it is just not harm reduction by any stretch of the definition when people die as a prohibition-related harm. (but never scrutinised under Health ministry’s National drug ‘harm minimisation’ policy framework, and prohibition harms rarely if ever advocated against by eco-justice party, despit being so deserving and such a vulnerable target - ‘poor public policy’ in helen clarks words, but why have the green party let Labour forget their commitment to reviewing the law (1998 resolution).

half the back-block murders, police shootings , prospective ‘taser’ incidents, and crime damage and ‘miscreancy’ eg youth justic outcomes, in nz is arguably prohibition related harm.’FUCK OFF COPS’ is a general sentiment in many of the circles i move in (not all underclass either i might add).

but Keith Locke has yet to mention and apears to have no concept of the War on Drugs - after 8 whole years of being the law and order, foreign policy expert. And Nandor has forgotten what is at the heart of injustice in NZ?

VERY STRANGE.

regds

The lawyer was right. The court and police however, were doing their job as dictated by the parliament of the people.

I have scant respect for the law. Some for the police, they don’t write the laws they are sworn to enforce, but none for the professional evaders of responsibility who make the law.

respectfully
BJ

Adjusting one little regulation under the misuse of drugs act, a shift from class C to D. How hard is that?

I’m not arguing for state mandated redistribution of income, but merely a redesign of the current economic system that was designed to favour and protect the privileges and dominance of one social class over another.

I don’t like the State anymore than you do, probably less, because I recognise the fact that it works far more in the interests of the capitalist classes than for the workers and I despise the compromising, paternalistic, oppurtunistic Fabians as much as you do.
http://www.mutualist.org/id7.html

One fact that I’m sure of is your intellectual honesty so I highly recommend you read this.
http://www.mutualist.org/id4.html

There is a long heritage of monetary reform analysis, from rocket scientists, engineers, prominet public servants, etc but it essentially boils down to what is above; bUT i can tell you from personal experience that the character of DSC at all levels is vastly different from that which i xperienced as a green, so it probably wouldn’t suit many here.

What incentive is there for most people to do jobs that they don’t like nowdays? If you’d notice te least satisfying jobs tend to be the ones that provide the least compensation. Cleaners, hospitality staff (cooks, dishwashers etc). Why is this the case? Because degrees of financial compensation is dictated by the tension between the bargaining power of capital and labour.

If capital has to compete for a limited supply of workers (such as after the Black Plague devasted the population of Europe) then labour has a strong bargaining position and can negotiate for better wages, but if labour has to compete for a limited number of jobs (such as when land owners forced the majority of peasants off previously commonly held land in the Enclosure movement during the Edwardian Period) then the bargain position shifts to favour capital who is then able to negotiate the wages down.

Perhaps I used the wrong word. Maybe inequitable would be more appropriate e.g. unfair and it certainly is an unfair world when one section of society consumes consumes 30% of the world’s resources despite having 5% of the world’s population.

I wonder if capital gains, rental of housing, and interest on investment is included in income distribution statistics, and the tax system favouring those that own land (LAQC, lack of capital gains tax, and ability to write off interest payments), because this country could be more inequitable than we currently realize if they aren’t included.
There are studies that convincingly link housing affordability to poverty.
http://www.cpag.org.nz/cgi-bin/htsearch?config=cpag&restrict=&exclude= &words=Housing+Affordability+MUL

“I would like to hear the pros and cons of a different structure. Is there a credible academic analysis somewhere?”

There are both credible academic analysis of the work of Silvio Gesell and emperical research on how his theories worked in practice something that neoclassical economics and neoliberalism lacks.
http://www.transaction.net/money/cc/cc04.html

Irving Fisher, Professor of Economics at Yale University visited Worgl after reading the writings of Silvio Gesell to witness the theories being successfully demonstrated and wanted to apply the same theories in the United States, but was opposed by FDR, because it would threaten Federal centralisation of economic planning and therefore his power.

A similar project is being run in Tyrol, German and its success is such that the German Central Bank has completed a study on it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2007/01/18/cneu ro18.xml

Jerome Blanc, The American Journal of Economics and Sociology
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-53449308.html

John Maynard Keynes wrote admiringly about the economic theory of Silvio Gesell (who influenced the designer of the currency of Worgl, Austria that I alluded to earlier) in his book General Theory of Employment, Money, and Interest, but his only disagreement was on the nature of interest when he said in his liquidity preference theory is that since people prefer to spend their money and those who decide to save should be rewarded for foregoing spending it.

Thats not why interest exists though.
Interest is a way for banker’s to attract capital to their institutions away from competing investment vehicles so that they can loan multiples of that money for interest, which is their primary means of profit. It is also useful for governments to contract and expand the money supply in the interests of the capitalist class as alluded to by John Kenneth Galbraith in his book the Good Society.

http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~roehrigw/keynes/engl.htm

Unfortunately that is the chief cause of economic instability for several reasons.

a) the interest component of the loan is not issued at the time that of issue so all business are competing for an insufficient supply of money, which means that businesses will fail unless the economy grows through the extension of greater amounts of credit.

b) at the beginning of the business cycle, firms tend to overinvest in production while both credit and labour are cheap, but as profits increase and employment rises, labour’s bargaining position is improved and are emboldened to demand pay increases, so in the interests of the capitalists the banks, but they don’t realise that their profits are determined by the demand for their products are dependant on the wages of their workers thus why there are frequent “business cycles”. Boom and Bust.

3) It reinforces itself as it encourages and rewards the hoarding of wealth, which insures an inadequate circulation of money supply, creating further demand for credit, and the concentration of wealth into the hands of a few.

4) It encourages and facilitates speculative investments, which have been the source of many economic crises since the institution of private banking was invested, going back to the first recorded bank run suffered in the time of Emporer Tiberius.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Influence_of_Wealth_in_Imperial_Rome  /The_Business_Panic_of_33_A.D.

I am not against pensions or benefits for those who genuinely qualify for the sickness or invalids benefit, however the rest are simply sponging off the tax payer.

But what incentive would there be to do the jobs no one likes doing, or the jobs the come with a lot of pressure and responsibility? If there is little differential in pay, then wouldn’t most people opt to go for the most personally satisfying job? Who would clean the gutters? Who would drive a taxi at 3 in the morning? Once you have pay differential, you have economic inequality.

In the Kibbutz movement, they eventually returned to money and pay structures.

I find the banking structures interesting. I have seen the video about the development of fiat currencies, although I sensed I was watching a propoganda piece, and wondered who was behind it.

I would like to hear the pros and cons of a different structure. Is there a credible academic analysis somewhere?