[GJM] Re : Taxation, and So-Called "Re-Distribution" is Out-Dated Trash Thinking.

[robert searle]

Dear Michel Tremblay

        I should remind you that TFE is still in the
process of research, and development and all feedback
is welcome. It is a big subject, but I do feel it is
politically feasible especially if you have the banks,
and corporations largely on your side otherwise the
whole thing becomes "impossible".

Ofcourse, the power of governments could well be
diminished by the emergence of new, and existing  NGOs
which are better financed as never before. They could
become more competative rather than cooperative. This
may not necessarily be a bad thing, and obviously
national, and local laws would still be enforceable.
As with governments the success of NGOs, and their
programmes depends on efficient planning, and relevant
resources that may exist, or need to be developed.

Thank you for your response.

Robert Searle


--- Michel Tremblay <micheltremblay at gmail.com> wrote:

> Robert,
> 
> a reality check at who hold and yield power would
> maybe be important
> in order to assess the valitiy of your TFE things.
> For now to there,
> from a non TFE system to a TFE one, long steps would
> have to be done
> and huge principles based on rationnality (your
> model is by the way a
> highly liberal pluralist one based on individual
> rationality and
> rationalist ontology), which is according to me
> detached from even the
> extreme ends of what I would call, in Neogramscian
> terms, anything
> between the two ends of the "limits of the possible"
> spectrum, that
> is, where are we now and where is you TFE located.
> To me, it is far
> from being within the limits of the possible in
> terms of political
> feasability.
> 
> Plus it seems to me that you believe too much in
> rational
> individualism, as the example of you NGO thinking
> shows. NGOs, as they
> are today, are not always what thy should be, not
> necessarily a public
> good or redistributive in terms of social justice,
> are sometimes part
> of a huge industry and represent sometimes interests
> that ship away
> the general interest that the state (should)
> represent. Look at india
> and you;ll se that having thousands of ngo might be
> a good idea, but
> it is arguably not so much of a progressive thing,
> as the state is
> disminished while ngos, treating particular and
> localised public bads,
> take over in a fairly (nationaly analysed)
> undistributive way.
> 
> Michel
> 
> 
> 2006/11/6, Ole Lefmann <olefmann at tinyonline.co.uk>:
> > And whatever you look at is either pure nature or
> materials from nature
> > changed by manpower.
> >
> >
> >
> > The assertion that nature doesn't matter in
> economics is a lie propagated in
> > the interests of those who want to hold on to
> monopoly of nature to the
> > detriment of the crowds who are excluded from
> nature and hope for charity or
> > social security benefit or for that the merciful
> landowner will let them
> > work on his land for a small share of what they
> produce to the landowner.
> >
> >
> >
> > Ole
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> >
> > From: Carol Wilcox
> [mailto:carol.wilcox at labourland.org]
> >
> > Sent: 06 November 2006 19:11
> >
> > To: robert searle
> >
> > Cc: Dave Wetzel; John Christensen; Ole Lefmann;
> Prem Sikka;
> > timothy.phillips at phillipsconsultancy.com;
> c.hoskyns at coventry.ac.uk;
> > cafecito98 at yahoo.com; micheltremblay at gmail.com;
> > jerseycycletours at hotmail.com;
> cchavagneux at alternatives-economiques.fr;
> > waleseuropa at yahoo.co.uk; Rob Deeks; Richard
> Murphy; Brian Hodgson
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Intertax] Taxation,and So-Called
> "Re-Distribution" is
> > Out-Dated Trash Thinking.
> >
> >
> >
> > Robert, I am amazed that someone who asks us to
> believe that he has the
> >
> > solution to all the world's ills is totally
> oblivious of the importance of
> >
> > land. In its simplest conception, the economy
> consists only of land and
> >
> > labour.
> >
> >
> >
> > Carol
> >
> >
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >
> > From: "robert searle" <dharao4 at yahoo.co.uk>
> >
> > To: "Carol Wilcox" <carol.wilcox at labourland.org>
> >
> > Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 10:59 AM
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Intertax] Taxation,and So-Called
> "Re-Distribution" is
> >
> > Out-Dated Trash Thinking.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> >
> > >      TRANSFINANCIAL ECONOMICS GOES BEYOND
> TAXATION,
> >
> > > AND RE-DISTRIBUTION, AND CAN LEAD TO GLOBAL
> JUSTICE.
> >
> > >
> >
> > >
> >
> > > Dear Carol Wilcox
> >
> > >
> >
> > >         I fail to see why land has to be
> "...essential
> >
> > > for social justice...." What is far more
> important is
> >
> > > an advanced system of finance which
> >
> > > can do the following.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > i) fully finance the public sector without
> raising
> >
> > > taxes.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > ii) fully, or partly finance NGOs using new
> unearned
> >
> > > money to ensure that democracy flourishes, and
> becomes
> >
> > > more pervasive as never before. Moreover, this
> can
> >
> > > lead to poverty alleviation in a number of ways
> alot
> >
> > > quicker, and efficiently  than via
> redistribution of
> >
> > > existing financial wealth. This ofcourse would
> come
> >
> > > about through the agency of NGOs, and
> governments. The
> >
> > > only limits are ofcourse natural ones which are
> >
> > > effective planning, and resources (eg. land!!!!)
> >
> > >
> >
> > > iii) fully, or partly finance the productive
> private
> >
> > > sector via commercial grants, and interest free
> loans
> >
> > > notably in the area of simple, and complex forms
> of
> 
=== message truncated ===



Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com