Untouchable - For How Much Longer?

You say:
"The CCPA (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives) used to include BoC policies in its alternative budgets but dropped them from more recent alternative budgets because they saw that the federal deficit was now a huge surplus, debt was coming down, and there was lots of room to tax. See Jim Stanford's article in yesterday's Globe. He is one of the architects of the CCPA alternative budget process. I subscribe to CCPA's Monitor and read their material all the time."

This statement, although accurate, amounts to saying that, well, we have a trickle of money where we could have a much better, healthier distribution- but crumbs are better than nothing. Throw the baby out with the bathwater. Also, the fact the debt may come down a bit doesn't address the central problem of education concerning the uses of the BoC-- a problem the CCPA could be addressing. The way you put it, it appears that, as a member, you are satisfied with the reasoning given for dropping it.

Herb says: "CAP insisted the NDP divorce itself from labour..."
Herb, when/where did CAP say that? To my knowledge, that is not so.

Herb says::
"The NDP has passed resolutions about the BoC not unlike the positions taken by CAP but then didn't include them as part of its party platform. I think that the reason for that is that the spin doctors are in charge of their campaign. And to some extent they are correct but then the NDP sounds like the other parties. Nothing new just we will defend health care better than the other guys will. Tax and spend is what the voter hears. I am a member of the NDP and have worked hard to bring more awareness into that party of the role the BoC could play and used to play."

As a member of the NDP, I would think you would find it completely unacceptable that NDP resolutions concerning the BoC -such an important issue- should be dropped without any explanation.

Perhaps you should join CAP. It seems to me that's where your priorities are. Which is it? Your priorities, or that CAP's "too small"? Too small has ALWAYS been the launch for change, throughout history! You know that. Perhaps it is you who are lost in rationalizing the actions of the organizations above, & can no longer see the forest. It BREAKS MY HEART that such vibrant, well-informed, active, effective organizations, who could be doing so much in this area, have backed away (not to mention the Centre for Social Justice or even Linda McQuaig, who also, it appears, won't touch it). Who, here, can't see the forest for the trees?

Education & belief system(s), as you know, are the key. I have always thought so, & that is why I ran as a CAP candidate in the last 2 elections; & why I have made, now, more than a dozen videos to do with various social change issues. You may view info about some of them on the CAP website, or check out my websiteithedreamofcanada.ca (Of particular interest may be my two new top links 'Election 06' and 'Economics').

It is my understanding that these videos have provided an entranceway to education concerning the BoC to several people who have since joined CAP. Calls for these videos were impressive during the election - & that's without any promotion of them or advertising on my part. People DO want to know!! If you want to promote the BoC, why not continue to challenge these organizations to which you belong, why not show the video "The Creation of Money and its Consequence" to some of them, along with a brief presentation? What better teachers could we have than Bill Krehm and the Hon. Paul Hellyer?

Why minimize CAP, to which both these teachers have contributed significantly? The mesage is being lost because others cannot see the forest for the trees. For my money (pardon the pun) CAP's vision is not radical, but historical, as its roots date back to Keyne's social perspective, moves forward through history gathering strength (in my opinion, through THE most important book of the 20th century) Polanyi's "The Great Transformation", evolving, through a Canadian Vision given by Tommy Douglas, to a contemporary, modern, solid progressive CAP, founded by Paul Hellyer, led today by Connie Fogal, offering a policy platform addressing (i) what's happening to Canada; and (ii) what could be done, at least initially, to protect, revitalize, and preserve it.

The organizations you've listed, Herb, for reasons which I do not know, refuse to see or even consider the forest because of their preoccupation with their own trees. The incredibly transformative powers of nation-state central banks for their own citizens remains off the radar, an untouchable subject - even for social progressives. Private for-proft bankers are literally laughing at us all - all the way to the bank.

John Riddell