According
to renowned physicist Albert Einstein the hardest thing in the world to
understand is the income tax. Einstein spent a lot of time thinking about
various things including income tax.
What
was Einstein talking about, filing tax forms, well if he was talking about
that the latest software makes it easier for individuals to fill out their tax
forms. It is possible that Einstein was talking about the reason of the income
tax. He would, of course, have been using his understanding of some of his
greatest works, especially relativity to try and explain income tax.
Understanding
relativity, one would get to the conclusion that income tax is relative, and
one wouldn’t be wrong, it would give some understanding of income taxes. Income
taxes can be said to be relative in many aspects. Let us say we had a flat tax
rate, say 8% for all. Take 4 fisherman, 1, 2, 3, and 4. 1 and 2 both catch 25
fish each a day, whilst 3 and 4 both catch 100 fish a day. This means that 1
and 2 pay 2 fish in taxes a day whilst 3 and 4 pay 8 fish a day in taxes.
Though
both 1 and 2 pay the same amount of taxes, both will feel it differently. 1
might already have a larger wealth base than 2 such that the taxes are not felt
as much as 2 who has a lower wealth base. Though the taxes are the same, the
work done is the same, for 1 who has a larger wealth base the relative effects
of the tax are not the same.
Another
factor to consider is the household. If all adults in household 1 are working
and in household 2, only 2 is working the relative tax hit will be harder on 2
than 1. Of course, the same applies to 3 and 4. When one wants to know the
impact of a tax, it will be relative because outside earning that income there
are other factors that determine how far that disposable income will go after
tax. This means that both the tax and the income have different relative facts.
This is
certainly a realistic view of the world as explained by relativity. This makes
it difficult to understand how people conclude when it comes to how much taxes
should be paid. Though these questions asked by looking at relativity give
questions that should be pondered, it does not ask enough questions and makes
the understanding of taxes to be difficult, why?
Einstein
once asked a question, does a mouse looking at the moon change the nature of
the universe? The same mind wanted to take life out of existence, if only we
could study physics as if there are no humans there is no life. Einstein and
his followers are trying to look at the universe without life. As life is here,
if you try to look at the universe without life, it is impossible to get to a
theory that explains everything, it is impossible because life is part of the
universe.
Does a
mouse looking at the moon change the universe? The answer is a simple yes. The
existence of the mouse does change the nature of the universe every single
time. The photons from the moon hit the mouse instead of the ground because the
mouse exists. The mouse does affect its surroundings because if the mouse did
not exist its surroundings would not be affected in the manner of its
existence.
You
cannot take life out of existence, you can’t wish yourself away as you study or
observe something, you are observing t how can you not matter, then who is one
observing for. First and foremost, they observe for themselves, so that they
know, they then inform others of that knowledge. You can’t then take a mind
that says life is not important and study taxation. Only the living pay taxes,
the spoils of the dead are shared out by the living. No dead person signs anything
or gives anything away, or pays anything, they are dead, they have no say in
what happens to stuff that was their whilst they where still alive.
We
return to is the mouse important, the answer to this question is yes and the
reason is that if it didn’t exist, the environment would be different, it
wouldn’t cast a shadow. That shadow it casts has changed the nature of the
universe. The mouse is in a relationship with whatever is in it’s location
including the moon and sun light.
That
everything is in a relationship is about a mind that accepts reality as it is,
the mouse is in a relationship just as much as the earth is in a relationship
with its surroundings. The mind that accepts everything is in a relationship does
not say this relationship is more important than this relationship, it doesn’t
come from that kind of culture, it see’s relationships and that all
relationships take energy to maintain even the relationships Einstein predicted
take energy to maintain just as a mouse looking at the moon. All relationships
have the same principle that is why freedom is lost.
Taxes
are about relationships in society. They are about relationships between the
government and the people and the role of government. How a government taxes
the people is the ideology of that government? It shows what kind of
relationship the government has decided to have with the people it governs.
How the
government spends that money also shows the relationship the government has
decided to have with the people it governs. If how a government taxes and how
the government spends those tax revenues illustrates the relationships between
the government and those who are governed, then every aspect of taxation shows
the relationship between the governed and the rulers.
Providing
a service as such from the government is old and new, some governments do, some
governments do not, but all governments tax. At the end of the day the
collection of taxes and how those revenues are used is up to the discretion of
the government, and the government gets its legitimacy from society.
A tax
is a mechanism used to provide a revenue stream for the rulers. The government
then spends that money depending on the relationships it has with those who are
being ruled.
To
survive human beings, need food, water and air. A human being’s relationship with
food, water and air is vital for survival, without these the existence of that
human is at stake. Air is free for all, abundant enough for all life. Humans must
try to get food and water, to get food you must eat food that is where the
energy to be in relationships comes from.
A tax
must provide this energy to the rulers who will then distribute to sources they
deem fit. A tax provides food and water for those in government and those in
service to the government.
Survival
ensured, to increase the chances of survival humans need clothing and shelter.
A tax provides this for the government.
It is
better to talk of households, a small household being a single person. The
young ones in that household need the tools of life, knowledge if they are
supposed to have better chances of survival as adults, this comes through
education. Taxes provide this for the government, for the rulers of society,
including entertainment.
If a
tax means that the one who is being taxed has their food water or even shelter
compromised, meaning their offspring are in peril, the relationship is
endangering their existence in the present and in the future. But we must be
honest, near starvation is not starvation, such relationships between governments
and those they rule have existed since dawn of governments.
Though
mammals, humans do not want to walk around naked, they need clothing, often a
status symbol that is the relationship people have with their clothing, very
important functionally and socially.
If one
is a functioning human being when their offspring are in peril they should be
concerned. The offspring especially if they are young are vulnerable as they
can not get food and shelter for themselves, but they need these for survival.
One gives birth as a way of continuity of society, the relationship is such
that love from the parents should be to look after the well being of that child,
those are functioning human beings and hence the continuation of the family,
society, and eventually race.
Even
though a relationship exists, if taxpayers are starving, it is an illogical viewpoint
from those that are paying the taxes, the relationship will not be very
sustainable, this depends on the makeup of those who are starving whilst paying
taxes. That make up is about relationships in their heads, how their minds
function, such situations become sustainable only because of the make up of
those being taxed whilst starving, whilst their offspring are in peril.
It is
illogical from the side of those paying the taxes whilst starving, they will
spend a great deal of time fixated on food and shelter. From those who receive
the taxes and distribute the taxes. Often the heads of government and those of
the court, you can call them ministers, secretaries, advisors, what ever the
name, they get access to food first because they are the ones given a budget
for their portfolios. The priority being those protecting the borders of the
society as they also protect the government that controls that going on within
those borders.
If
people are starving and paying taxes, we see this relationship more often than
we should. A broken-down system when ordinary civil servants (part of bureaucratic
machinery) are not paid, but the top officials in government and the protectors
of the border get more than enough food.
This
brings about the idea of the boundaries, who are they being protected for, the
government or those paying taxes whilst starving. To pay taxes one must have
produced something. If they are then at near starvation in majority, that means
the government has taken as much as it can from them, everybody in society,
that little from everyone adds to a lot for a few.
Of
course, for those few who benefit from taxing people even though many they tax
are at near starvation, to them the relationship will of course seem fine and
they will convince those they need to of the logic of the system. Though such
relationships between government and those governed have often existed in the
past, they still exist today. Robin Hood’s come from such societies.
Most
societies however do have a functional civil service, they need to be paid as
they are part of the government machinery and they are paid by taxes collected.
These taxes collected are at the discretion of the ruler who distributes funds
to the court according to taste. That taste of course been affected by
relationships in their heads that are a product of the past location of the
ruler. Members of the court, today called Secretaries, Ministers, Deputy, or
some such official sounding name.
Every
income of the individuals involved in the government machinery comes from
people who have created goods and services. They are paid and then do the
services of the government, that has a single individual at the top. These
services include collecting taxes for the government, business licenses, drivers
licenses fees, fines for the government fines such as anything they desire is
some punishable offence that deserves a fine, keeping a record of number of
people in society, tariff charges for spending your money the way you want,
after converting work from effort.
Taxes
are about human relationships. All relationships are maintained by energy and
thus there is a loss of freedom. The government and those that are taxed are in
a relationship and thus both loose freedoms. The government even if it taxes
starving people needs those people to provide taxes and thus are in a
relationship and lose freedom. The government needs to expand energy collecting
taxes, needs energy to maintain an order according to their ideology, the
government too loses energy. The taxpayer loses energy by giving away a part of
their work in the form of taxes. That work takes energy. Taxes are taking part
of the work, and work is about effort, effort converted to work.
When
talking of energy, effort converted to work, that is another way of looking at
money, given that all relationships lead to a lose of freedom. Money is
essentially a claim of the work of others, effort that has been converted to
work. Money is a claim essentially on the energy of creating that good, it is a
value of the energy that was used to create that good and service. When one
purchase a good or service, they are valuing qualities of energy spent in
creating that good and service.
For a
fisherman, this means that they give up a part of their work to the government.
They would have sold that work to get money in order to claim the works of
other members of society. To claim that portion of energy that transcends
effort and becomes work. Not all effort becomes work done.
A tax is
the government taking ones claim of other members of societies work for itself.
The government is taking claims to the relationships that exist, it is claiming
energy that was expanded to create work for itself. This work that the
government is claiming is a result of relationships that fishermen had with his
boat, his equipment, the lake, sea, or ocean where they go fishing. The fish
the fishermen take to the market is a result of energy expanded in a
relationship, that relationship in the case of the fishermen is that of fishing
and everything that goes with it. The government claims a portion of this
energy that is represented by money.
What is
a fair tax? As long as an individual has food, water, shelter and clothing on a
daily basis they will remain alive and go back to work tomorrow to get food,
water, shelter, and clothing, that is how powerful a relationship people have
with these basic requirements. A slave basically receives food, water, shelter
and clothing., they are back to work tomorrow driven by the need for food, water,
shelter and clothing. That is why slaves are sold naked, they are given clothing,
given everything at the whim of the master.
Most
aspire to more than just food, water, shelter, and clothing in this modern
world of 2020. They have other needs over and above needs of purely making it
to the next day to get food, water, shelter and clothing, if this is the case,
well we know what relationships are happening in society understanding what a
slave is. If a person would have afforded some little accessories before the
tax and after the tax they have just food, water, shelter and clothing enough
energy to get back to work the next day, the same relationship a slave has with
the material, that person will not likely be very happy.
What is
a fair tax? That depends on what kind of culture a society is. A culture is
about how relationships are handled in a society. Culture is certainly more
than dancing, festivals, and religion, all these things are about how people
treat each other in society. More than anything, how you treat another member
of society is your culture. That relationship one has with other members of
society is culture.
A fair
tax is the total of individuals desires. If the fishermen catch fish and not enough
is left for them after taxation, relationships in their mind will tell them
that is nor fair. The recipient of the taxes however will justify it as fair. That
is just relationships with other humans, with oneself. A fair tax is about
culture. Somebody might not mind paying 20% in taxes if it goes to help other
members of society but will mind if it goes to help those at the top of the ruling
class, and vice versa, it depends on relationships.
But
whilst thinking of your own desires, put yourself in the other guys reality,
everybody in society is in a relationship merely by being members of that
society. It is about the overall view of society of the government, it is about
the overall view of society of those being taxed, it is about the relationships
in society. You can tax people 100%, a slave is taxed that much, but you will
be back at work tomorrow as long as system gives you food, water, clothing and
shelter, slaves have gone to work everyday throughout history.
That is
nothing difficult to understand about income taxes. They are always at the
discretion of the government, their primary purpose to keep the government
going, how that money is spent is about relationships within that society.
Bhekuzulu
Khumalo
If you like what you read, be generous if you can it will be appreciated
No comments:
Post a Comment