Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
Christian based service movement warning about threats to rights and freedom irrespective of the label, Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
Edmund Burke

Science of the Social Credit Measured in Terms of Human Satisfaction
7 February 1975. Thought for the Week: "A man giving testimony in a court of law has to swear, so help him God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. If he lies under oath he is guilty of perjury, the penalties for which are rightfully drastic."
"But governments - the 'State, that coldest of all monsters', in Nietsche's words - are not brought into a court of law in the matter of credibility. They do not swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth....There is no judge or jury to sentence governments to penalties for perjury, so they use the Big Lie and get away with it. Or they would get away, if the mills of God did not grind exceeding small over the decades and centuries...."
"When governments resort to the Big Lie they abandon faith, hope, and love. They abandon faith in the people - and in reality; they abandon hope - that life is sound and integral that reality answers the genuine question...they try to turn the eyes of the soul toward darkness, toward the lie, And in so doing they sign their own death-warrant."
American poet E. Merrille Root in American Opinion.


"Canberra - The Whitlam Government has put its economic policy into reverse, The 'full astern' order was confirmed by yesterday's Cabinet decision to drop the capital gains tax and hold a special Premiers' conference on the economy. Cabinet also decided to refer the super phosphate bounty question to the Industries Assistance Commission - and to look at protection for the local color TV industry. On Tuesday Cabinet put quotas on car imports and approved measures to curb Government spending. These were all reversals of previous policies. They amount to an admission of failure by the Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam. The Government has now adopted almost all of the proposals it ridiculed when they were put forward last May by the Federal Opposition Leader, Mr. Snedden. ." Laurie Oakes in The Sun Melbourne, January 30th.

Asked why the Labor Government was now adopting policies it had previously criticised, that master of the art of double-talk, Dr. Jim Cairns, explained that they were not "appropriate" at the time they were advocated by Mr. Snedden. The economic situation has changed, and changed policies are necessary, patiently explained Dr. Cairns as if lecturing to students back at the Melbourne University where he taught, amongst other things, that "profits" were one of the great evils of society.

It is not so much the change in the economic situation, which has forced the Whitlam Government to reverse itself, but the Queensland election results, the growing loss of electoral support right throughout Australia, and the fear of an early Federal Election. But anyone who believes that there has been any genuine change of heart amongst the Socialists is deluding himself.

What Australians are witnessing is a Cairns-Whitlam dialectical step backwards in order to make further Socialist advances later. Prime Minister Whitlam is now only the junior partner as the dialectical step is performed. Dr. Cairns, the old Marxist from way back, author of The Silent Revolution, is the man in charge of policy making.

Those who have listened carefully to Dr. Cairns must have noticed that on the subject of the capital gains tax, a central plank of Labor policy for years, he has declined to promise that the proposed tax had been dropped permanently. And then there is the Dr. Cairns "six -point plan", which we have analysed in the past. That is being kept quietly in the background, but will be brought forward when the time is regarded as opportune.

Starting with the easing of the credit squeeze late last year, the reduction of company and income taxes, the cutting, then abolition of the deposit requirements on overseas investments, the curbing of public service salary increases, the gradual re-introduction of tariffs, the Cairns-Whitlam Government has finally embraced what Mr. Snedden talked about before the May Elections last year. It is true enough, and that he talks strongly on curbing Commonwealth spending - being careful not to be specific about how! - but what Australians are now seeing is the implementation of the Snedden programme. And the results are going to confirm what we predicted before and after the May Federal Elections - the finance-economic crisis is going to deepen and the high inflation rate continue. There would be little difference under Mr. Snedden.

When Prime Minister Whitlam told a press conference on January 29th, that there was "some risk" of the economy "over-shooting the mark in about a year's time", "But the great risk at the moment is unemployment" he was merely re-stating official Government policy: that continuing inflation is preferable to growing unemployment.

Dr. Cairns knows that inflation will continue and that it is the basic instrument, which will steadily erode the remains of the free society. Mr. Whitlam is a financial dunce, but he has at last got the message that the present dialectical step is essential for attempting to avoid an early Federal Election, which he would almost certainly lose. It is probable that Mr. Whitlam has bought himself a little time. Dr. Cairns new attitude towards the States will also help; but coming events are going to further demonstrate to Australians that until there is a change in present inherently inflationary financial policies, they must move from one disaster to the next, irrespective of the label of the Government at Canberra.

Mr. Snedden does make one valid point in arguing for an early election; that a change of Government must be regarded as an "economic tool" because this would provide the business world with some new confidence. For our own part, we feel that the sooner Mr. Snedden and his colleagues are placed in office the better, primarily to demonstrate beyond all argument what we have consistently warned about: that a Liberal-Country Party Government would, without a change of policy, create conditions leading to an open revolutionary situation.

At this critical point there should be a clear-cut alternative: surrender completely to the Marxists, or adopt the type of constructive anti-inflation policy embodied in the "Petersen Plan". Australians may have to face this alternative before 1975 is out.


"Federal Government measures to stimulate the economy are failing to create new jobs - employment opportunities are still disappearing at a fast rate." - The Age (Melbourne) February 4th.

On the same page in the Business Section of The Age is a headline-' Executives Tip A Gloomy Year." And this is in spite of the reversal of the credit squeeze, and confirms our view stated often in these pages last year that the Australian economy would move more deeply into "stagflation" during 1975.

Stagflation, a word firstly, to our knowledge, coined by Professor Walters at an address at Monash University in July 1971, is the modern economic "phenomenon" of a rising inflation rate, accompanied by industrial and commercial stagnation. Up to this time it had been an economic shibboleth that industrial and commercial stagnation would naturally reduce inflation. This "belief was the rationale of the Treasury economists, in recent times, of utilising deflationary measures, e.g. higher taxation, higher interest rates, credit squeezes, to "control" inflation.

The theory was; and some economists still cling to it, that inflation was generated by "demand": there was too much money chasing too few goods, and this evil state of affairs brought about such a situation that the price levels of consumer goods, and services, were "bid up". These economists were always delightfully vague when pressed to specify what goods were in short supply; the goods that were "too few" for money to buy. They got around this somehow, obviously to their satisfaction, by adopting the line that goods need not be unavailable to be in short supply. Some of the replies, which we sighted, would have made the Leprechauns of Old Erin as green with envy as the Emerald Isle itself at the wonderful state of confusion, which they (the economists) could create!

The stagflation is well and truly with us. Eighty percent of senior business executives, in a survey (The Age - Feb. 4th) said that they would be reducing staff levels this year, or at the most, only maintaining the present levels. Low profitability is the salient factor; and one does not need to be a business consultant to interpret the pattern. An almost daily reading of the business pages of the metropolitan dailies will reveal that such and such's profit for the December quarter is down 7.2%, and another nationally-known company had a fall of 47% net profit, as revealed by a worried Chairman in an address to anxious shareholders.

There is one reason for all this - Inflation. Higher wages and salaries; higher costs of materials; higher costs of money on which to operate. The confidence, or rather the lack of it, mentioned in the previous item certainly is an important factor also; it is one of the "real intangibles" without which any given economy cannot operate effectively. We can 't see this confidence returning so long as the Socialists are in charge of Australia's fortunes, the present tricky dialectical back stepping notwithstanding.


"And Mr. Hawke said that he was confident that communication between the Government and the electorate would improve dramatically in the coming months." - John Jost, reporting the Terrigal Labor Conference, The Age (Melb.) Feb. 4th.

We have often noticed this "line" taken by the Socialist ideologues. Their policies based on Fabian Socialist doctrine are ideologically sound, but "the masses" don't understand them. So, presumably "the masses" must be educated. They cannot as yet, as in the Soviet be "educated" by the K.G.B. and all the organs of the mass media, rigidly controlled by the State. Furthermore, those distressing elections keep interfering with the forward march of Socialism, and make the task of the Socialist ideologue so frustrating and sometimes abortive.
If only we had more power, say the Socialists; what wonderful things we could do.' So they set about filching every shred of power that they can; but it's nowhere near satisfactory.

