30 de abril de 2011
Inheritance TaxInheritance tax is another Keyensian method of wealth redistribution. It is based on the idea that a portion of the accumulated wealth of individuals needs to be redistributed through the government to those in greater need. It is, in my opinion, an excellent example of a society that takes a utilitarian view of its citizens. What else can explain the willingness to add to the grief of surviving relatives by making them pay for what they inherit from the one who died? Beyond that, there is not much difference between the inheritance tax and an income tax. The inheritance is treated as a special form of income and taxed at its own special rate.Property TaxThe main problem I have with property tax as it is implemented here in the United States is that it actually negates the principle of ownership. I say this because, regardless of what it may say on the deed of title, you can be evicted from what is supposed to be your property for failure to pay the tax. In what way is this different from the early feudal period where the landlord could kick out the tenants for failure to pay the required tax? I can see none. Despite the fact that we claim to own our property, we are in fact nothing more than tenants with more rights to the property than renters.Another problem with property taxes is that the government claims a revenue from that which it has not provided. John Médaille makes excellent points on the claim that a community can make on the value it has provided to the land, but the current practice of property taxes goes well beyond that. It also taxes the value provided by the individual or business as though the community has some natural claim to it. It is one thing to say that the presence of community has provided value to a piece of land and therefore the community can make a claim against that value; it is quite another thing to say that the community can make a claim against an increase value of your house on that land because you decided to improve it at your own expense.These problems are the reason I cannot support property taxes as they are currently implemented. With these defects in place, I would personally prefer the sales tax.
28 de abril de 2011
27 de abril de 2011
- The Well and the Shallows (1935).
26 de abril de 2011
The bourgeoisie cannot exist without constantly revolutionizing the instruments of production, and thereby the relations of production, and with them the whole relations of society. … Constant revolutionizing of production, uninterrupted disturbance of all social conditions, everlasting uncertainty and agitation distinguish the bourgeois epoch from all earlier ones. All fixed, fast-frozen relations, with their train of ancient and venerable prejudices and opinions, are swept away, all new-formed ones become antiquated before they can ossify. All that is solid melts into air, all that is holy is profaned …
25 de abril de 2011
23 de abril de 2011
19 de abril de 2011
16 de abril de 2011
15 de abril de 2011
14 de abril de 2011
And it is their faith that the only ultimate thing is fear and therefore that the very heart of the world is evil. They believe that death is stronger than life, and therefore dead things must be stronger than living things; whether those dead things are gold and iron and machinery or rocks and rivers and forces of nature.
It fancies that money will fight when men will no longer fight. So it was with the Punic merchant princes. Their religion was a religion of despair, even when their practical fortunes were hopeful. How could they understand that the Romans could hope even when their fortunes were hope less? Their religion was a religion of force and fear; how could they understand that men can still despise fear even when they submit to force? Their philosophy of the world had weariness in its very heart; above all they were weary of warfare; how should they understand those who still wage war even when they are weary of it? In a word, how should they understand the mind of Man, who had so long bowed down before mindless things, money and brute force and gods who had the hearts of beasts?
and Carthage fell as nothing has fallen since Satan.
13 de abril de 2011
11 de abril de 2011
10 de abril de 2011
So it has been with the wage-worker. So long as most citizens owned land and instruments and house-room, and the rest, then it was a natural contract for one man to take wages from another. The wage worker might himself be an owner, adding to his income for the moment by a particular bit of work; or if he saved on his wages he could become an owner. The number of wage-workers working for one particular man was small. The relations between the citizen who paid the wage and the citizen who earned it was personal and human. But when, under the action of competition and the use of expensive and centralized machines, and rapid communication, you had thousands and thousands of men working at a wage under one paymaster or corporation, things were utterly changed—and that is where we stand today. Our industrial society has become divided into a very large body which lives wholly, or almost wholly, on wages, that is on food, clothing, and housing doled out to it at short intervals by a much smaller number of paymasters, who control capital: that is, stores and reserves of land, housing, clothing and food.
The human relation has disappeared, you have the naked contrast between an employing class exploiting a vastly larger employed class for profit. The interests of the two are directly hostile. The wage-worker is the enemy of the paymaster. It is the business of the paymaster to give the wage earner as little as possible, and to make him work as hard as possible for that little. It is the business of the wage-worker to work, and therefore to produce, as little as possible for as much as he can get out of the paymaster. The whole scheme of wealth production becomes irrational and topsy-turvy. The paymasters, who direct, do not aim at wealth production—which serves us all—but at their own profit. The wage-worker does not aim at wealth production by his work, but on the contrary, at working as little as possible for the largest pay.
Meanwhile, every sort of social abomination arises from this evil root. There is the spiritual abomination of what is called “Class Hatred.” The oppressed hating the oppressor. There is the corresponding spiritual abomination of contempt, injustice, and falsehood. The secure oppressor despises the wage-earner, does him the injustice of using his labor without thought if the wage-earner’s advantage or of the community, and he tells a falsehood that was a truth at the beginning of the affair but is now a lie: he says that all this is based on free contract and is therefore rightly enforced by the courts of law and the armed services of the community.
9 de abril de 2011
7 de abril de 2011
For the authoritarian nationalist conception of the State represents something essentially new. In it the French Revolution is superseded. (...) We have modernized and ennobled the concept of democracy. With us it means definitely the rule of the people, in accordance with its origin. We have given the principle of Socialism a new meaning. ... Never have we left anyone in doubt that National-Socialism is not for export. ... We do not aim at world domination, but we do intend to defend our country, and it is our new conceptions which give us the inexhaustible and ever-renewed strength to do so. ...
Las tres hipóstasis del egoísmo son: el individualismo, el nacionalismo, el colectivismo.
La trinidad democrática.Nicolás Gómes Dávila
5 de abril de 2011
4 de abril de 2011
During the Middle Ages only the Jews were permitted to take interest. St. Thomas Aquinas agreed with Aristotle that taking of interest was usury and the Church acted accordingly. The lender, however, was permitted to take compensation for the gain he would forego, the loss he would encounter, the risk he would run, or whatever other external title their might be. But the Reformers, who either thought that they had to liberate a suffering humanity from the shackles of a terrorizing Church or believed that they had to give some compensations in return for their own brutal regimentation, permitted the charging of interest; thus the formation of modern capitalism was promoted.
Por Thomas Storck
"Na Idade Média as corporações profissionais, exemplo perfeito das instituições católicas, frequentemente limitavam a quantidade de propriedade que cada dono/trabalhador podia ter (por exemplo, limitando o número de empregados), precisamente no interesse de evitar que alguém expandisse demasiado o seu negócio levando outros à falência. Porque se a propriedade privada tem um objectivo, como Aristóteles e São Tomás diriam, ele é assegurar que cada homem e a sua família possam levar uma vida digna, servindo a sociedade. Uma vida digna, e não duas ou três. Se o meu negócio me permite sustentar-me a mim e à minha família, então que direito tenho de o expandir, privando outros do meio de se sustentarem e às suas famílias? Pois os medievais viam aqueles que se dedicavam à mesma actividade, não como rivais ou competidores, mas como irmãos empenhados no importante trabalho de providenciar ao público bens e serviços necessários. E como irmãos uniam-se nas corporações, tinham padres para rezarem pelos seus mortos, apoiavam as viúvas e órfãos, e de modo geral olhavam pelo bem-estar uns dos outros. Quem é que não é capaz de admitir que esta concepção de sistema económico é mais conforme à fé Católica do que a ética selvagem do capitalismo?"
O Estado deve manter-se superior ao mundo da produção, igualmente longe da absorção monopolista e da intervenção pela concorrência. Quando pelos seus órgãos a sua acção tem decisiva influência económica, o Estado ameaça corromper-se. Há perigo para a independência do Poder, para a justiça, para a liberdade e igualdade dos cidadãos, para o interesse geral em que da vontade do Estado dependa a organização da produção e a repartição das riquezas, como o há em que ele se tenha constituído presa da plutocracia dum país. O Estado não deve ser o senhor da riqueza nacional nem colocar-se em condições de ser corrompido por ela. Para ser árbitro superior entre todos os interesses é preciso não estar manietado por alguns.