Subject: TURMEL: Flaherty on LETS?
Date: 30 Nov 1997 22:57:25 GMT

     The reason I spent time on you is that you were the heavyweight
whose arguments many Socreds around the Internet world were having
trouble dealing with. Of course, once I brought advanced engineering
modeling techniques to bear, the truth stood out for all to see.
     But your arguments with the Socred Numerator Boys were never the
ones I intended to make. You have heard my argument for the
Denominator Boys. I never wanted to talk about rectifying the problems
with the Old system. I wanted to note the lack of problems with the
New LETS system.
     I'm saying inflation cannot occur at all in a one-to-one LETS
casino token system. I care not who is right in the discussion of what
is causing inflation in the Old system though I have my definite
deductions. I'm saying involuntary unemployment cannot occur in a LETS
local currency system. I care not who is right in the discussion of
what is causing employment in the Old system though I again have my
conclusions. All I really care about is that inflation and involuntary
unemployment do not arise in the interest-free LETS system where I
again have my conclusions.
     In my efforts to get the Socred Numerator Boys to push the LETS
bandwagon, I would consider it the greatest coup in monetary reform
history to get the Internet's foremost economist to endorse a solution
they'd be forced to admit they all like too. Let's face it. I can say
that when I was first invited to visit sci.econ and alt.conspiray
newsgroups, my friend specifically mentioned you as the man he'd like
to have me answer. This was four years ago. If I could get you to
endorse national and global LETS, it would electrify the Social Credit
world and I think the LETS world too. Having ruled the world's premier
Internet newsgroup all these years, you have to admit your public
endorsement of LETS might have repercussions you were unaware you
could command.
     In all my postings, I don't believe you have ever challenged
anything on LETS. I found this smart. You were content to watch me
beat up on the slower wits but had to know that Jaikaran's thesis was
even closer to my P+I theorem than even Douglas's A+B theorem.
     You know I spoke for 2 hours at Rensselaer Polytechnical
Institute in Troy New York last November. It's on tape. Send address
and I mail you a copy with one to Prof. Stodder. I was thrilled to
find out that Rensselaer is the oldest school of engineering in the
United States, quite the fitting place to present the first banking
systems engineering analysis to an American Economics Faculty.
     Most of these students were already up on LETS regardless of what
was going on with the Old system. Whether and how the current system
was malfunctioning was of little consequence to the question of how
LETS does work and why. So now I'm going to put the Internet's premier
economist on the spot.
     Do you see any harm in trying LETS accounts side by side with our
regular accounts in a national or international LETS Time/Greendollar
system for purely voluntary use?

Send a comment to John Turmel