospitals had a very efficient laundry system and supplied the hospitals with more than adequate linens. Now the Conservative government has contracted out the services, without tender it seems, to a good friend of the Premier and strong financial supporter. The cost is considerably more, almost double, the employees get paid minimum wages, between $5.80 and $8.00 per hour as opposed to wages paid by the government ranging between $10.00 and $21.00 per hour. The hospitals are very often without linens, I know because I am in the middle of taking a friend to the Cancer Clinic regularly, and even those it supplies often are old and worn and with holes. Chick ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bill Daly" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, May 19, 2003 2:21 AM Subject: Re: [SOCIAL CREDIT] employee ownership > on 18/5/03 1:49 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] at [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > > -->I don't know if Douglas considered employee > > ownership of production. I imagine that somewhere, he > > did, and someone more versed will tell me so?<-- > > > > The Draft Mining Scheme in *Credit-Power and > > Democracy* published 1920. > > > Douglas is also very clear in distinguishing between social ownership of > the means of production which is the objective of the > Socialists, and social ownership of the fruits of production. Obviously if > we can all get fair access to the fruits of the production system it doesn't > really matter who ownes the means of production. > The Socialists' focus on community ownership of the means of > production does, in practise, result in impoverishing production. It removes > the responsibility (and the accompanying rewards) away from those memebers > of society who are most competent and content to administer the production > system. It puts this administration into the hands of incompetents and > powerseekers. Witness the terrible fall in production and absence of > innovation after the Soviet revolution. > The Social Credit emphasis on social ownership of the fruits of > production is an entirely different objective that that of the Socialists. > it is interesting that both the Socialists and monopoly capitalists have > opposed Social Credit. It must be assumed that those in present positions > of power resulting from monopoly capitalism and Socialism want to retain > their power over the have-nots. > Their maintanence of a system that keeps poverty amidst plenty, or > potential plenty, keeps in with the false philosophical view that hardship > is good for people. The West's wage slave system is a result of the same > thinking as the old Soviet slave labour camp system. Michael identifies this > idea as "economic Calvinism". > Douglas discovered that it was not sufficient to simply explain to the > administrators of the banking system the "flaw" that he had discovered > during his work in British industries during WWI. The controllers of the > banking system, he discovered, actually believe that the lack of > widespread economic freedom is necessary in order to hold society together. > They believe in coercion not voluntary cooperation. they may even belive in > this with the greatest of sincerity; but they simply don't believe in > freedom. The debt sytem is a perfect reflection of this idea. > The Social Credit view, because it accepts that people should be > free, arrives at a different method for the administration of society's > financial accounting system. It is not overly useful debating various > financial technicalities until those involved make the decision of whther > they want everyone to have maximum freedom or if they prefer to see various > artificial controls placed on the freedom of others. Once this philosophical > outlook is sorted out - to one conclusion or the other - then it is a > relatively easy matter to work out which financial mechanisms will achieve > the particular results. > All of the Social Credit financial proposals are only a reflection of > the view that everyone - absolutely everyone - ought to have access to that > which has clearly been provided by the Creator. > Bill Daly > > > > ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84IaC.bcVIgP.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html ==^================================================================
