Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site dciem.UUCP Path: utzoo!dciem!mmt From: mmt@dciem.UUCP (Martin Taylor) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re:Governments don't create wealth, eh? Message-ID: <1046@dciem.UUCP> Date: Fri, 10-Aug-84 17:22:54 EDT Article-I.D.: dciem.1046 Posted: Fri Aug 10 17:22:54 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 10-Aug-84 20:19:18 EDT References: <2032@utcsstat.UUCP> Organization: D.C.I.E.M., Toronto, Canada Lines: 60 On taxation being robbery and governments not creating wealth, I think Ian Darwin is absolutely dead wrong (not my usual impression of his postings). Capitalism works because of the concentration of control in a place where decisions can be made. Money in the hands of many people, a little for each person, cannot get refineries or factories, or even houses built. You have to concentrate the money for these things to happen. But it isn't the money itself that is useful -- that's only paper. It is coordinating the work of many people that is useful. These people may work directly for the money funnel (boss) or for the suppliers of goods to the capitalist, or for secondary suppliers ... All money achieves is the control of these people's work. Individuals or corporations do not create wealth. Wealth is not money. What wealth is, is the ability to have or do what you want, and that means organization. Wealth is created by orgainzing raw materials into something useful: ore into metal, silicon into computers, lumber into houses, and so forth. There are many things that are good for the community, but not good for any one individual. Basic research is such a thing. Roads are another. For these things, one needs a concentration of control in the hands of someone whose concern is the good of the community (and I don't want to get into the infinite recursion about it being to his benefit to be re-elected because he appears to be doing good for the community). The job of a capitalist is to improve his degree of control, and his means is to augment the supply of money at his disposal. Any society that is to stay healthy must have an organization that controls the work of people for the benefit of the community. They can do it by coersion (China, for example), or by using money in the same way as the capitalist. You have the choice between tithing your labour for community purposes or paying taxes so that someone else does the community work. Perhaps it would be better if we all took our turns as police, roadworkers, garbage collectors, scientists, and so forth, doing the necessary things that individuals might not feel worth while to them (or might not be able to afford). But such labour would also have to be either coerced or paid. In any event, SOME taxation money does go to create wealth. Other money goes to reduce the concentration of control by allowing more people to get a small share of the money, and they can thereby exercise cooperative control of the capitalists by buying or not buying products. That kind of control requires distribution of resources, not concentration. It has been shown by history that such distribution does not happen with laissez-faire government, but without it, the capitalists themselves suffer collectively. It is silly to say that government use of money does not create wealth. It does, by both direct and indirect means. It is equally silly to equate taxation with robbery. Without it, you wouldn't have the "money" you claim is yours and not ours (including you). -- Martin Taylor {allegra,linus,ihnp4,floyd,ubc-vision}!utzoo!dciem!mmt {uw-beaver,qucis,watmath}!utcsrgv!dciem!mmt