[GJM] [Intertax]Is Taxation Necessary in the 21st Century, and Beyond?

Fri Jul 28 01:49:11 MDT 2006

--- Carol Wilcox <carol.wilcox at labourland.org> wrote:

Dear Carol Wilcox,

           Thank you your for your interesting
response. I must apologize to all for being "over the
top" with my introduction to the subject of
Transfinancial Economics, or TFE. Yet, I still hold it
to be of the highest importance compared with the
limited understanding of Tax Justice, and taxation in
general.

I will answer your following remarks on TFE, or
Transfinancial Economics....I also see you are a
Georgist!! So, this should be interesting!!

> Dear Robert
> 
> Thank you for sending me this. I think the idea of
> creating money for public
> finance is well worth investigating since most
> taxation regimes have a
> negative impact on the economy and are inherently
> regressive. However, your
> prescription would seem to imply excessive
> regulation and interference in
> free markets in order to control inflation and the
> mechanisms for
> implementation are in any case a long way away from
> becoming achievable.

SEARLE REPLIES. We already have "....excessive
regulation and interference in the free market..."
With respect, I feel that this comment is largely
meaningless. Businesses would flourish as never before
in a tax, and interest free economy. As I said in the
article it would be a very small price to pay if
super-flexible electronic controls over inflation were
introduced. 

> 
> Whilst I may agree with you on some of your 'key
> anti-tax arguments', I
> think you should acknowledge that there are some
> important arguments for
> taxation. Christoph Habammer's paper Gender Bias in
> Tax Systems (sent by
> Andreas yesterday) lists the 'Role of Tax Systems',
> in addition to raising
> revenue for public goods and services, as 'to
> correct market imperfections
> and to encourage or discourage certain types of
> behaviour'. I think you
> would agree that the latter is a legitimate role for
> taxes and that the
> 'fines' to which you refer are no substitute.

SEARLE REPLIES. The problem with many people when it
comes to criticising TFE is that they miss the BIGGER
PICTURE. As such they overstate the minor points of
the subject.Moreover, it largely fruitless to talk
about taxation when it could be abolished, and
replaced with something far more advanced. We have the
technology to control the levels of inflation, and
devaluation becomes a virtual impossibility. Ofourse,
we must never forget the massive implications of TFE
some of which I list here...

1. Properly funded social,economic, and political
programmes by democractic government.

2. Properly funded social, economic, and political
programmes by NGOs. This would increase the level of
democracy as never before.....

3. The power of the TNCs would be challenged by NGOs
as never before making them more acountable in a
variety of ways.

4. A massive overdrive towards the national, and
international  creation of various sustainable
technologies as never before in human history.

5. People would have all their hard-earned money to
spend without any deductions of it via taxation,
and/or interest from loans......

              Need I say more!?

> 
> Although the Habammer paper mentions correction of
> market imperfections it
> does not elaborate, possibly because current tax
> systems rarely succeed in
> achieving this aim.
> 
> To this list I would add redistribution of wealth
> and I agree with you that
> 'financial wealth is not properly redistributed at
> the present time'.
> However I do not see how your proposed system would
> achieve this.

SEARLE REPLIES. Though the rich would get richer, and
poor would also get richer. The reason being that
there would be a greater amount of money going around.

However, those NGOs concerned with fairer wealth
distribution,poverty alleviation, and relevant issues
would be financially empowered as never before because
here we are largely  talking about ethical rather than
political issues. Thus, they would become a powerful
educator, and influence in society, and politics to
find credible means of achieving fairer wealth
distribution. 

The real question which really matters at the end of
the day is this. It is NOT that important whether the
rich get richer or not. What should concern us is a
new understanding of money so that the poor can lift
themselves out of their present situation. The rich
are not going to suddenly disappear, and genuine
redistribution is not going to radically change things
overnight. 

Personally, I do not believe in our present
competative capitalism. I feel something akin to
socialism is vital. Yet, I am not that foolish to
believe that it will happen in the next few decades.
Instead, I see the new financial empowerment of the
present  capitalist system as being the probable seeds
of its own downfall because as mentioned before NGOs
would be financed as never before to tackle the
question of wealth distribution, poverty alleviation,
TNCs, et al. Thus,they would become a REAL FORCE in
society,and politics. Yet, without genuine financial
empowerment they are not going to achieve much. 

Moreover, the green, and sustainable movement  should
concentrate on the real issue, and that is MONEY
BECAUSE IT THE MEANS BY WHICH LIMITED RESOURCES ARE
CONTROLLED. BY CHANGING THAT YOU CHANGE EVERYTHING.

  Thus, MONEY = CONTROL = POWER = INFLUENCE.

There is too much emphasis on limited resources, and
this needs to be redressed.

> There is a tax reform which could be easily
> implemented now: annual land
> value tax or resource rental. This meets all the
> criteria for a good
> taxation system, including correction of the most
> dysfunctional market of
> all - the land market. Please find attached for
> information 2 papers which
> were produced for the UN and visit our website
> www.labourland.org (has links
> to many other LVT sites.
> 
> I look forward to hearing from you.
> 
> Carol Wilcox
> Labour Land Campaign

SEARLE REPLIES. I am well aware of LVT. But, most
people in the country are not really that interested.
More importantly, it is limited in extremis to the
vision of Transfinancial Economics,or Non-Taxation
Monetary Reform.

Regards

Robert Searle

> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "robert searle" <dharao4 at yahoo.co.uk>
> To: <intertax at listen.attac.de>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006 8:16 AM
> Subject: [Intertax] IS TAXATION NECESSARY IN THE
> 21st CENTURY, AND BEYOND??
> 
> 
> >
> > Dear All,
> >
> >        Is taxation really necessary in the 21st
> > century. This is the REAL QUESTION. We can waste
> our
> > time uselessly about tax avoidance, and tax
> evasion or
> > we can do something which is actually USEFUL, AND
> > CONSTRUCTIVE with our time...that is to create a
> > super-advanced financial system that puts HUMANITY
> > FIRST. What you read below is something of the
> highest
> > importance. Yes, it still requires further
> research,
> > and development but it has the seeds of immense
> good
> > for all of us on this planet.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> >
> > Robert Searle.
> >
> >
> >       Title of "Working Paper" Transfinancial
> > Economics, the Non-Taxation Revolution(below).
> >
> >
> >
> > This is a summary of a research, and development
> > project concerned with Transfinancial Economics,or
> > more simply TFE. Essentially, it revolves around 
> the
> > concept that new unearned money could be created
> > responsibly where there is a genuine need.
> >
> > What follows is a deliberately simple, and
> > non-technical account of how this could be
> achieved
> > without hyper-inflation. So-called "facts and
> figures"
> > are not included here but ones own independant
> > intelligence should be able to see the massive
> > social,economic, and political implications of
> TFE..
> > which incidently is also known as Non-Taxation in
> this
> > context, or Non-Taxation Monetary Reform.
> >
> > Essentially, Transfinancial Economics is a
> > "revolution" in our understanding of finance, and
> the
> > world.
> >
> >
> > 1.LEGAL ACCESS TO FINANCIAL POWER, AND
> > DECENTRALISATION.
> >
> > There are three types of organizations that could
> > benefit from the responsible creation of new
> unearned
> > money. They are:-
> >
> > i) National Democratic Governments: Instead of
> raising
> > direct, and indirect taxes an independant public
> > authority, or even some kind  of a private
> financial
> > institution  known as a Central Treasury Bank
> would
> > have powers to create new unearned money in a
> measured
> > way.This would be used to fully fund as never
> before
> > various social, economic, and political
> programmes.
> >
> > Thus, cost-cutting would no longer matter.
> However,
> > the Central Treasury Bank under Law would make
> > appropriate checks to ensure that finance orders
> from
> > a democratic government are absolutely neccessary,
> and
> > beneficial. In other words, transparency is vital
> to
> > control, or curb the misuse of any funding.
> >
> > ii) Local Democratic Governments: As with the
> above
> > new unearned money could be created in a measured
> way
> > by a Central, or local Treasury Bank. Hence, local
> > taxes would no longer be necessary.
> >
> > iii) Non-Governmental Organisations,or NGOs: Many
> of
> > these would be financed in full, or in part by new
> > unearned money without the need of fund-raising,
> or
> > large charitable donations from wealthy people.
> > Essentially, we are discussing in the main here
> > charitable humanitarian NGOs, and they would be
> fully
> > funded in most cases probably. They would not need
> any
> > finance from governments,big business,religious
> > movements, and/or sects. There are those that
> ofcourse
> > do, and they could possibly still be partly funded
> by
> > new unearned money. The origination of such
> capital
> > would emanate from Grant Generating Banks. These
> could
> > be independent public authorities, or
> alternatively
> > exist as a private commercial venture. Anyway, as
> is
> > the case in todays world which NGO gets how much
> > financial aid would be decided by specific trusts,
> > foundations, and the like.
> >
> >
> > However, it must be said it is very important to
> > understand that what we have just been discussing
> is
> > Centralised TFE in which big government still has
> > role. This can be greatly diminished if a future
> > Transfinancial, or Non-Taxation NGO(s)wanted right
> at
> 
=== message truncated ===

___________________________________________________________ 
The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html