Tuesday, August 30, 2011

New Global Taxes

(Milton Friedman`s economic model appeals much more than the Keynesian economic model of Government intervention in markets...which seems to be running on steroids in this scary day and age. This article is prefaced with the video above that cuts to the core of this philosophical issue that has become so important to our future security...and in response to this recent announcement by CEPAL, a division of the United Nations)

If it were not bad enough that most domestic governments have almost unlimited taxation authority without approval of its constituents...we now receive the news that Global taxation is on its way as well. This article published by the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC...or CEPAL in Latin America) should sound alarm bells to any free enterprise, free market thinker throughout the globe. While it is obvious there are no true free markets left in the world...those of us who continue to produce, dream and work towards individual sovereignty and self sufficiency should strongly react and prepare to fight this latest round of GLOBAL TAXATION.

This taxation is sponsored by and for the benefit of the United Nations and its various constituencies. While the UN was initially started on noble premises and to support freedom around the globe, I would suggest overall it has turned into an huge global body that represents the interests of the governments of the nations who form it and not necessarily the individuals within those nations. It has been almost powerless in the face of global conflicts and confrontations to unify and fight terrorism or statism. In fact, its policies have been very status quo for sustaining the power of statism more than individual rights for world citizens. More often than not the UN has supported socialism and world government as the solution for the ills of the world versus free markets and individual rights.

There are only five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (Russia, the United States, China, the United Kingdom, and France), who are all nuclear powers and have created an exclusive nuclear club whose powers are unchecked within the UN. And of course, one would question if anything is "united" about those five states accept for maybe their being the 5 largest producers of global armaments that continue to fuel all global conflicts including both sides of the war on terror and against the drug trade. One could argue that the UN can`t lose a war because it has interests on both sides of the battle.

So...next step...GLOBAL TAXATION in ADDITION to the arduous taxes these member states already impose upon their citizens. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem if these nation-states wanted to appoint a percentage of THEIR domestic taxes and incomes to help "global warming" and poverty issues in Latin America or elsewhere. But no, what they are proposing is to IMPOSE new global taxes on the producers in the world who are already taxed to high heaven by those same states. They are calling it a "transaction tax", but rest assured this is just the first inch of a mile they intend to take.

So many issues arise with this proposal. Lets just focus on the Latin American portion of this agenda. ECLAC, or CEPAL as they are known here in Latin America, according to their own website...

"... is headquartered in Santiago, Chile, one of the five regional commissions of the United Nations. It was founded with the purpose of contributing to the economic development of Latin America, coordinating actions directed towards this end, and reinforcing economic ties among countries and with other nations of the world. The promotion of the region's social development was later included among its primary objectives."

Their admitted and historic basis of philosophy is that "Keynesian thought, the historicist school and the Central European institutionalists exerted a decisive influence in the Commission's early years. More recently, the focus has been on a revival of this line in inquiry, along with the new theories of international trade and industrial organization, evolutionary theories of the firm and the new institutionalism.
How comforting...

Lets dissect this for a moment. Keynesian thought is behind all these government "stimulus" programs where governments intervene in everything from markets, to currencies, to bailing out the losing large institutions that have such a poor track record of managing and maintaining themselves. How is this working so far? Has it been helpful and productive to take the moneys of the taxpayers and productive business people or corporations...and put it behind the losing entities and false financial pariahs who have run Wall Street for so long? Oh, and how about those billions that go to international relief in such places as Haiti, Afghanistan and all the other mudholes of the world? A majority of those funds end up in the pockets of the defacto rulers and/or middlemen...who represent those same countries to the United Nations! Does anyone else see this mad cycle of good money after bad and supporting losing causes?