The reality is, of course, that policies of high taxation, with inflation, are stripping the individual of so much of his economic independence that he if forced reluctantly, to accept aid from the State, on the State's terms, and especially in the vital areas of life - H.E.W. (Health, Education, Welfare.) But Mr. Hawke, and his fellow Socialist ideologues will need to do more than "communicate" to Australians: all their fancy talk won't save their political skins if inflation keeps rising and unemployment mounts.

It is likely that there will be a change of Government, more in spite of Mr. Snedden than because of him. The implications of such a change of Government are touched on in another item in this issue of On Target. However, we do think that Mr. Hawke sounded an alarm, which the Liberals and the Country Party, for that matter, would be foolish not to heed. Speaking to the Labor Conference at Terrigal, Mr. Hawke (perhaps papering over the cracks) contrasted Labor's "unity" to the apparent disarray of the Liberals; quote - "There is no certainty who the Australian people will have as an alternative Prime Minister (Liberal - Country Party). Is it Fraser or Peacock?" Mr. Hawke did not mention Mr. Snedden. We feel that the Socialists will definitely be able to score heavily off the Liberals on this point, and we can well understand the desire of some Liberals to have the leadership showdown again before the next election breaks.


"The Federal Government's Family Law Bill would lead to 'gross injustices and intolerable indignities, especially to women', Bishop Edward Kelly said yesterday." - The Age, (Melbourne) Feb. 3rd.

We have referred to the Family Law Bill (another of Senator Lionel Murphy's 'specials') in these pages recently, and have pointed out that it is, wittingly or unwittingly, an attack on the basis of marriage in the Christian sense. Marriage, in the Christian sense is the very basis of a stable family life, providing an environment of love and protection for the spiritual and physical growth and development of the young. The family, in the Christian sense, has been the basis of Western Christian Civilisation. They are now breaking down together; and we leave it to the moral philosophers to decide which of them is the chicken, and which the egg. The important point is that they are breaking down, and we are convinced, as are many Churchmen, such as Bishop Kelly, that Senator Murphy's Family Law Bill will hasten this process of family disintegration. It is definitely an attack upon the family.


We regret to inform supporters that there has been a further delay, over which we have no control, in the delivery of our shipment of Dr. Antony Sutton's literary nuclear missile, "National Suicide." The Western Australian League office has received some supplies but will be able to supply West Australian supporters only. A statement will be made as soon as possible concerning deliveries of this book to the head office.

Money Supply And Prices: As the only source of money is the credit which is made available by banks as loans or overdrafts to suppliers of goods and services it is obvious that all the money in circulation at any given time will be the money issued for current production. (Most of that which has been issued for previous production will have been spent by the people to whom it was paid as income, and will have returned to the banks, and been cancelled). It is equally obvious that the money, which is available to consumers, at any given time, to buy the goods and services available, will be mainly that which is issued as production at that time. These two statements are, of course, two different ways of speaking of the same money-issue; first from the producers' point of view, and then from the consumers'. This is the basis of the belief of those who claim that national income equals the value of national production.
Let us picture the situation as they see it. The producer draws upon his overdraft account to finance his working costs, and pays out of his overdraft money as wages, salaries, and payments for raw materials, tools and equipment. All of this money, in its final distribution, becomes someone's income. This amount of money is then available to buy consumer goods. If the producer markets his products at a price, which is made up of all the above-mentioned costs, and if each producer working on overdraft does the same it would seem that the money distributed should enable consumers to buy all that is produced. The producer, having sold all his goods, should have drawn back enough money from the community to pay off his overdraft; and the consumers should have the goods at prices they can afford. Why is the situation, in reality, so different?