Adonis Diaries

Archive for March 27th, 2011

What is the definition of a State: Beside Taxing the people?

Money printing is meant to facilitate internal commerce and expanding trades.  Taxing people for doing business in the Land is viewed as a logical and reasonable endeavor.  Consequently, the more a State print fictitious money, not covered by gold or anything of sustainable values, whatever tax is collected will never be enough to catch up with inflation.

Karl Marks wrote: “Tax is the foundation of a State”.

Sound correct, but I like to get to the root of the taxing concept.

What if “Printing money is the basis for any State“?  In any case, the State is imposing and collecting taxes as an indirect way of demanding a sizable percentage for the money printing monopoly.

We all know from movies and stories that mafia and gangs gather taxes from private enterprises, in return for providing security…

What kinds of security is needed when the gang has the sole monopoly of force in the region? Obviously, mafia and gangs are not in the business of providing health and social security for the people:  People have got to scramble for such kinds of luxuries.

Question:  What can be a discriminating factor between a gang with monopoly of force  and a State that does not consider offering health and social security to its citizens as an integral part of its business?

You may know the revolutionary adage: “No taxing without representation”.

What about the larger majority who pay taxes but are not equitably represented?  Is it the more you pay taxes the better representation you are entitled to?

Is it the better you transfer and turn-over printed money (financial institutions), the more eligible you are to represent the government interests? Is that the way it works?

If we turn the adage around and say: “No representation without paying taxes“; would that sentence smack as conservatism, and a pretty fair concept, socially and organizationally?  For example, if you are in the tax bracket of people earning less than the minimum yearly cut-off level for not paying taxes, would you feel very ashamed to demanding reforms and changes, simply because you didn’t contribute to the State’s treasury?  Is it the way it works?

For example, people in the oil rich producing countries of absolute monarchies and oligarchies (such as Saudi Arabia, Gulf Emirate States, Kuwait, Qatar, and even in Iran and Libya…) don’t have to pay taxes and the cost of gas for cars is minimal because the government do not take any percentage on gas consumed…  By the by, these regimes got it in their mind that their “citizens” are not entitled to significant representation at any level in the government.   Things are changing now in the Arab World.

If the population need social and health security, would these programs be categorized as charity programs in the budget?  

Or only the 20% of the poorest classes in the population should feel gratitude for their bigger brothers in their capability of turning over more money?

Is it how people are currently feeling in Europe with gimmicks of balancing budgets problems? 

People are demonstrating in mass and turning violent, because the governments are playing stupid by eliminating social and health programs, while giving bonus gifts to multinational corporation in tax laws.

The US has been imposing to the least developed States, in the last two decades, the economics constraints of the “Washington Consensus” ideology of the World Bank that says:  “Least developed nation governments should not invest their budgets on health and social programs, and they have to open their markets to foreign products, goods, and money…”

Least developed nations were demanded to just open up their markets to foreign trades and loosen up all laws on the flow of money handled by financial multinationals.

The Republican party in the US, and their allies, want to balance an impossible budget with their fundamental ideology that says: “It is not the business of a State to extending health and social benefits of any kinds to communities.”  Should a State governance emulates how gang operates?

What about privatizing the printing of money and eliminating the concept of State?

Anyway, the powerful financial institutions in the USA have de facto privatized the printing of money.

Four years after the financial crisis, and no resolutions have been contemplated or executed.

Least Developed Countries (LDC):  How are they fairing with the UN?

Least Developed Countries (LDC) is a name given in 1972 to the poorest nations, during the third conference of the UN on world commerce and development. How LDC are fairing after the many UN conference made in their name?

It is 1972, Santiago, the Capital of Chili, during President Salvador Allende. The UN consisted of 120 recognized States (currently, there are 189 States).  In that UN conference, the richest powers qualified 24 countries as LDC.

For example, a LDC is generally an insular country (no commercial sea port), has no satisfactory sanitary and hygienic facilities, high rate of illiteracy, high rate of infantile mortality, and earning less than $200 per year per individual.

At that conference, the World Bank economic ideology was supported by the US government under the “Washington Consensus”.  The guidelines under the consensus was that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) would not support State policies that refused to have open market for foreign products, or refuse to adopt loose laws permitting free flow of money, or capital managed by multinational financial companies, disposing of unregulated liberal commerce, have reduced the government involvement in social institutions and contribution to health and social security…

Tough reduction in social benefits like what current England, France, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, and Greece… are trying to make their people swallow under the banner of balancing budgets while increasing huge gifts extended to their multinational companies, and financial institutions…

It is 1981, Paris.  The first UN conference focused on the LDC that have grown from 24 to 49 poorest States. The rich powers decided to allocate 0.7% of their GNP to developing countries; 20% of that miserly aid was to be attributed to the LDC.

It was all well-intentioned promise that was not kept.

Latin America States were undergoing US pressures for avoiding social reforms and maintaining oligarchic structures…Most African States were experiencing long-lasting civil wars while multinational companies were exploiting the raw minerals at full scale.

It is 2001, Bruxelles (Belgium).  The third UN conference for the LDC.  The Washington Consensus on economic guidelines have proven to be the worst remedies for the developing countries. Emerging nations suffered financial crisis for obeying the guidelines of the IMF.  The new guidelines are oriented toward human development in education, preventive health, equitable job opportunities,

The civic organizations for sustainable development, conserving biodiversity, climatic changes…have been very dynamic and virulent in transforming the UN conferences from an economic and financial Davos focus to Porto Alegre spirit.

Still, the aid to development to the LDC never increased to 0.7% of GNP. Worse, the effective development aid was reduced to half:  Included in the budget of development to poorer nations are paying off accumulated debts and paying employees of the main institution at home base.

Since 2001, the world witnessed serious upheavals such as invasion of Iraq that lasted 9 years, the financial crisis of 2008, and the polarization of world powers between the US and China.  The US counted on for maintaining financial world stability and China being given the prerogative of world effective productions…

How are the least developed countries fairing with the successive UN conferences?

Evidences point out that central government of the powerful States have given up getting involved directly.  Only civic organizations are relied upon to cover for the impotent States activities.




March 2011

Blog Stats

  • 1,518,892 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 764 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: