Governments steal in exchange for a vote.
The voter will generally vote for the best thief, that they think will steal in their interests, or if they fear being stolen from, will vote, perhaps, for the non-stealer. It is a useless message for a political party to say that they will steal less because the votes that count are those that want more stealing; we aren't inclined to vote for lower taxes.
"Vote for me and I will lower taxes", is not an appealing message because people who dislike taxes wouldn't be voting in the first place. We assume the politicians already know that we prefer not to be taxed. The best message here is to say that services will improve but at the same cost; things will be done more efficiently, which is a weak argument and only an appeal to competence. This seeks to re-assure the voter.
The voter is holding the free market to ransom and will repeal it if they are not served.
Voting does not legitimise a crime; certain things should be illegal, even if they are popular. Just as there are crimes defined even in the circumstances of War, equally the State should be restricted in its powers.
The Constitution of any State (if written) must be designed to limit the powers. The State doe not have a right to tax income, for example.
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment