Without dispute, government must act to have any effect. Government must assess a tax in order to act, for she cannot finance her operations without money or resources; unless, in some way, she manages to motivate enough people to freely contribute both their time and resources.
When a tax is assessed, the economy is always hurt. The tax assessment hurts the individuals against whom it is levied, all those who do business with him, and those who do business with them, and so on. Tax increases weaken the economy. Increasing government actions translates to both a weaker economy and a more powerful government. A more powerful government is more easily inclined to increase her taxes on a weakened economy, being less able to resist tax increase initiatives.
An income tax decreases a person's desire to work by reducing the rewards for his labors. The results are higher unemployment, and fewer people accepting jobs with increased responsibilities. This leaves much less capital available for spending, and thus weakens the economy.
A sales tax decreases a person's desire to spend. Less spending weakens the economy, but the result here differs from the first case in that people have higher wage jobs and more money saved for difficult times. The wages for increased responsibility are not diminished and therefore people are more likely to rise to their full potential, producing their finest work at their best wages. Unemployment is much lower because people are more inclined to work when the wages are undiminished by taxation. People will tend to save more because the penalty for purchasing goods is higher. During difficult times, people continue working through them because their savings carry them through it. Therefore depressions are much lighter and shorter with sales tax versus the income tax. Taxation still weakens the economy by slowing the business side, but the working part of the economy continues with as efficiently as possible given the economic state.
The decision of whether government should do something rests with the consideration of the cost on the individuals taxed. Reversing the popular quote, "No representation without taxation," because those who are taxed understand best the cost on themselves and on those with whom they do business. All must be taxed equally for all to be represented equally, and that taxation must be applied as a sales tax for the motivation to work to remain strong and keep everyone producing their best for the economy and receiving the best wages for their work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Sounds like just the standard failed libertarian thinking.
Cheers!
RichGriese.NET
The only thing that has failed about libertarian thinking is the election of their politicians. The only way to fail is to try and libertarians simply have not had enough people in office for their ideas to be tried. Conservatives and liberals on the other hand have done more in the last few years to destroy our country through fiscal irresponsibility and unethical policies than in all previous decades combined. Over 12 trillion dollars in debt. Does anyone even comprehend the magnitude of that? http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ http://defeatthedebt.com/debt-clock/?gclid=CJy2ouOVnaECFcNO5wodY3J1yA
You think any nation will ever use a libertarian system? I don't.
Cheers! webulite.com
I understand. I guess that is why libertarianism seems so irrelevant. First you have no nations that use a libertarian model. and even libertarians don't see any nations using them in the future.
Cheers! webulite@gmail.com
Will any nation go libertarian? I can't say that I want them too, because my ideas differ greatly from such ways of thinking. But given our recorded history, we see that political power both attracts corruption and corrupts leaders. So we can never expect a good political system to naturally occur on this earth. As such, it is the lot of philosophers to dream and of historians to lament, of scholars to theorize the ideal systems and of theologians to promise the heavens. For me, I create the best possible systems within the constraints of our real world, regardless of whether those systems prove popular with the people. For the masses would rather waste the riches of others in their own selfish pleasure, whenever they have the power to do so, than to work by the sweat of their own backs for their own long-term good.
I WAS hoping that you might illustrate your examples of my failed thinking though, since you called my ideas examples of failed libertarian thinking.
The cool thing about libertarians is that they care less about what happens to others (i.e. adopting a libertarian government) than about what does not happen to themselves (i.e. removal of government regulation on their lives). So of course they don't care about what other people adopt for their government, only about which kind of government rules them. Personally, I care more about impartial equality for all than anything else. Partial equality would be where people actively make everyone equal in terms of wealth, skills, etc. Impartial equality simply says that I will remove the power of dividing people by race, interest, gender, or any other attribute so that every person retains access to the same opportunities equally. It says that anyone merely asking a person their race or income is inherently and ethically wrong.
Post a Comment