Money v. Currency

One of the problems with talking about things other people either don’t know anything about, or (more often) who are operating within a different “paradigm” (“a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated”) is that matters can often get . . . confused.  People often use the same word with different meanings, while some even change the meaning of words within a single sentence, sometimes without realizing they are doing it.

How to Stimulate Economic Growth

Yesterday we noted that fiddling with the tax system does not really affect the aggregate rate of economic growth.  Assuming that the government is not emitting bills of credit and inflating the currency and that private opportunists also are not printing their own money, the amount of spending in the economy will remain the same, regardless of the tax rate, even if the tax rate is 100%.

About That Corporate Tax Rate

The “conservatives” claim that taxing corporations less will stimulate the economy, result in new capital formation, and create jobs.  The “liberals” claim that taxing corporations less will mean taxing people more, depress the economy, result in new capital formation, and destroy jobs.

Birth of the British Currency School

For quite some time, we have been making references to the “Currency Principle” versus the “Banking Principle.”  Understanding the differences between the two is key to understanding today’s problems with money and credit, and why adherence to the Currency Principle precludes restoring Say’s Law of Markets and establishing and maintaining a society characterized by widespread capital ownership.  So here goes —

News from the Network, Vol. 10, No. 47

Even with the mid-week holiday and two days without internet access (long story), things have been moving well along, with great strides being made in a number of areas.  This is encouraging, because things often slow down at this time of year, whereas for us they seem to be picking up:

Happy Thanksgiving!

Since you should have better things to do today than read even this blog, we'll let you off the hook with a brief holiday greeting:

Happy Thanksgiving

And if you want something more. . . .

A Pecuniary Paradox

Today we look at one of the more bizarre, even baffling paradoxes that afflicts the modern global economy, albeit one that has become so engrained in monetary and fiscal policy as to rank as unquestioned — and unquestionable — dogma of The Great Defunct Economist, He Who Reigns Above All Other Economists, Alive or Dead.  In case the heavy-handed sarcasm hasn’t alerted you to whom we refer, that’s John Maynard Keynes.

Who Invented Social Justice?

Judging from current literature, lectures, and what-not, “social justice” is just another name for socialism.  Is that really the case, though, given that, e.g., the Catholic Church has been extremely supportive of social justice, but “down” on socialism?  Are socialism and social justice really just different names for the same thing?

The Just Third Way Hour Podcast

The latest Just Third Way Hour podcast features an interview with Michael D. Greaney, CESJ’s Director of Research.  Greaney relates about how he learned about CESJ, and talks about his two upcoming books.

News from the Network, Vol. 10, No. 46

Even with the “Holiday Season” right around the corner next week, things are happening on the Just Third Way front.  The CESJ core group has put together the outlines of the presentation that could be the basis of a lecture or an interview, new podcasts are being recorded on schedule, and the new and revised publications are on track:

The Nature of Truth

You get into the strangest arguments on the internet . . . and sometimes they really are arguments, that is, “a coherent series of reasons, statements, or facts intended to support or establish a point of view.”  Not like what we got into, thankfully just on the fringes.

Faith or Reason?

A while back we got into a rather pointless argument — with a lawyer, no less — about whether the natural law is discerned by faith, or by reason.  Despite what you might think, it was the lawyer who argued for a faith-based understanding of natural law!  (And he was supposed to be an expert on constitutional law, too, oy weh.)

Random ESOP Musing

As we may have mentioned once or twice in the past, we like to get questions from our loyal readers . . . “loyal” being defined as anyone with a query that does not begin, “Are you stupid-insane-crazy, etc., etc., etc., for saying something with which I disagree, misunderstand, or can’t pronounce?  (The answer, by the way, is “yes.”)

The Just Third Way Hour Podcast

We’ve been a little remiss in posting the link to the CESJ podcast, scheduled for release on a weekly basis . . . so here are the first few weeks’ worth.  The newest one is always at the top, so if you want to catch up, or use the podcasts as an informal Justice University class on the Just Third Way (albeit without a syllabus or grading. . . .) start at the bottom and work your way up.  These are mainly informal talks about matters relating to the Just Third Way, so tune in and turn on to the Just Third Way with your host, Bryan Vosper:

News from the Network, Vol. 10, No. 45

A number of CESJ initiatives have made a great deal of progress this week.  We have been talking with people from across the globe and even in the United States, as can be seen from this week’s news items.  Our electronic outreach seems to be having some effect, and the social media, podcasting, and now even television are starting to pick up on the Just Third Way:

VI. Reinventing Religion

Far from being a “religious” problem, what has been happening with respect to social justice affects the whole of society.  The fact remains, however, that — at the same time — the issue is “religious” in that what eventually became known as socialism first arose within Christianity as an alternative to the existing economic, political, and religious order, and based on a different idea of the dignity of the human person.

V. “Doing” Social Justice

No virtue — and social justice is a virtue — can be imposed by force, a monopoly of the State, (human) nature’s only legitimate monopoly.  Force can be used to prevent injustice or punish wrongdoing, but not to impose virtue.  Everyone is free to be unvirtuous, as long as in being so he or she does no harm thereby to others or to the common good.

IV. Foundation of Confusion

As a follow-up to last week’s look at social justice, yesterday we looked at social charity, that, just as individual charity is the “soul” of individual justice, is the “soul” of social justice.  We discovered that (as Father Ferree put it) in social justice nothing is impossible . . . even if the institution in need of reform is social justice itself!

III. The First Step

Last week we looked into the real understanding of social justice: the virtue that reforms institutions to make individual virtue possible once again, but does not replace individual virtue.  What do we do, however, when social justice is the very institution that needs reform?

News from the Network, Vol. 10, No. 44

Some new initiatives, the near-completion of others, and restarting still others have marked this week.  As the end of the year approaches, this bodes well for continued success in the coming year:

II. The Problem (and Solution) of Social Justice

Yesterday we raised the question about what to do when the institution of social justice, the virtue directed to correcting institutions, is the very institution that is in need of correction.  Fortunately, the paradox of the very institution essential to reform being itself in need of reform resolves itself — up to a point.

I. A Question of Human Dignity

Modern society, if there are any doubts, is in serious trouble.  Over the last two centuries, the institutions of civil, religious, and domestic society — State, Church, and Family — have been revised, reformed, and reinvented to the point that these chief props of human dignity have become, to all intents and purposes, meaningless.