Taxation, or What?

 Taxation, or What?

My friend, the accountant (see [1]) is not on top-form any more, is not up for another discussion on the need for more effective taxation, and I will have to develope the arguement with myself; or find some editor who will take a risk and share this with the public. 

I established (in [1]) that the money that flows into the pockets of the rich, stagnates there; it does not get spent and, in that process multiply via the recycling mechanism demonstrated elsewhere [2] and called 'the multiplier'. My solution (in [1]) was to tax it back into circulation; taxing in a socially acceptable, progressive, manner. 

Taxation still seems the most obvious way of recycling money back from the wealthy (where it accumulates) to the poor (where is is spent). But it is unpopular. Indeed, it is perhaps the gravest of the several weaknesses of 'liberal democracy' that people tend to vote against taxes. Until the public get educated in these matters it will be resisted.  Thus my accountant friend (see [1]) regarded 'estate tax' (= 'death duty') to be "double taxation", and the exorbitant salaries of the CEOs to be 'fair' by the application of the 'market forces yardstick'.

There are two other lines of argument that I will outline here: Philanthropy, and Fairness. 

In the middle ages the enormous expense of building a church, or a cathedral, or endowing a university, actions that benifit ALL of society, was bourne by the landlords, simply because only they had the money. More recently in the USA, and to a lesser extent in the UK, there was a good tradition of philanthropy. Stanford University was founded (in 1885) by Leland Stanford and his wife, Jane.  Andrew Carnegie founded (1911) his Carnegie Corporation to support  "education, democracy, and peace". (He had already built the Carengie Hall in 1889-91.) Then J.D. Rockefeller founded (1913) The Rockefeller Foundation which supportes public health and medical research. More recently we have the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and in England, the Wellcome Trust. And there are many others. So, we await, and hope soon to see, the public benefits of the Amazon Trust, and the Facebook Foundation, etc.  People who wish to live in society, and share the benefits of society should want to contribute in proportion to their wealth. Progressive taxation should not be necessary. 

Against the argument that 'market forces' justify the enormous wealth of the trillionaires, (the notion that impartiality = fairness), we may have to look more closely at the value of work [2]. Is it really true that an hour of one man's time is worth 3 million times the minimum wage, on which millions of other people survive? I think it could be said that e.g. Amazon. com, Inc. is underpaying its staff and its sources. 

References
[1] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2020/11/paying-taxes-both-virtue-and-necessity.html
[2] https://occidentis.blogspot.com/2026/04/tax-and-spend-2.html
[3] https://conversableeconomist.com/2026/09/07/the-latent-benefits-of-work/

(Please send comments direct to cawstein@gmail.com)