Текст книги "Ford and Stalin. How to Live in Humaneness"
Автор книги: (IP of the USSR) Internal Predictor of the USSR
сообщить о нарушении
Текущая страница: 24 (всего у книги 32 страниц)
[25] This suggests that banks should not be the usurers’ «kolkhozes» («collective farms») (among their number are not only the stockholders who own the bank but also the average depositors who receive their share of the bank’s usurious income by means of interest on deposits), they should be investment funds which can lend help to any entrepreneur starting a new business or expanding the existing one for the benefit of the society.
[26] Raising the price by $100 – taking into account the necessity to clear not only the loan interest ($4 per car) but the loan itself. The effect a $100 increase in price would have is illustrated through the table given by Ford in his book. The table reflects the trends of car output and reduction of prices for a 12-year time period.
Time period
Price in USD
Output of cars
1909 – 10
950
18 664
1910 – 11
780
34 528
1911 – 12
690
78 440
1912 – 13
600
168 220
1913 – 14
550
248 317
1914 – 15
490
308 213
1915 – 16
440
533 921
1916 – 17
360
785 432
1917 – 18
450
706 584
1918 – 19
525
533 706
1919 – 20
575 to 440
996 660
1920 – 21
440 to 335
1 250 000
Ford is nearly apologizing for the rise in prices and the fall in output occurring in 1918 – 1919. He adds the following comment to the table: «The two latest years were the years of war, and the factory was busy with military orders» (Ch. 10. “How Cheap Can One Manufacture Goods?”)
The second half of the 20th century was characterized by different macroeconomic parameters and the trend in car prices was also different: in the early 1960’s stock-produced (i.e. without tailoring the car to the customer’s specific requirements) «Lincoln» and «Cadillac» cars (American luxury cars of the same class as «Chaikas» made at the Gorky car factory if anyone still remembers those) cost about 5000 dollars; in the early 1970’s their price rose to $7000; in the 1990’s stock-produced cars of this class cost around $60000 – 70000. This is just one of the many examples of the accelerating price growth during these 40 years that takes place while science and technology make regular progress. This progress should reduce production costs further and further yet it is hampered by system-forming bank usury. Price growth made emission of dollars necessary in order to maintain the population’s solvent demand, this led to the dollar’s loss of purchasing power and is one of the reasons which caused the global financial and economic misfortunes of the late 20th and early 21st century.
[27] And in fact it was a dependence on usurers. In this quotation and below in all the occasions when lending loans on interest is meant the word «banker» was substituted for the word «usurer». The reasons have been explained above.
[28] The American writer Vidal Gore (a relative of the former US Vice-president Albert Gore, George Bush junior’s rival in the 2000 presidential election, Jacqueline Kennedy’s stepbrother) in his interview to the RTR channel (broadcast on the night of March 15/16th, 2002) disagreed with the maxim lately much overused by the Russian reformers whose authorship they attribute to Leo Tolstoy, namely, «patriotism is the last resort of rascals». Vidal Gore said that in our historic era «reform is the last resort of rascals».
[29] When financial and economic processes taking place in a society are described in terms of a mathematical science known as «game theory» it turns out that the institution of loan on interest is a game with a nonzero sum. It means that this is a game where only one side is pre-programmed to win by the very principles the game is based on without any alternatives. In our case this side is the usurer, and in the historic reality it is the international mafia corporation of usurers.
The usurer (corporation of usurers) maintains loan interest at a level exceeding production growth rate measured in constant prices. By these means the debtor’s paying capacity and the paying capacity of anyone who buys from the debtor passes over to the usurer’s purse because the loan to be paid back together with the interest is included into the product’s cost and price. This way the corporation of usurers parasites on the entire society regardless whether the society employs a financial and credit system or is engaged in natural economy.
