In this interview published by ' Review , Grover Norquist describes briefly the guidelines of its policy: lower taxes => less state => more growth. In a way so polished and so obvious as to seem trivial.
In fact, the obviousness of this report is undoubtedly shared by those who, like me, had the opportunity to hear live Norquist in a brief round table organized by Design, by whom, a few more for the truth, on the right endorses liberal ideas and liberal libertarian and, lastly, by whom, perhaps, from the left sees the consequential logic of this position. With equal obviousness
these people, like me, seeing that it is impossible for Italy to change is all in low prevalence and especially understanding of rationality 'of this mechanism.
Still too few include the fact that they share or eliminate the availability of the lever of the increased tax burden necessarily lead to weight reduction of state: if the fees can not be increased and, indeed, are decreased, the only way not to see explode the deficit is to reduce costs. We expect this reduction to be immediately following the decision not to increase or even reduce taxes, but, after a likely increase in the deficit, the only way to restore balance in public finances would be to reform the state, reform that would necessarily produce a reduction of its weight. The need for spending cuts then, is probably generated by first cutting the unproductive support the economy and reducing the bureaucracy that comes from too much regulation of this. But few realize
above (or want to understand) the fact found, or that the virtuous cycle triggered by the reduction of taxation, which implies a lower weight of the state, would have immediate effects on the one hand an increase in disposable income businesses and individuals, and thus a greater propensity investment and consumption, on the other, a definite reduction in prices because the tax always turns in an alteration (increase) in the price of any goods, the value that otherwise would result in a free and competitive market.
course you can discuss what "minimum" should be the state, then quantify exactly what should be his presence and, above all, where such presence should be addressed, but always assuming the share of the idea that it should be minimum.
The point is that unfortunately we are far from being able to discuss, even between left and right, quantification of minimum intervention, since che non si condivide, a destra come a sinistra (questa incapacità di abbandonare l’idea di stato paternalista è trasversale purtroppo) nemmeno il fatto che lo stato debba occupare una minima parte delle sfere della vita delle persone.
Ascoltando Norquist ci si scontra palesemente contro questa realtà probabilmente tutta italiana: per mancanza di informazione, per la tutela sempre e comunque prima di tutto dei propri privilegi, per cultura, quando purtroppo per cultura si intende l’accettazione acritica di tutto quello che proviene dall’ideologia dominante dell’ambiente in cui ci si muove, non si riesce nemmeno a condividere l’idea, per quanto ovvia, che meno tasse significano meno stato e meno stato more freedom of action and ideas, more economic and social growth, greater spread of wealth.
In fact, the obviousness of this report is undoubtedly shared by those who, like me, had the opportunity to hear live Norquist in a brief round table organized by Design, by whom, a few more for the truth, on the right endorses liberal ideas and liberal libertarian and, lastly, by whom, perhaps, from the left sees the consequential logic of this position. With equal obviousness
these people, like me, seeing that it is impossible for Italy to change is all in low prevalence and especially understanding of rationality 'of this mechanism.
Still too few include the fact that they share or eliminate the availability of the lever of the increased tax burden necessarily lead to weight reduction of state: if the fees can not be increased and, indeed, are decreased, the only way not to see explode the deficit is to reduce costs. We expect this reduction to be immediately following the decision not to increase or even reduce taxes, but, after a likely increase in the deficit, the only way to restore balance in public finances would be to reform the state, reform that would necessarily produce a reduction of its weight. The need for spending cuts then, is probably generated by first cutting the unproductive support the economy and reducing the bureaucracy that comes from too much regulation of this. But few realize
above (or want to understand) the fact found, or that the virtuous cycle triggered by the reduction of taxation, which implies a lower weight of the state, would have immediate effects on the one hand an increase in disposable income businesses and individuals, and thus a greater propensity investment and consumption, on the other, a definite reduction in prices because the tax always turns in an alteration (increase) in the price of any goods, the value that otherwise would result in a free and competitive market.
course you can discuss what "minimum" should be the state, then quantify exactly what should be his presence and, above all, where such presence should be addressed, but always assuming the share of the idea that it should be minimum.
The point is that unfortunately we are far from being able to discuss, even between left and right, quantification of minimum intervention, since che non si condivide, a destra come a sinistra (questa incapacità di abbandonare l’idea di stato paternalista è trasversale purtroppo) nemmeno il fatto che lo stato debba occupare una minima parte delle sfere della vita delle persone.
Ascoltando Norquist ci si scontra palesemente contro questa realtà probabilmente tutta italiana: per mancanza di informazione, per la tutela sempre e comunque prima di tutto dei propri privilegi, per cultura, quando purtroppo per cultura si intende l’accettazione acritica di tutto quello che proviene dall’ideologia dominante dell’ambiente in cui ci si muove, non si riesce nemmeno a condividere l’idea, per quanto ovvia, che meno tasse significano meno stato e meno stato more freedom of action and ideas, more economic and social growth, greater spread of wealth.
0 comments:
Post a Comment