Status Update

P.E. is 61% done

'By making the higher incomes pay a larger share of the public expenditures than lower incomes, one impedes the operation of capital and eliminates the tendency, which prevails in a society with increasing capital, to increase the marginal productivity of labor and therefore to raise wages.'

=> I wonder how wont are people earning higher incomes not to spend them so as to gather capitals and pay higher wages today.

— Jun 16, 2020 05:17AM

2 likes · Like flag

P.E.’s Previous Updates

P.E. is 91% done

'What is wrong with Western civilization is the accepted habit of judging political parties merely by asking whether they seem new and radical enough, not by analyzing whether they are wise or unwise, or whether they are apt to achieve their aims. Not everything that exists today is reasonable; but this does not mean that everything that does not exist is sensible.'

— Jun 19, 2020 04:22PM

P.E. is 91% done

'Only those who unconditionally and unrestrictedly consider the market economy as the only workable form of social cooperation are opponents of the totalitarian systems and are capable of fighting them successfully. Those who want socialism intend to bring to their country the system which Russia and Germany enjoy. To favor interventionism means to enter a road which inevitably leads to socialism.'

— Jun 19, 2020 04:22PM

P.E. is 85% done

'Frequently, we hear the assertion that the democratic institutions are only a disguise for the "dictatorship of capital." The Marxists have used this slogan for a long time. [...] Today Hitler and Mussolini ask the nations to rise up against "plutodemocracy." In answer to this it suffices to point out that in Great Britain [...] and in the United States the elections are completely free of coercion.'

=> More below!

— Jun 19, 2020 01:24PM

P.E. is 82% done

'The unhampered market economy is not a system which would seem commendable from the standpoint of the selfish group interests of the entrepreneurs and capitalists. It is not the particular interests of a group or of individual persons that require the market economy, but regard for the common welfare.'

=> More in the comment below!

— Jun 19, 2020 11:54AM

P.E. is 81% done

'All national monopolies and — with a few exceptions — all international monopolies owe their existence to tariff legislation. Were the governments really serious about fighting monopolies they would use the effective means they have at their disposal; they would remove the import duties. If they merely did this the "monopoly problem" would lose its importance.'

— Jun 19, 2020 11:05AM

P.E. is 80% done

Anti-profiteering has been made a priority in the eve of WW2.

France : Nationalization of weapon industries by Blum (Front Populaire)
England : 100% war profits tax (Labour Party)
USA : Even stronger measures to prevent war profits.

Causing severe drop in military production, leading — along with governmental meekness from UK and France — to the Axis having the upper hand in the early stages of the conflict...

— Jun 19, 2020 10:10AM

P.E. is 75% done

'The incompatibility of war with the market economy and civilization has not been fully recognized because the progressing development of the market economy has altered the original character of war itself. It has gradually turned the total war of ancient times into the soldiers' war of modern times.'

[2/2]

=> Ludwig von Mises might allude to the concept of 'doux commerce' dating back from the Enlightenment.

— Jun 19, 2020 08:06AM

P.E. is 75% done

'Democracy is the corollary of the market economy in domestic affairs; peace is its corollary in foreign policy. The market economy means peaceful cooperation and peaceful exchange of goods and services. It cannot persist when wholesale killing is the order of the day.'

[1/2]

— Jun 19, 2020 08:02AM

P.E. is 71% done

[About syndicalism: ]
'Decisive is that the market economy, in which the owners of the means of production and the entrepreneurs as well as the workers depend on the demands of the consumers, is being replaced by a system in which the demands of the consumers no longer determine production, but by a system in which only the wishes of the producers prevail.'

— Jun 19, 2020 04:07AM

P.E. is 66% done

'it is necessary to emphasize that all political and economic ideas which dominate the world today [in 1940] have been developed by English, Scottish, and French thinkers. Neither the Germans nor the Russians have contributed one iota to the concepts of socialism; the socialist ideas came to Germany and Russia from the West just as did the ideas which many Germans and Russians today stigmatize as Western.'

— Jun 18, 2020 02:45PM

Post a comment »
Comments Showing 1-1 of 1 (1 new)

date

newest »

message 1: by P.E. (last edited Jun 18, 2020 02:20PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Jun 18, 2020 02:19PM

See also :

'A tax system which would serve the real interests of the wage earners would tax only that part of income which is being consumed, and not saved and invested. High taxes on the spending of the rich do not injure the interests of the masses; however, every measure which impedes the formation of capital or which consumes capital does injure them.'

=> Mises advocates no inheritance tax nor wealth tax regarding property, but a flat tax regarding incomes.
I am skeptical about its serving the real interests of the wage-earners if they are 'receiving and consuming the largest share of the total national income', as Mises states, p.51-2.

Full quote below:

'The demagogue tells the voters: "The state has to make large expenditures. But the procurement of funds for these expenditures is not your concern. The rich should be made to pay." The honest politician should say: "Unfortunately the state will need more money to cover its expenditures. In any case, you will have to carry most of the burden because you are receiving and consuming the largest share of the total national income. You have to choose between two methods. Either you restrict your consumption immediately, or you consume the capital of the wealthy first and then a bit later you will suffer from falling wages."
p.51-2

-----

=> In the long run, whether the unbridled formation of capital per se doesn't harm 'the interests of the masses' still depends on capital owners wanting to hire workforce & raise wages, doesn't it?

=> Then, does the accumulation of capital benefit both capital-owners and workers in any case?

reply | flag

P.E.’s Reviews > Interventionism: An Economic Analysis > Status Update

P.E.’s Previous Updates

Post a comment »Comments Showing 1-1 of 1 (1 new)

Post a comment »
Comments Showing 1-1 of 1 (1 new)