[30] A non-usurious banker should get a different training. He should be concerned with the multiindustrial production and product distribution aimed at serving the morally healthy interests of people, state institutions and public organizations. He should view the policy on investments, credit and insurance only as a means to control multiindustrial production and distribution aimed at serving public interests.
[31] This is true. In the history of modern global civilization the usurious banker’s position within the capitalist system of the Western type is a system-forming factor programmed by the Bible’s sociology. This was discussed more than once in the books “The Brief Course...”, “The «Rupture» of Economy Should be Excised” and other written by the Internal Predictor of the USSR. From this point the usurer’s domination is a forced domination. The domination is based on the fact that the institution of loan on interest is a game with nonzero sum where the corporation of usurers is pre-programmed to win without an alternative. Yet they are not the masters of the «game». They are merely an instrument.
[32] That is people capable of controlling the inter-industry proportions of investments and the rhythm of investments within industries during the process of their technological re-equipment. Non-usurious bankers are required to do nothing else.
[33] This way they reveal their own folly by denying others to be intellectuals upon the principle: «If you are so smart, show me your money?» The answer to this question mainly should be as follows: «You’ve got it thanks to me and to many others».
[34] See the novel by an American writer E. Sinclair (1878 – 1968) “The motor-car king” (1937) that was published in the USSR and re-published several times while books by Ford himself were locked up in «spets-hrans» («special depositories»). This is how V. Lenin described E. Sinclair: «… a socialist of senses, theoretically uneducated».
[35] He once held the posts of President Yeltsin’s advisor on economic issues, the minister of economics in 1996 – 1997, at present (first quarter of 2002) he is a free-lance advisor on economics to the government of the Russian Federation.
[36] To be precise it was not Ford who invented the assembly line, yet it was Ford who was successful in applying it. The assembly line was known and used since times immemorial. For example one of the sources on shipbuilding history reports that in Venice galleys were built on the assembly line (to provide re-enforcements to the fleet in the shortest time possible) as early as the Middle ages. There was a well worked-through project, mass production of standard hull and sparring (masts and other parts of rig) components stocked in advance. After the hull was assembled on the building berth and launched it was towed along a canal on the banks of which there were warehouses and workshops. Equipment and outfit to be mounted on the ship were taken from those warehouses and loaded on board. A turnkey fighting unit was built in less than 24 h.
[37] And why not taking up the post of Chairman of the State planning committee of the USSR? – Ford’s world understanding is more in line with conscientious work in this office than with abusing his authority in the rank of a factory’s director in pursuit of personal enrichment which would be an example of what Livshits calls a «business talent». It was people of Ford’s way of thinking (not the people who shared the outlook of academician A. Aganbegyan, A. Livshits, E. Gaidar, M. Fridman and other gangsters under guise of scholars) that were lacking in the Gosplan (State planning committee) of the USSR and the Gosplans of Soviet republics, in the high school and science in general, and we shall make this evident later on.
[38] Is it really so that the mafia of usurers in Russia – mostly peopled by Jews – is inferior in its fierceness to the Russian bureaucracy, where Jewish positions (exactly how it is prescribed by the doctrine of Deuteronomy, Ch. 23:19, 20; Isaiah Ch. 28:12, Ch. 60:10 – 12, see Supplement 1) are also strong? And what is the money that industry and not some abstract «business» spends on usurious bankers made up by? – Under Livshits and Chernomyrdin loan interest rates used to soar up to 240 % per year and have never dropped below 20 %. Is it not a vicious act of sabotage?
[39] Livshits could very well have alluded to Lenin here. «Don’t you dare to give orders!» – was one of the demands Lenin made of party executives who sought to take part in controlling economy at the very start of building socialism. Thus it is only the covers and slogans that change, the problems remain the same…
[40] In a crowd-“elitist” society where the “elite” is also a crowd living by tradition and judging by authority (this is how the sociological term «crowd» is defined) this statement means: the crowd is always right. This way one can get deep into troubles by indulging to corrupted and perverted crowd and following its tastes…
[41] And this is a reluctance to deal with the issue of the objectivity of Good and Evil and an effort to impose somebody’s subjective idea of them pretending that it is an objective one.
[42] A. Livshits asks a rhetorical question:
«How can one manufacture cars when banks do not give long-term loans?»
Ford answered him in his book a long time before A. Livshits was born:
«Borrowing for expansion is one thing; borrowing to make up for mismanagement and waste is quite another. You do not want money for the latter – for the reason that money cannot do the job. Waste is corrected by economy; mismanagement is corrected by brains. Neither of these correctives has anything to do with money».
[43] Rather, they refuse to see and turn their back on this problem when it is pointed out directly. The analytical notes “On the Nature of Bank Activities and Improvement of Well-Being” and “On the Check Parameters of the Macroeconomic System and Organizing its Self-Control in a Socially Acceptable Mode” have been distributed in the State Duma and sent to the Ministry of economics that was at that time headed by professor E.Yasin with Ya. Urinson as one of his deputies (both of them of Jewish origin). The Duma kept silence, and the Ministry of economics replied politely that if we are concerned with publishing a thesis we should apply to the Academy of science and universities and not to their institution.
[44] «The Institute of the transition period economy» which has been headed by E. Gaidar for several years takes up a special place within this system. If given a name corresponding to the nature of his activity the institute would be called: «The Institute of CREATING ECONOMIC PROBLEMS» which it cannot provide solutions for due to feeble-mindedness».
[45] The bank system on the whole performs the following tasks on the macro level of the economy:
is engaged in accounting of the macro level (keeps counts and transfers monies, accompanying purchase and sale deals of the majority of microeconomic subjects, at least it does so in the so-called «economically developed» countries);
provides short-term loans to production sphere damping the failures in the rhythmic alternations in the economic subjects’ paying capacity thereby speeding up products exchange and increasing running speed, stability and output capacity of the multiindustrial production and consumption system of the society;
provides long-term loans to the sphere of production enabling enterprises to overcome investment peaks in their expenditure and thereby ensuring that old productive capacities are renewed, new capacities are introduced and the inter-industry proportions of productive capacities (i.e. the so-called mutual compliance between productive capacities of different industries) are maintained;
provides loans to families enabling them to satisfy their consumer wants which provides for adaptation of nominal solvent demand to existing market prices. This increases sales of manufactured products and speeds up the delivery of certain services to the population (under an economic policy directed towards the satisfaction of morally healthy needs of population this option gives a chance of a rapid advance in the society’s welfare).
The bank system is indispensable in solving the above-mentioned tasks, yet their solving is not an end in itself for which banks solely exist. This is a means to assemble the number of microeconomy into the systemic integrity of the macroeconomy, that microeconomy solving the majority of productive tasks emerging in the life of society and its members with the help of their technological activities.
[46] In fact a bank deposit is a loan lent by the depositor to the bank. Therefore interest on deposit is a kind of loan interest. Most banks pay interest on deposits out of income where the share of usurious income received from the credit services lent by the bank is quite substantial. In other words every depositor takes part in the usurers’ robbing the society. The only difference between depositors is that the majority lose more by higher prices of purchased goods and services than they gain from income on deposits; and the minority gain more from income on deposits than they lose by prices on purchased goods and services which the money required to return loans with interest is included into.
[47] In order to understand why these numbers are named as the top limit for loan interest rates one must know the following. The average annual growth of the technosphere’s energy potential measured against coal production during the 150 years preceding the beginning of the 21st century was 5 %.As the volume of production is limited by the volume of energy which is put into the manufacturing processes then a loan interest rate which poses no threat to the stability of financial system and of technical renovation of the macroeconomy cannot exceed the growth rate of energy potential within the production sphere (on this issue please refer to the theory of similarity of multiindustrial production and consumption systems in “The Brief Course…” and “Dead Water” in post-1998 editions by the Internal Predictor of the USSR).
In conformity with such energy potential growth rate within the production sphere the limit of loan interest rate at 5 % per year during the whole of the mentioned century and a half lay within the bounds of safety for the macroeconomy of most countries. A 7 % rate was safe for the macroeconomy of usurious countries (crediting countries) whose income contained profits from loans lent to other countries and allowed to compensate for the discrepancy between the energy potential growth rate calculated in constant basic prices and the usurious demands expressed in loan interest rates by means of import. It is exactly this kind of income that devastated the economies of «third world» countries (most of them former colonies), which were ruined by usurious countries. This prevented their cultural transformation and made the people of those countries hate the usurers.
But the point is that besides the factors of a purely financial and economic nature there are other factors significant for the society’s life and the advocates of a «moderate» loan interest rate avoid discussing them. These very factors result in the ways nations react non-financially, as well as in the ways some people react personally when they see that entire regions of the Earth and their population are enslaved often by means of legalized system-forming usury which results initially from acknowledging the rightfulness of «moderate» loan interest rates.
[48] But it might be so that excluding the issue of slavery exercised by financial means from discussion is exactly what this policy is aimed at. We lay the blame for it on the economic science, which is the legacy of the era when Western-type capitalism was being implemented. And we lay the blame on the social and economic publicists who rely heavily on its authority.
[49] Though it is beyond any doubt that every family should have a right of having property passed on from generation to generation, such as a certain amount of money savings, housing, etc., as it provides for stability of family «infrastructure» and of the family itself in succession of generations.
Current Russian legislature violates this natural family right (the mob of lawyers in the Duma know only about individual rights yet they have no idea about protecting collective rights: rights of family, labor collectives, peoples, the mankind) by stipulating what is in fact a tax on the death of parents collected from their children and grandchildren after they take possession of the parents’ apartment if they lived separately.
This is just another example of how foul Russian bourgeois reformers act: being incapable to organize the social production and distribution which provides their citizens with normal life conditions and ensures that the budget is funded the state of bourgeois reformers shamelessly grabs at anything it can.
[50] Substituting the average laborer with the «average tax-payer», which became a custom in the mass media is also a substitution of one matter with another. Are Russian lawyers so hopelessly dumb that they cannot understand this point? – And if they are not dumb why do they refrain from discussing this issue both in Russia and in the «international community»?
[51] This can be proven by rigid accounting means on the basis of the theory of similarity of multiindustrial production and consumption system described in the works by Internal Predictor of the USSR “The Brief Course…” and “Dead Water” in post-1998 editions.
[52] There is two words in English meaning two similar things: concept and conception. They are:
Concept – n. general notion; abstract idea.
Conception – n. 1 conceiving or being conceived. 2 idea, plan. 3 understanding (has no conception).
(“The Oxford Dictionary of Current English”; revised second edition. Oxford University Press, 1996.)
In the present work we use the second word due to it’s third meaning – understanding. Since any conception of living is primarily the understanding not just an abstract idea.
[53] Because it was actually or legally impossible to violate the actual property or administrative rights of others or because directive addressed control was disrupted due to impediments to efficient information exchange in large administrative structures («liked by the tsar, but despised by the dog-keeper») and in remote «branches» where local directorates become actually more powerful than the central one («God is high in the sky, and the tsar is likely far»).
[54] «Investment product» is a term, which denotes means of production, permanent structures, etc. adopted in Western economic science.
[55] It is said in the Bible that construction of the tower of Babylon (no matter what the real project was like) stopped because the participants of the project lost their common language culture.
[56] A nut with the thread in inches cannot be screwed on a bolt with the thread in metric units, etc.
[57] Because from 1994 on “The Brief Course…” by the Internal Predictor of the USSR was published more than once. This work describes the theory of similarity of multiindustrial production and consumption systems which can provide the basis for solving the task of exercising control by means of self-regulating production and consumption in society, which can be performed both to a socially useful end or to a socially detrimental end.
[58] J. Stalin's work “The Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR” is quoted from a computer file therefore the quotations have no reference to pages but refer to chapters only.
[59] «Comparative analysis of the ways American and Japanese directors manage their businesses revealed that for American top-managers the primary goal is profitability of business. Their Japanese counterparts place their
Such vector of management, which businessmen and managers of the two countries have, adhered to over decades explains why American capitalism loses the position it has attained by the middle of the 20th century to Asian capitalism represented by Japanese capitalism.
Yet «Ford Motors» under the management of its founder was an exception from this rule, which characterizes Euro-American capitalism over the whole course of its history. In a footnote to Chapter 4.2 we have given a table illustrating the trends in product output and pricing on products that were being improved every year. One can see from this table that the management of «Ford Motors» did not pursue a momentary maximum profit but sought to increase sales, i.e. to develop the market, to expand its share on the market. It was the success in developing the market that provided for stable self-repayment based on sufficient profit. Ford explains this functional dependence several times in his book.
[60] Let us explain the terms used here:
global policy is the activity directed towards achieving goals regarding the whole of mankind and planet Earth. Essentially it consists in controlling a range of long-term tendencies which very often rules out any correspondence between current politics and existing tendencies. Defining global policy can of course be compared to a «grand chessboard» as Z. Brzezinski did in a book with the same name (Brzezinski Z. “The Grand Chessboard. American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives”. Basic Books) yet one would have to place all countries on this «board» including one’s own;
foreign policy is the activity directed towards achieving goals of the state’s ruling class beyond the state’s territory and jurisdiction;
domestic policy is the activity directed towards achieving goals of the state’s ruling class within the state’s territory and jurisdiction.
Ruling classes of the overwhelming majority of state-like formations that existed in history are not homogeneous. Therefore different subgroups within those classes may have different interests and may set different priorities between global, foreign and domestic policy. For this reason global policy, domestic and foreign policy of one and the same state can more or less disagree and hamper each other. One can read about how this may actually happen without having to deal with all the nonsense of political science in the novel by a Polish writer Boleslav Prus called “The Pharaoh” (printed 1895) which was published in Russia several times after 1991 (a review by Internal Predictor of the USSR can be accessed from the file 9608282rc*.doc from the Information base).
[61] The second book by H. Ford that became widely known is called “The International Jew”, first published also in 1922. It was published several times in Russian translation in the 1920’s in the USSR. Yet later it was withdrawn even from the «spetshrans» of central libraries, as the annotation to its 1993 edition says (published by the «Moskvityanin» publishing house, Moscow).
«Spetshran» is an abbreviation of «spetsialnoye hraneniye» («special custody»). In the USSR this denoted library stock that contained books published both abroad and in the USSR which were not classified but had no access to public libraries or were withdrawn from them. Access to the «spetshran» literature was granted only to authorized specialists and only in their professional field of knowledge. One was required to submit a written request and recommendation from the party committee of one’s place of work which had to be approved by superior party authorities and probably by the KGB.
The book “Today and Tomorrow” is less well-known. In this book Ford continues on the topic started in “My Life and Work”.
[62] Atheists have a right to believe that objective rights result from the man’s genetic programs and from the laws of nature on the whole with the terms «genetic programs» and «the laws of nature on the whole» used in their broadest sense. In the context of this work what is important is that «objective rights» exist objectively. The debate on their source and variations in terminology are outside the context of this work.
The issues of religion and atheism are dealt with in other works by Internal Predictor of the USSR in detail: “Towards God’s Ruling…”, “Why does the Internal Predictor Urge People to Live in God’s Kingdom Without Acknowledging the Last Covenant?”, “«Master and Margaret»: a Hymn to Demonism? Or the Gospel of Devoted Faith”, “Dialectics and Atheism: Two Incompatible Essences”, etc.
[63] It is exactly this way of using capital and small letters that corresponds to the moral and ethic duplicity which is characteristic of the personality’s psyche within the culture of the New Testament canon: «god» and «Caesar».
[64] Algorithm – garbled «al-Khowarismi», the name of a mathematician who lived in Central Asia in the Middle Ages. His name is used as a term for a succession of actions that allow to achieve certain goals. A description of such a set of actions is also called an algorithm. An algorithm consists of the following:
the information which describes the way incoming information is transformed for every block of the algorithm and
the actions (measures), which control the exchange of the information transformed within the algorithm between the blocks.
By algorithms we mean the aggregate of particular functionally specialized algorithms.
In the subculture based on the humanities the closest notion to the terms «algorithm» and «algorithms» is the term «scenario», more particularly – a multi-choice scenario.
[65] Even the analysts of radio «Freedom» note that the Duma members proceeding from their own understanding of practicability often initiate laws or pass laws which contradict to the Russian constitution and to laws passed earlier. But the madhouse on radio «Freedom» is not free enough to discuss the issues of different possible social life conceptions and which one of them is the best. Yet these are the questions that have to be asked in order to start getting over the conceptual uncertainty in social self-government and getting rid of folly.
[66] In Russian there are three words sounding differently that are used to show really different things. Two of them are translating on English as “Jew” and there is no word for the third. We (though in citations and in stable statements we will leave an original term) will use the next translation:
Hebrew – shows national (or, correctly, pseudo-national) belonging of a person to the some system of “national” clans.
Jew – it is a word to name the Judaists, so it shows only the religion, not nationality (or pseudo-nationality as “Hebrew” do). There is no need to confuse these two terms. But also “Jew” can be not Judaist, but one who knowingly or unknowingly follows the Judaic conception of all-world domination (see the Supplement 1). So it approaches to the term “zid”.
Zid [zhid] – shows one’s belonging to the active parasites corporation inclined to parasitizing on work and labor of others.
The terms on Russian sounds roughly similar to these ones.
Why do we need to make such a differentiation? Since not each Hebrew is Judaist (and Jew), and not only Hebrews can be Jews. But too often one confuse these nationality and religion (and even the meaning of the word zid is often considered to be just Hebrew. Thus zids of other nationalities fade from the picture).
[67] Called after senator Joseph McCarty (1908 – 1957). He held the post of Chairman of the senate commission of the United States Congress on government agencies’ activities and of the regular commission on investigating «anti-American activities» (since 1953). He started a campaign on persecuting and violating the rights of those suspected in sympathizing communists and also those who opposed to the arms race and the «cold war».
[68] This macroeconomy is hostile to a laborer both as a producer and as a consumer of products. H. Ford had no power over the US macroeconomy. Those who had power over it used it maliciously to set up «the great depression». Many businesses perished in it and many suffered heavy losses. «Ford Motors» was also among the victims: it was forced to close 25 of its 36 factories.
This was the effect of macroeconomic factors, not of some mistakes which the management of «Ford Motors» made in choosing and executing the strategy of business development.
On the other hand, the book “My Life and Work” by H. Ford was published 7 years before 1929 when the «great depression» broke out. Seven years is a long time enough for the society to think its contents over, to start changing its morals and ethics (including business ethics) and to make it impossible for the potential organizers of the «great depression» to fulfill their plans.
[69] It is necessary to add control of the micro– and macrolevels in their interaction to the functions named by H. Ford.
[70] It is really so if the legislators act within the framework of a flawed conception of organizing people’s life in society. For example, this is the case if the legislative, executive and judicial authorities are controlled by the Biblical doctrine of establishing the system of global slavery through financial means.
[71] It is true but it implies that the common people become familiar with conceptual power and make it righteous. This will inevitably lead to the state and government activity being transformed and in consequence – to passing of new laws and abolishing many previous ones.