I have news for you ladies and gentlemen...this institutional approach to governing the world and solving the economic "crisis" of the world is NOT WORKING. Money is being filtered and churned through these huge taxing authorities...and very little of it is getting down to the point of need. Sure, you see UN vehicles occasionally on the news delivering food or relief to starving, displaced people in Africa and other desolate places...but I would suggest that each truckload cost 10-20 times more per delivery than if that support was more localized or regional in its source. We truly do NOT have food shortages in this world...we just have a distribution and COST crisis...and the UN is doing little in that regard with all the billions it takes in. One reason for that may be the fact that in 1945, the UN had 51 members. It now has 193, of which more than two-thirds are developing countries. When it comes to the combined budgets of the UN, it is this General Assembly who has authority on how those funds are spent. Each member country...1 vote. That to me reads that the poor developing countries of the globe have control on the UN when they want to...just based on simple math.

A few more UN facts have to be pointed out for the purposes of this blog. Though the US has one vote of 193 members...we pay 22% of the $5 Billion budget. China pays 3.2% roughly. Russia isn`t even in the top 10...yet both China and Russia along with the USA has vetoing power over the whole UN. This whole scenario is whacked out. And now the UN wants to impose global taxes on ALL global transactions? WOW!

I encourage anyone to review-download the 2010 report from CEPAL titled "Time For Equality". While I don´t take issue with the overall philosophy of equal rights for all within a democracy and the world at large...I do take issue with the way and reasoning why institutions like this one perpetuate such a message. So much of what they say here sounds admirable and doable...yet so much of the fundamental philosophy underneath it shouts out "unprincipled equality"...such as suggesting that true democracy equals equality by way of REDISTRIBUTION. This is the fundamental error of the socialistic model. You cannot justify STEALING from the haves in order to support the have nots. Everyone has to learn to "fish". If society dictates feeding everyone equally regardless of their work ethic or entrepreneurship...history has proven that the power will go to the FEW institutional "fishing companies" who will rake their portion off the top and give the rest to the masses. Is this really an improvement over a "corporate elite" model or monopolies? At least monopolies provide REAL jobs and incentives. (no, I am not advocating monopolies...just making an illustrative point).

Where equality comes in is the right to fish...or work...in a competitive environment. Much of Latin America`s economic inequality is actually supported by "protectionism" and foreign worker quotas. No one down here wants "competition" for jobs. They want "protection" of jobs. They want jobs to be a "right", not something that is earned. They want a "status quo" they can always count on. This is just irrational in a competitive, real world. If a nation-state does not allow better educated workers to come in from the outside, they will continue to drivel on way behind the global curve. It is about competition...not rights...that limit many of these countries from thriving in today`s global economies. These markets are so controlled and protected...there can be no true incentive to change or grow with technology advancements. And when government jobs in many of these Latin countries equal 60-70% of the jobs available...there is an obvious waste and stench of bureaucracy and non productivity...since we all know that governments PRODUCE NOTHING. They simply exist to oversee the laws of the land and protect the borders. In reality, they just simply "redistribute" some of what they rake in from productive society. How can this activity require a majority of the country`s workforce? Why doesn`t CEPAL start working on THAT issue?

But no, it is easier to attack and vilify "inequality" of income especially in the private sector, than to look at the extreme wastes and instant millionaires produced by these socialistic states of Latin America. These are not TRUE democracies...and no matter how much tax you bleed out of the economic producers, you are NOT going to bring equality to these masses until you stamp out the cancer of "entitlement" and "redistribution" from your methodology. Instead, focus on freeing and equalizing MARKETS and unleashing the power of innovative INDIVIDUALS to grow businesses and create jobs much better and faster than governments can.

The pyramid of the solution is UPSIDE DOWN. The institutions like CEPAL and the UN are not going to provide the economic answers. Individuals and families are. Allowing them to tax on a global scale is NOT going to help the poor and disenfranchised. It is only going to take institutional dominance and political filtering to a whole new level of imbalance. This is "Reaganomics" in reverse. The trickle down of tax cuts...versus the "trickle down" of tax INCREASES. Governments should not be growing in size...companies and producers should. Until that changes in Latin America and beyond...you will not see more equality just because you exercised some new taxes on every transaction in the world. My God...get a grip on reality!

No comments: