Stands krakket gennem LaRouches økonomiske program efter Hamiltons principper.
LaRouchePAC Internationale Webcast, 14. oktober, 2016.

Hr. LaRouche har leveret den klare recept, såvel som løsningen. Vi begyndte at forklare dette sidste fredag med vores særlige webcast med Paul Gallagher (dansk: Glass-Steagall: Det presserende første skridt); men vi er gået videre med at forklare dette spørgsmål. De Fire Økonomiske Love efter Hamilton, som Lyndon LaRouche udarbejdede for næsten to år siden, og som begyndte med genindførelsen af Glass-Steagall, men som omfatter en recept, der er en meget præcis og videnskabeligt funderet fremgangsmåde for, hvordan man totalt skal reorganisere og genoplive ikke alene USA’s økonomi, men også skabe et helt nyt, økonomisk paradigme for det transatlantiske system, i harmoni med det, der allerede stråler ud fra Eurasien. I sammenhæng hermed har hr. LaRouche prioriteret de fire, økonomiske rapporter, som blev skrevet og forelagt Kongressen af vores første finansminister, Alexander Hamilton, i 1790’erne ved selve den amerikanske republiks fødsel. Disse fire rapporter er: »Rapporten om statslig kredit«; »Rapporten om statslig bankvirksomhed«; »Argumentet for forfatningsgrundlaget for Nationalbanken«; og »Rapporten om varefremstilling«. https://larouchepac.com/20161013/alexander-hamiltons-four-economic-papers

Engelsk udskrift:

Friday LaRouche PAC Webcast October 14, 2016

HAMILTON'S FOUR REPORTS AND LAROUCHE'S FOUR LAWS —
BASIC NECESSITIES FOR MANKIND'S CONTINUED EXISTENCE

        MATTHEW OGDEN:  Good evening; it is October 14, 2016.  My
name is Matthew Ogden and you're watching our weekly Friday
evening webcast here from larouchepac.com.  I'm joined in the
studio today by Benjamin Deniston from the LaRouche PAC Science
Team; and we're joined via video by Kesha Rogers from Houston,
Texas; and Michael Steger from San Francisco, California.  Both
of whom are leading members of the LaRouche PAC Policy Committee.
        Now, I just want to begin our broadcast here today by
re-emphasizing exactly what Mr. LaRouche has been emphasizing
every single time we've spoken to him this week.  That it cannot
be said enough that the American people scored a major victory
against Obama with the defeat of his treasonous veto of the JASTA
bill and the overwhelming veto override that was delivered as the
final act of the United States Congress before they left for
their districts.  This only demonstrates what the American people
are capable of when they overcome whatever fear, whatever
intimidation has come from this Barack Obama administration; and
we can see that it's been a force for seven and a half years to
try to intimidate the American people out of taking their country
back and acting in their own self-interest.  But Obama's decision
to ally with the British-Saudi treason terror faction and to veto
this JASTA bill, demonstrated who he was; it demonstrated his
true colors.  And the American people drew a line in the sand and
said, "Enough is enough!  No more of this."
        You can look at what has happened in the weeks following
that event.  We are now directly involved through missiles and
bombing in the war in Yemen; this is the decision by Barack Obama
to become involved in yet another unnecessary foreign war.  We
are siding with the genocide and war crimes of the Saudi regime
there in Yemen.  The lies and the propaganda that are coming out
of the Obama White House against Russia, and the actions that
Russia is taking in alliance with the Syrian government in
attempting to defeat ISIS and the terrorists in Aleppo are
unprecedented; along with the completely unfounded propaganda and
lies about so-called Russian cyber warfare and hacking and all
the rest.
        You can see the utter denial of the fact that we are right
on the verge of a complete blow-out of the entire trans-Atlantic
financial system.  All you have to do is read the headlines of
the major financial press to see that even {they} are admitting
that Deutsche Bank is more leveraged than even Lehman Brothers
was at the time of its collapse; and that Deutsche Bank could, in
fact, be the next Lehman.
        So, all of these three items combined should show you, as we
emphasized earlier this week on the Policy Committee show on
Monday, that you would have to be completely out of your mind not
to see how close we are to the combined threat of a complete
blow-out of the financial system and the very real threat of the
eruption of a nuclear war.  Even Mikhail Gorbachov is saying we
are closer to a Third World War than we have ever been before.
This is the remaining months in office that Obama has.
        What Mr. LaRouche has delivered as the prescription, as the
solution, is very clear.  We began to elaborate this last Friday
during our special webcast with Paul Gallagher; but we've
continued to elaborate this question.  The four Hamiltonian
economic laws, drafted by Lyndon LaRouche almost two years ago,
which begin with the re-institution of Glass-Steagall, but
contain a prescription which is a very precise and scientifically
grounded approach to exactly how to completely reorganize and
revive not only the United States economy, but to create an
entirely new economic paradigm for the trans-Atlantic system in
accord with what's already emerging out of Eurasia.  In
conjunction with this, Mr. LaRouche has put a premium on the four
economic reports that were written and submitted to Congress by
our first Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, in the 1790s at
the very birth of the United States republic.  These are:  the
"Report on Public Credit"; the "Report on National Banking"; the
"Argument for the Constitutionality of the National Bank"; and
the "Report on Manufactures".
        So, as a key component of our show today, Ben and I in
conjunction with Kesha and Michael are going to elaborate a
little more on what is the contents, what is the substance of
those reports from Alexander Hamilton; and then, how do they
translate today in the four economic laws of Lyndon LaRouche,
with a major emphasis on how a breakthrough in terms of man's
exploration of space and everything that that entails in terms of
the great economic leap and scientific revolution for mankind, is
the application of the Hamiltonian principle for today.
        But before we get to some of that more detailed discussion,
I think we should just revisit a couple of the urgent points in
terms of the current mobilization.  The channeling of the spirit
of the JASTA victory into the mobilization for the re-institution
of Glass-Steagall and the proceeding toward the entirety of the
four LaRouche economic laws.

        BEN DENISTON:  Plenty can be said, but I would just
emphasize — you said it already, but I think given the state of
our nation today; and I hate to mention the elections, but this
is really a form of psychological warfare.  This is not an
election; this is a Jerry Springer episode, this is insane.  But,
as Matthew cited, look at what we did with JASTA.  That did not
require either of these candidates to do anything on that; that
was an action demonstrating the institutions of the United
States, the republican system of the United States.  The
integration between the work that we've been leading and the work
the 9/11 victims' families have been leading on the ground,
working with various institutions, various regions of the country
as a totality came together and slammed Obama, slammed the
British, slammed these degenerate Saudis on this issue; in spite
of the insanity leading the Presidential election process.  So,
that's the spirit we need to take right now to the current
Glass-Steagall fight.  This financial system is collapsing; as
was said, you can see that in any major press at this point.
There is no solution left in the monetarist framework the way
these guys are playing it.  Bail in; bail out; QE; they've been
playing these games for years now, and they're reaching the end.
This can't keep going; we need a reorganization of the system.
If we're not going to have a Presidential candidate who's going
to take the lead on that, that doesn't matter; we need to make it
happen.  We're not going to wait 'til after the election; we're
not going to wait for one of these ridiculous fools to take the
lead on this.  We're going to make it happen.  That's what we did
with JASTA; that happened.
        So, people who are cynical out there — we did it!  That
happened.  It can happen again, and it needs to happen again.
Glass-Steagall is going to completely cut off Wall Street; this
is going to be a massive revolution in the United States, a
massive shift of power in the United States away from the
interests of Wall Street and international finance back to the
sovereignty of the United States.  It is the necessary
indispensable first step for opening up this full recovery
program.  But I think people need to have the urgency of getting
this through now.  Again, don't let your friends, your
associates, the people you're talking to, fall into this cynical
pessimism; which is really being pushed at this point, with the
Jerry Springer show — aka these debates.  These things can
change; we can get these laws through.  There's already huge
momentum around the country on Glass-Steagall; there's growing
recognition of LaRouche's Four Laws as the necessary next steps.
So, I think the message to take away at this critical time is go
out and move!  This is the time to make this happen.

        MICHAEL STEGER:  Yeah, I think that's right.  I think it's
important to take a look at a couple of things in the context of
this Hamilton question. Because it was about two years ago that
Mr. LaRouche launched the Manhattan Project with the key focus of
Alexander Hamilton at the foundation of that, as well as a
commitment towards a Classical renaissance.  And what we saw in
the process of these last two years, was the mobilization of a
key part of the American population — the New York City area;
because of the questions of Glass-Steagall and of Wall Street
implicitly, and the question of 9/11.  There was a mobilization
of that population around an optimistic vision of the country,
both through Hamilton's policies, really the foundation of
Hamilton setting forth the most advanced conception of human
economy as a scientific practice that has been conceived yet.
Mr. LaRouche said this  himself, that what he took as the Four
Laws was essentially a patenting of what Hamilton had set forth
in these documents.  Both the power of the Federal government,
and the means and mechanisms by which you can develop and foster
a perpetual growth of the human species.  But I think it's also
important — because I think this is something that too many
Americans overlook, either voluntarily, but more so
involuntarily, because of the black-out in the media; that in
June of 2014, we saw consolidated what Xi Jinping had put out as
an international policy at the end of 2013, which was the New
Silk Road perspective.  In June 2014, that was consolidated by
the BRICS; and largely what we've seen, given the attempts to
undercut Brazil and South Africa, but we've seen an increasing
level of coordination and collaboration between Russia, China,
and India, that has fundamentally shifted world history.  We are
talking about a fundamentally new economic system; one that looks
at the very policy Mr. LaRouche laid out beginning in the 1970s.
At the core of that, is the question of an International
Development Bank; or what the BRICS have entitled the New
Development Bank.  Or as a LaRouche-Hamiltonian conception of a
new international credit system; that is there.
        Now, not only is that economic perspective there; it is
recruiting nations like Japan, the Philippines, Australia,
Canada.  Many nations joined the Asia Infrastructure Investment
Bank; nations like Egypt, and Iran.  But there is also a very
clear strategic component; we see this specifically in Syria.  We
see what Russia has done to confront Obama's war agenda.  Then
the coordination between Russia and China, India, and increasing
numbers of other nations throughout Eurasia.  This is a unique
opportunity for the American people to create a new Presidency
that looks to realign with Russia, China, and these major
nations.  All of the propaganda against Putin, all the attacks,
the lies, the mass of lies against Putin coming out of the Obama
operation right now in the Presidential election is a mass
cover-up of what really exists for the American people; which is
a chance to go back to a LaRouche-Hamilton perspective in
economic policy in the United States with very key collaborators
internationally.  That really is shaping the intervention we made
around JASTA, both the Manhattan Project and this Russia-China
intervention.  The BRICS is larger, but those nations most
specifically.  We really have a unique opportunity to shut down
this London-Wall Street financial system, which for 50-60 years
and longer, essentially, but since the end of World War II has
been a mass genocide program in Africa, in South America.  Forced
sterilizations; imposed famines; scientific frauds like global
warming, the ozone layer, or human overpopulation; all of these
things have been concocted as ways of undermining and destroying
the human economic growth potential.
        And we now see a potential today to change that.  An
intervention by the American people like we saw with JASTA,
around this LaRouche-Hamilton perspective is absolutely key.  But
I think this global perspective is essential to that, to
understanding why we can be so optimistic today.

        OGDEN:  Yeah, I think that if you go and look at what was
presented last week, Paul Gallagher presented a clear picture in
terms of the proximity of the complete breakdown of this
financial system; and the causes for that, the reason for that.
The insanity of 0% interest rate QE bail-in, bail-out regime that
has reigned since 2008; but really since the repeal of
Glass-Steagall in 1999.  The fact that what would be a productive
economy has been completely drowned and suffocated by a shark
tank — as he characterized it — of this just robbery, looting,
criminal practices and complete insanity as it reigns in terms of
economics.  The fact that Mr. LaRouche is on the scene, and has
for 50 years what has now been adopted in part by several major
nations on this planet — I think most clearly evidenced by the
policies of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank and the New
Silk Road projects coming out of China.  We have the ability to
bring Alexander Hamilton's principles to bear on this current
situation.  The vacuum of leadership in the face of this total
meltdown of the financial system gives us a great opportunity for
optimism.  In fact, through reasoned leadership of the type that
was exerted in the midst of this fight for JASTA, but which was
really a fight against the entire imperial apparatus that has
dominated this country since 9/11; you can in fact create a
policy revolution of a type which has not been seen for a long
time, especially since John F Kennedy with his commitment to the
space program.  But really not since Franklin Roosevelt in the
full extent of that kind of economic approach.
        I think we should revisit these four economic principles of
Mr. LaRouche before getting a little bit more deeply into the
content of the Hamilton economic reports. We begin with [No.1] the principle of Glass-Steagall, re-instituted exactly as
Franklin Roosevelt did it. It proceeds directly from there, that
through a restored actual commercial banking system in which you
have the Treasury of the United States restored to its original
intended role, as Alexander Hamilton created it; the power of the
Presidency, as Abraham Lincoln demonstrated very clearly through
his use of the Greenbacks and also his national banking bills of
1863 and 1864, can reorganize this banking system, from the top
down, to restore it to its original intent; that it should be
used for the productive investments of productive enterprise in
the United States and the improvement of productive enterprise.
        But that's not enough! What you have to have from that
standpoint, is [No. 2] a scientifically-grounded and principled
understanding of how credit, through the mechanisms that were
provided by Alexander Hamilton, must be directed to {increase}
the productive powers of your labor force. [No. 3] What are the
specific projects? What are the specific investments? What are
the specific cutting-edge discoveries that must be pursued that
in a scientifically provable and knowable way that will increase
the productive powers of your labor force, both individually and
as a whole? And that has to be defined from an understanding, as
Mr. LaRouche has uniquely developed it, of the principle of
energy-flux density, not a one-to-one labor power, as manual
labor per individual member of your society, but the application
of technology and ever-higher forms of technology, to create the
increases of productive powers of labor, upon which progress in
your society depends.
        And then, No. 4, what are the specific future-oriented
drivers that express the unique character of man? What makes man
different from a beast? How is mankind, as Vernadsky would define
it, a unique and distinct species, distinct from all other forms
of animal and other kinds of life? And, what is our imperative,
as that sort of species? I think it is no better expressed than
in the space program, as it was conceived and elaborated, as
Kesha has emphasized, by Krafft Ehricke, who Mr. LaRouche
directly mentions in that "Four Economic Laws" paper of two years
ago.
        So, that was elaborated on the webcast last week. We've got,
I think, a little bit more specificity for especially that third
economic law, but I think between what Ben and I have, and then
the discussion with Kesha and Michael, you can see the resonance
between what Mr. LaRouche is addressing in these four economic
laws, and what Alexander Hamilton originally laid out in the
content of those four economic reports that he drafted to
Congress in the 1790s.

        BEN DENISTON: You had some quotes from those reports that
you want to read?

        OGDEN: Sure, we can start with that.

        DENISTON: Okay.

        OGDEN: Let me bring up on the screen the first slide from
these Hamilton reports. [Slide 1] I'm going to focus mainly on
the "Report on Manufactures." This was written in December 1791,
but, as I mentioned earlier, this is merely one out of four, and
in the "Report on Manufactures," actually, Hamilton refers
repeatedly to his other three reports, "On the National Bank,"
"The Defense of the Constitutionality of the National Bank," and
"On the Public Debt," or, "On the Public Credit."
        I think the "Report on Manufactures" is a very important and
useful place to start, because it really is nothing less than the
study of the science of how the human mind, through its
application by means of technology, can in fact increase the
potential population density of any given economy or any given
nation. This is the way that Mr. LaRouche came at this, but in
fact it's very much demonstrated and laid out, explored, in an
exploratory way, in this "Report on Manufactures."
        Quickly, the context of the "Report on Manufactures" — you
could really call it Hamilton's "Defense of Manufactures," in the
context of what was becoming a prevailing but fraudulent
argument, coming from circles such as Thomas Jefferson circles
and others. That the United States, as a new nation, should
merely be an agrarian economy, an agrarian economy in one form or
another — landlords and peasants — or just an infinite
extension of agricultural lands westward, and just depend on the
product of the soil as the driver of the economy. Hamilton said,
this is false, this is a fraud, this must be addressed, and he
wrote the "Report on Manufactures" to address this.
        What Hamilton elaborates is that in fact an economy which is
dependent merely on agriculture will be able to support far less
people at a far lower standard of living and a far lower density
of population, than an economy which also includes manufacturers,
science, technology, and the application of that, through
technology. A kind of argument generally used, said that anybody
who was not farming and was doing something else, like
manufacturing, would be producing less food, and so we would have
fewer people; we would be able to support fewer people. Hamilton
destroys this argument, saying in fact that it's the other way
around: the more division of labor that you have, if two people
are just doing agriculture, they can only support themselves. If
instead one of them is engaged in agriculture and one in
manufacturing, not only can they support the two of them, but
they can support themselves and others.
        Let me go back to that first slide, with that quote.
Hamilton says, the purpose of this report is "to evince that the
establishment and diffusion of manufacturers have the effect of
rendering the total mass of useful and productive labor in a
community greater than it would otherwise be." So, you can see,
he's very clear in what the purpose of this study is.
        Next slide. [Slide 2] He says "It may be inferred that
manufacturing establishments not only occasion a positive
augmentation of the produce and revenue of the society, but that
they may contribute essentially to rendering them greater than
they could possibly be without such establishments." So, without
the use of manufacturing, the ability of the economy would be
lesser than it would be with manufacturing establishments.
        He says there are seven reasons for this. I'm not going to
elaborate all seven, but you can see on the screen on the next
slide [Slide 3] the seven reasons he has listed: "(1) The
division of labor." I touched on that briefly. "(2) An extension
of the use of machinery." We'll elaborate on that a little bit
more. "(3) Additional employment to classes of the community not
ordinarily engaged in the business." "(4) The promoting of
emigration from foreign countries." That's an apropos point. "(5)
The furnishing greater scope for the diversity of talents and
dispositions which discriminate men from each other." We'll touch
on that a little bit more. That's an important one. "(6) The
affording a more ample and various field for enterprise." And
"(7) The creating in some instances a new, and securing in all, a
more certain and steady demand for the surplus produce of the
soil." This one is actually often overlooked, but Hamilton says
this is the most important one, and I think it will be
appropriate for what Ben's going to get into.
        Let me elaborate just a couple of these ones. We're going to
take a look at No. 2: "An extension of the use of machinery."
Here's what Hamilton says about that. This is the next slide.
[Slide 4] Alexander Hamilton says, "The employment of machinery
forms an item of great importance in the general mass of national
industry. 'Tis an artificial force brought in aid of the natural
force of man; and, to all the purposes of labor, is an increase
of hands; an accession of strength,{unencumbered, too, by the
expense of maintaining the laborer}. He's saying you have an
increase of hands, almost artificial labor, and you don't need to
feed that labor.
        Next slide. [Slide 5] [Hamilton continues,] "May it not
therefore be fairly inferred, that those occupations, which give
greatest scope to the use of this auxiliary, contribute most to
the general stock of industrious effort, and, in consequence, to
the general produce of industry?" So, that's the use of machinery
in manufacturing.
        Let's take a look at the next slide. [Slide 6] This is where
he elaborates the point [No. 5] "As to the furnishing greater
scope for the diversity of talents and dispositions, which
discriminate men from each other." He says, "It is a just
observation, that minds of the strongest and most active powers
for their proper objects fall below mediocrity and labor without
effect, if confined to uncongenial pursuits. And it is thence to
be inferred, that the results of human exertion may be immensely
increased by diversifying its objects. When all the different
kinds of industry obtain in a community, each individual can find
his proper element, and can call into activity the whole vigor of
his nature. And the community is benefitted by the services of
its respective members, in the manner, in which each can serve it
with most effect."
        Next slide please. [Slide 7] He continues, "If there be
anything in a remark often to be met with — namely that there
is, in the genius of the people of this country, a peculiar
aptitude for mechanic improvements, it would operate as a
forcible reason for giving opportunities to the exercise of that
species of talent, by the propagation of manufactures."
        OK; next slide. [Slide 8] In this one, he's elaborating his
point [No. 6] about "affording a more ample and various field for
enterprise." This is quoted, but I think it's very important. He
says, "To cherish and stimulate the activity of the human mind,
by multiplying the objects of enterprise, is not among the least
considerable of the expedients, by which the wealth of a nation
may be promoted."
        Next slide. [Slide 9] He continues, "Even things in
themselves not positively advantageous, sometimes become so, by
their tendency to provoke exertion. Every new scene, which is
opened to the busy nature of man to rouse and exert itself, is
the addition of a new energy to the general stock of the effort."
        Next slide. [Slide 10] He continues, "The spirit of
enterprise, useful and prolific as it is, must necessarily be
contracted or expanded in proportion to the simplicity or variety
of the occupations and productions, which are to be found in a
society. It must be less in a nation of mere cultivators, than in
a nation of cultivators and merchants, less in a nation of
cultivators and merchants, than in a nation of cultivators,
artificers and merchants.
        Next slide. [Slide 11] I want to put special emphasis on
this one, because I think it opens up the point that Mr. LaRouche
was exploring in his Four Laws paper about physical chemistry.
Alexander Hamilton says under this one [Point No. 7], the heading
of "As to the creating, in some instances, a new, and securing in
all a more certain and steady demand for the surplus produce of
the soil." Hamilton says, "This is among the most important of
the circumstances which have been indicated. It is a principal
mean, by which the establishment of manufacturers contributes to
an augmentation of the produce or revenue of a country, and has
an immediate and direct relation to the prosperity of
agriculture."
        Next slide. [Slide 12]  "It is a principal mean by which the
establishment of manufactures contributes to an augmentation of
the produce or revenue of a country."
        Next slide [Slide 13] After elaborating a little bit why
it's advantageous to have a domestic market rather than just
depending on foreign markets for your produce and products, he
says:
        "It merits particularly observation that the multiplication
of manufacturies not only furnishes a domestic market for these
articles which have been accustomed to be produced in abundance
in a country; but it likewise creates a demand for such as were
either unknown or produced in considerable quantities.  The
bowels as well as the surface of the Earth are ransacked for
articles which were before neglected.  Animals, plants, and
minerals acquire a utility and value which were before
unexplored."
        Then, jumping forward quite a bit, I just wanted to go to
Hamilton's conclusion of the entire paper, after discussing
public credit and national banking. [Slide 14]  He says:
        "In countries where there is a great private wealth, much
may be affected by the voluntary contributions of patriotic
individuals.  But in a community situated like that of the United
States, the public purse must supply the deficiency of private
resource.  In what can it be so useful as in promoting,
prompting, and improving the efforts of industry?"
        So, just before Ben picks it up, I just want to emphasize
that what Alexander Hamilton is exploring, is the science of how
the human mind can increase the productive powers of labor and
through that, by means of the application of technology and
principles that were hitherto unexplored or undiscovered, can
increase the potential population density of a nation or an
economy.  I think this seventh point, which he puts the most
premium on, is the role that manufactures can play in spurring
the discovery of resources that we didn't even know were
resources before.  What had been previously considered just rocks
or otherwise, become the most valuable resources — minerals,
fuels, coal, oil, uranium; the most valuable resources for your
economy.  I think Alexander Hamilton would be particularly
excited if he knew about the potential of the Moon to be mined
for a resource that I'm sure they did not have any conception of
in 1791 — helium-3 — as a source of fuel for nuclear fusion,
for example.  So, I just wanted to give a little bit of actual
content of Alexander Hamilton's Report on Manufactures; and maybe
we can use that to contextualize a little bit of what Ben's going
to present here.

        DENISTON:  People should know, we are making these — in
their totality — available on the LaRouche PAC website.  This is
admittedly some pretty heavy material for some of our viewers,
but this is really what's needed right now.  I would just
emphasize looking where we are in the United States right now,
and again, a lot of people know Glass-Steagall needs to happen; a
number of people have a sense of having some sovereign control
over our money supply.  But what Hamilton understood and what
LaRouche understands, is what is the science of growth.  You can
have sovereign control of your money, you can cut off destructive
speculation like Wall Street; you can throw that in the trash.
But how do you create growth?  How do you actually create a more
productive economy in totality?  That is what Hamilton
understood; that a true credit system can facilitate these
increases in the productive power of labor.  That's what the
American people need to understand right now; that's what we have
a chance of joining internationally with what's going on around
the world.  But it's going to require that the United States
return to our understanding of these core principles.  I wanted
to just take a second and pull a little bit out of what Mr.
LaRouche defined as his Third Law in his policy document; and
just go through a couple of historical examples to put a little
bit more of a picture on this relation of the actual
understanding of the productive powers of labor and the critical
role that Mr. LaRouche has defined in his work furthering
Hamilton's own understanding to a new degree.  Mr. LaRouche's
work on what he defines as "energy flux density".
        But if we can go back to the slides, I have the full quote
of Mr. LaRouche's Third Law up there.  [Slide 15] Again, the
policy document as a whole is available on our website.  I just
wanted to read this and then go through a couple examples.
Again, the First Law being Glass-Steagall; the Second Law being a
national banking system, as Hamilton had defined.  And then he
presents a Third Law with this national banking system:
        "The purpose of the use of a Federal credit system, is to
generate high-productivity trends in improvement of employment
with the accompanying intention to increase the physical economic
productivity and the standard of living of the persons and the
households of the United States.  The creation of credit for the
now urgently needed increase of the relative quality and quantity
of productive employment must be ensured this time once more, as
was done successfully under President Franklin Roosevelt or by
like standards of Federal practice used to create a general
economic recovery of the nation, per capita.  And for rates of
net increases in productivity and by reliance on the essential
human principle which distinguishes the human personality from
the systemic characteristics of lower forms of life; the net rate
of energy flux density of effective practice.  This means
intrinsically a thoroughly scientific, rather than a merely
mathematical one; and by the related increase of energy flux
density per capita and for the human population when considered
as each and all as a whole.  The ceaseless increase of the
physical productivity of employment, accompanied by its benefits
for the general welfare, are a principle of Federal law which
must be a paramount standard of achievement of the nation and the
individual."
        I think really, again, illustrates Mr. LaRouche's work
furthering this scientific understanding of economy really rooted
in the work of Hamilton and those who continued this American
System tradition; but applying a new scientific understanding to
it.  If we go to the next slide [Slide 16], I wanted to highlight
a study that was done under Mr. LaRouche's direction back in the
'80s.  Mr. LaRouche has a long history of trying to educate the
American people and institutions about real economics.  I thought
this was just one example, but I think it may be a helpful,
specific case study to try and put some depth to the idea of the
productive powers of labor and the relation of energy flux
density to the productive powers of labor.
        So, what do we mean by that?  This is one expression of
that; this is a measurement of the productivity of iron
throughout the history of the United States up to 1975.  Iron
being by weight the most-used element by mankind as a whole.
Obviously, it's the main component of steel, so this is a major
part of any modern economy, is iron production.  This is a rather
fascinating study, where Mr. LaRouche said, don't just look at
tons produced; don't just look at people employed.  Look at the
relation between productivity — how productive is your average
laborer producing iron — and energy flux density; what's the
actual energy density per time used in the actual manufacturing
process of blast furnaces?  If you examine this historically, you
get this very fascinating and clear demonstration of what Mr.
LaRouche is talking about in terms of energy flux density and
productivity.  You see a consistent increase in the tons produced
per average iron worker per year in this case is the actual
number being used; measured against the energy flux density of
the production process.  The energy per area, per time; so the
concentration and density of energy used in the blast furnaces to
produce this iron.  And you see a dramatic, many-fold increase in
how productive each individual worker is as a direct function and
relation of the increasing energy flux density of the productive
process.
        More interesting, you see this kind of comes in successive
waves; and each of these waves is associated with — you'll get a
rise for a certain period, and then the productivity increase
will tend to level off.  Then, you'll get a new technological
revolution; you'll move to a higher energy density fuel, for
example.  Moving into better forms of coal was one example of
this; types of coal that have more energy per mass, per weight.
Or moving to coke — a derivative of coal that can operate at
higher temperatures and enable higher production rates.  Or
moving to higher technologies in the more recent period of
injection of pure oxygen into the process to create even more
heat and a more intense productive process.  There are various
technologies associated with each of those steps; you have
increases in technology, increases in the energy density of the
fuel producing the process.  You can kind of measure that
together as expressed in energy flux density; and you can see
that to really understand progress — but also these qualitative
shifts in progress; these leaps that occur, these are the kind of
metrics we want to look at.
        When you talk about this idea of — it's not a question of
the number of people you have employed; it's a question of what's
the capability of your labor force to produce the goods needed at
higher rates or efficiency, etc.  So, I think it's just one
useful case study to give some concept of the relationship
between the productive powers of labor and energy flux density.
It doesn't show it in this graphic, but as I think many of our
viewers wouldn't be surprised, these metrics have gone down
significantly since 1975; since we really settled into a
post-industrial economy which has led us to this collapse process
— the abandonment of this real industrial, forward-oriented
economic policy.
        If we go to the next graphic [Slide 17], it's just another
illustration of the same thing from the same study; but it's also
just interesting to note that with each of these successive
leaps, you also get higher rates of productivity per amount of
energy.  So, this is literally the productive output of iron per
amount of energy put in.  This idea that energy as a scalar value
in and of itself means something is not true.  The amount of
energy you're using does not necessarily tell you what your
economy can do, how productive you can be; but it's an issue of
energy flux density.  Higher energy flux densities, the same
amount of energy measured in just scalar, quantitative terms
becomes much more productive; because you're employing it with
higher technologies and at higher energy flux densities.
        This is just one example.  Similar studies can be done in
various sectors of the economy; but this is the type of process
that enables the productive section of your economy to continue
to — as Mr. LaRouche said in the concluding section of this
Third Law:  "[T]o continue this process of ever increasing the
productivity and ability of your labor force to produce more
goods, higher quality goods, that are needed to support society."
Those are the metrics that we need to understand that the credit
must facilitate and go to.
        I just wanted to highlight one other illustration of this
energy flux density issue, but on a national scale.  If we return
to the slide [Slide 18], you can also see this in terms of the
economy as a whole.  This is a study that we developed in the
Basement Team looking at the history of the United States;
looking at what you could consider one metric for the energy flux
density of the nation as a whole.  Now, we're looking at the use
of power per capita; not just what any one individual uses, but
everything that goes into all forms of transportation,
manufacturing, agriculture.  You take the net energy investment
in totality across the entire nation, average it per capita.
Then here we have it divided by power sources.  You can clearly
see the history of the growth of the United States very clearly
expressed in the increasing energy flux density of the nation.
You clearly see the Great Depression illustrated by a significant
drop in the energy flux density — measured in per capita terms
— of the nation.  You see a dramatic rise in Franklin
Roosevelt's mobilization coming out of the New Deal programs into
the World War II mobilization; you clearly see that reflected in
this graphic.  What's the next dramatic rate of increase?  Well,
it's certainly associated with Kennedy's space program, starting
there in the early '60s you see a dramatic leap in rate of
increase of energy flux density of the nation as a whole.
        Then what do you see since then?  This leveling off and
collapse, which is directly associated with the collapse we're
seeing now today in the United States; expressed in these
physical metrics.  You see that what should have been an
explosion of nuclear fission power was suppressed to just that
tiny, red segment there.  If you could see it — you might not be
able to at all — there's a little green tiny layer on the very
top there which is wind, solar, geothermal all combined.  So, if
you think you're going to support the US economy on Green
technologies, you're living in a fantasy.  All of the massive
subsidies and investment and propping up these things has barely
done anything to contribute to our actual net energy flux density
for our country as a whole.
        This is where we are today; this is one expression of the
collapse.  This is the process we have to reverse.  Maybe just to
illustrate one last example, I think it's really worth comparing
this with the next graphic [Slide 19]; which was the forecast by
the Kennedy administration in the '60s.  It was forecast that
this process would increase; and the next major component would
be the rapid expansion of nuclear fission power.  You'd get this
interesting process of these waves of fuel sources being used and
then surpassed as society moves to the next level.  The gray on
the far right, if you haven't read it yet, that's mostly
wood-powered; in very early times, wood was the main energy
source.  That was superseded by coal, as you can see in the
brown.  That began to fall off as other fossil fuels — namely,
gasoline, diesel, and natural gas — became a major component of
the economy.  As you can see, under a healthy orientation, it was
understood in the early '60s by the Kennedy administration, that
that should then fall off, and we should see a rapid expansion of
nuclear fission power as the next wave.  So, this is what a
healthy growth process would have looked like.  This is the kind
of process we need to return to; and as Mr. LaRouche says,
increasing the energy flux density of the nation, of the
productive powers of labor, of the labor force, these are the
kinds of metrics we need to be looking at.  Today, that means
fusion power.  It's not illustrated in the graphic here, but if
we're going to overcome those 30-40 years of stagnation, if we're
going to overcome the dramatic collapse in the productive
capabilities of our labor force; we can't just continue what was
done before.  As you've seen in all these historical examples, we
need to go to the new leaps in technology, the new leaps in
energy flux density, to drive the greatest increase in the
productive capabilities of the labor force.
        Then you have a system that will work; then the Four Laws
will work.  Now, a national bank will work; now, Glass-Steagall
will work, because it will facilitate this physical growth
process.  As we've talked about, this means fusion power, this
means the space program.  It's no accident that in those graphics
we were looking at, the period of the space program is very
clearly expressed in both of those; driving the increase in the
productive powers of labor, even in industries not seemingly
related to the space program.  But you see that driver program
reflected in this iron production, for example; you see it
reflected in the totality of the national energy flux density.
        Which brings us to Mr. LaRouche's Fourth Law; a fusion drive
program.  As he's increasingly emphasized, that is truly
integrated with a real space program.  So that has to be the
front end of a recovery program.  That'll come with all kinds of
things:  rebuilding our infrastructure; rebuilding the national
transportation system; power systems; all kinds of soft
infrastructure.  But it has to be understood as unified around
this increase of your productive capabilities; that's how an
economy works.
        That's what Hamilton understood, as Matthew showed us.
Smash the idea that we should be just agrarian, or should we be
manufacturing?  If you take people away from the other — a
complete lack of understanding of the synergistic relation of
actual human revolutions in technology; revolutions in the very
nature of mankind's relation to the environment more generally,
which are driven by real creative discoveries, creative thought,
real unique human growth.  This is the message, the unifying
conception that the American people need to understand and rally
around, if we're going to get out of the mess we're in now.  It's
not going to come from any form of monetarist jiggering of the
system; it has to be rooted in a real understanding of the true
science of human growth, of human progress.
        I know that might be a lot to throw at our viewers today,
but this is the historical challenge that we're facing.  We have
it in our history; we have it in Hamilton; we have in Lincoln; we
have it in Franklin Roosevelt.  We have it in a more developed
form than even them, with Mr. LaRouche's work.  But it's on us to
bring this to bear now as the revolution needed in the United
States.

        ROGERS:  Before we close out, let me just add one principle
from the standpoint that the underlying principle at the
foundation and at the core of Hamilton's four Reports and
LaRouche's Four Laws gets right at the heart of formation of our
US republic and the formation of Union as Hamilton saw it.  It is
what is defined directly in the US Constitution, but more
directly in the Preamble to the Constitution; the idea that
Hamilton was instrumental in developing.  This conception that
"We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more
perfect Union, establish Justice, ensure domestic tranquility,
provide for the common defense, promote the General Welfare, and
secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our posterity,
do ordain and establish this Constitution of the United States of
America."  What's at the core of that is the principle of the
General Welfare; which is directly under attack right now by the
actions of Obama.  That is explicitly shown in the attacks on not
only the General Welfare of the nation, but attacks on this very
principle of the increase of the productive powers of your
society, and on the creative and productive powers of the human
mind.  You can see this most explicitly in the insane recent
announcement by President Obama advocating the United States go
to Mars under the direction, should we say, and direct support of
private industry.  But in a recent conference President Obama was
in — the White House Frontiers conference — the key person he
was there with was a man by the name of Atul Gawande.  This is a
person who's been promoting the idea that the population doesn't
need health care, we need to cut healthcare; we need to kill off
more people.  That's what's at the core of the attack on the
General Welfare of our nation, is this idea of population
reduction — killing off of the population.
        When you look at what it was that was understood by
Alexander Hamilton on this question of advancing the productive
powers of labor, that was most directly expressed over a century
later after the death of Alexander Hamilton, with the birth of a
great pioneer by the name of Krafft Ehricke.  Krafft Ehricke's
understanding of the increase in the formation of a more perfect
union and the productive powers of labor, came with the
understanding that it was not until mankind left the confines of
one small planet — Earth — and actually went out into the far
reaches of our Solar System and developed the Solar System.  He
called explicitly for developing the Solar System through the
increase in the productivity of society, the increase of
manufactures, and the increase of everything that Ben just went
through very thoroughly in his remarks.
        I think what we get back to again, which was very clearly
understood by Alexander Hamilton, as Mr. LaRouche in the
foundation of his policies on physical economy, and by Krafft
Ehricke, is at the heart of this is the conception of, and the
principle of, the human mind.  The human mind in the power of
reason.  What I wanted to do is just read a quick quote from
Krafft Ehricke on this conception of the reasoning of the human
mind at the foundation of this very principle of what increases
the productive powers of labor in our society — or throughout
our universe.
        He says:  "We are cosmic creatures by substance; by the
energy on which we operate, and by the restless mind that
increasingly metabolizes information from the infinitesimal to
the infinite.  And on the infrastructure of knowledge, pursues
its moral and social aspirations for a larger and better world
against many odds.  Through intelligences like ourselves, the
universe — and we in it — move into a focus of
self-recognition.  Metal ore is turned into formation-processing
computers, satellites, and deep space probes; and atoms are fused
as in stars.  I cannot imagine a more foreboding, apocalyptic
vision of the future than a mankind endowed with cosmic powers,
but condemned to solitary confinement on one small planet."
        He goes on to take the principle which Alexander Hamilton
had defined in his four Reports, in his Report on Manufacturing,
and applies that to the development of space; particularly to the
development of our sister body, the Moon.  He says that the
manufacturing and the development of the process which would
organize the increase of society, the formation of a more perfect
union, off of the planet, would actually start with the
development of the Moon.  And he says:  "Lunar industry should be
viewed as an organism that over time evolves to progressively
more complex capabilities and generates sufficiently strong
foundations for expansion.  Lunar industry must be broad-based
and diverse if it is to last.  The need for economic feasibility
and early returns will require a skillful interplay between
market, consumer-oriented products and services, and
infrastructural investments such as transportation, energy, and
surface-space installations that expand food production and
diversity in industrial productivity."
        So, I think what is essential to understand is that
Hamilton's conception was not something that was confined to one
period in time, one period of history.  It wasn't confined to one
planet.  It was actually organized — as was later understood by
Krafft Ehricke — to the idea that man cannot be confined to one
planet.  If we are going to truly form a more perfect union, we
have to get off the Earth and develop the entirety of the Solar
System and universe we live in.  And only the human mind can do
that.

        OGDEN:  Well said. I think Hamilton would concur with that
one.  We can only encourage to do your own reading of these four
Hamilton Reports; and as Ben said at the beginning of the show,
we did make those four available on the LaRouche PAC website.
There's a big picture of Hamilton; you can click on it.  It's got
links to the four separate reports by Hamilton; each one is a
nicely formatted pdf.  You can print them out and read them on
your own.  I would also just emphasize that
larouchepac.com/fourlaws is the place where you can find
LaRouche's paper from close to two years ago, as you can see on
the screen.  This contains the four principles of LaRouche.  Put
those two together, and I think if you can do the work, we can
create the educated citizenry that's necessary to put these
policies into practice.
        So, the urgency of the mobilization for Glass-Steagall
absolutely persists; we are right on the cusp of a complete
meltdown of this financial system.  The Glass-Steagall
mobilization is one which must be generating the kind of activity
that we had during the JASTA mobilization.  That victory rendered
the Obama regime impotent.  Don't fall for the bluster and the
intimidation; don't give in to the fear that the Obama
administration is attempting to project right now.  We had a
revolution in this country with the override of the JASTA veto;
and it's a completely new situation.  If we maintain that kind of
sense of victory and urgency, we can continue to make some very
incredible breakthroughs.
        I'd like to thank Ben; thank you, Kesha; thank you, Michael.
Please stay tuned.  Obviously, we're going to just elaborate
these discussions much more in the days to come.  Thank you very
much, and good night.