My theory is that "Taxes are the cause of costliness"

You know that interesting economic theories have been on the agenda a lot lately. Interest rate is the cause and inflation is the effect, the most famous economic theory of recent days.

So I thought about it and developed a theory of my own. 

My economic theory is called "tax is the cause of cost!".

According to my theory, the more taxes the state levies, the more expensive it is. Therefore, the state should not tax anything!

Now you will say, how then is the state going to generate revenue? How will it provide the services it is expected to provide? 

Don't our taxes come back to us in the form of roads, water and electricity? 

How will these services be provided if there are no taxes?

It's easy, doesn't the state have paper? It also has ink. 

It will print the money and pay for whatever work needs to be done. The answer to this question is that simple!

Neither legal entities nor individuals will be taxed a penny by the state!

On top of that, whoever is in need, the state will promise them income through grants. 

Being a social state will be essential for the state! 

Of course, since it would be more logical for the state to receive a service in return for this money that it will pay to those in need with the principles of a social state, it may be preferable for the state to pay a certain fee for whatever work they can do, whatever they want to do. 

When you are in a tight spot, for example, you will say, "I know how to flip a coin, I can flip a coin for the state," and the state will say, "OK, you go to the corner, flip a coin, and the state will pay you a certain fee in return. 

Every job will have a price!

Immediately you will be paid for your work. One job, one money, like a purchase, like a receipt!

(I pay tribute to Ayşegül Atik, may she rest in peace).

For example, you will go and buy a loaf of bread from the bakery with this money.

How's that sound? Zero taxes and abundant income, no cost, and it doesn't matter if there is!

Can such a system work?

But what if the baker raises the price of bread in the meantime? What if the money you earned by flipping a coin is not enough to buy bread? 

Then you can go back to the state and beat your head against the wall a little bit, that's all. In return, you'll earn some more money and you'll be able to buy your bread, thus guaranteeing that you'll be fed. After all, the state pays you for everything you do!

But in that case the money would be worthless! Yes, maybe not, but you will be fed. 

In that case, how will the roads, water and electricity be paid for, we say money is worthless? 

Every labor has a price in the state. For easy jobs, you may be paid enough to buy bread, but depending on the difficulty of the work, the wage you can earn will be higher. 

The more work, the more money. The more bread, the more meatballs.

Will such a system work?

I mean, would the economy stabilize after a certain period of time?

I think that if we had a system that was closed only to our own resources, maybe a balance could be achieved.

I wonder if taxes contribute to the use of the state's money for shopping. If the state didn't want taxes, why would you use the money for shopping? When taxes are involved, in a sense you are forced to use money in all kinds of transactions.

But what else would you do? We need money anyway.

But there are many things we need to buy from outside! 

First and foremost there is energy!

So the economy doesn't run on local money alone. We also need to earn foreign currency and spend foreign currency.

How can foreign currency be allocated in such a system? Can the state earn enough foreign currency from its own production?

For example, if the state says, what can I do, if you need energy, think of a solution yourself, I don't have enough foreign currency and I don't tax you. Why don't you think for yourselves? 

Can someone think and find a different solution to the energy problem?

OK, for example, you go to the state with an interesting idea and the state pays you whatever it costs you to come up with the idea. 

Then it puts it in the program and does its best to make it happen. It pays those who want to work on this project with the money it prints.

Let's say, as I have written before, this project is a project to produce hydrogen from the Black Sea. We will produce fuel hydrogen from the Black Sea with state investment. 

Let's say we solve our energy problem with hydrogen. Or we are developing another energy source, it doesn't matter what the project is.

But we will need a lot of technological equipment to do this. And I think we will have to buy this equipment from abroad by paying foreign currency. 

How are we going to earn the foreign currency?

If the government says, what can I do, I don't have the foreign currency to buy the equipment? Isn't that possible?

In that case we have a lot of engineers. Someone will have to produce the necessary equipment. Could this also be a coercive factor?

Here is the free market, everything is free. Whoever is free to do whatever they want. Whoever develops what they want. As long as it makes money. Wild capitalism!

Maybe engineers can produce equipment with a little effort, but if they have no motivation, why would they do it? 

The answer seems simple. They will make money in return, it's a wild capitalism market. If there is money to be made, why not think about it? If the work is well paid, why not?

This is where another factor comes into play. If they are somehow fed, human beings are lazy, they don't want to work. He likes it more to be lazy. Idleness - I'm already lying around and fishing!

So can there be some kind of flattery for motivation? 

What do you mean? Why should we flatter this or that for no reason? What good is flattery anyway?

It's just human psychology, the old saying goes that a sweet tongue makes the snake crawl out of its hole. For some reason, human beings like to do everything they can to make others like them if they are appreciated and if they are flattered.

Isn't there anyone who does a thousand kinds of charlatanism on social media just to get "likes"? Yes! There are a lot of ridiculous videos circulating on social media.

Okay, let's put the charlatans aside. 

Why do you, for example, put so many photos on Instagram when no one forces you to? There are a lot of people on Instagram who take pictures of every minute of their lives. 

Don't you also take selfies and post them on Instagram? 

Isn't the goal to get "likes"? Social media has become one of the modern addictions. 

Even Instagram is a product of someone taking advantage of human psychology. 

People like to share their pictures, maybe also to show off to others.

I think the state can easily get some things done with some simple rewards. 

For example, wouldn't you like it if they praised you on a channel saying that Mr. Whoever developed such and such a thing? 

And if there was a monetary reward for what you have done? 

I would love it! 

Being famous is a good thing. It gives you pride. People need praise, being proud of themselves is a feeling they need.

I just remembered a scene from the movie The 5th Element, when Bruce Willis was under fire and he whispered to someone under the table to throw me that gun, the funny character who misunderstood what he said and sent the billiard ball, those who saw the movie will remember this scene, and then he proudly bragged to those around him that I helped him, I think that scene was very funny. Whoever thought of it thought well.

Still, I guess things don't work out as desired. Laziness is in our blood, after all. 

But on the other hand, objections are raised against the government. Of course it is easiest to criticize those in power. Everyone will probably start complaining that not enough services are being provided. Seriously, other measures need to be taken to establish such an order.

What are you going to do with the extra money you already earn? If you deposit it in a bank, you won't get any interest. Anyone can get as much money as they want from the state. Either way, it feeds them! Since there is not a great need for money, the interest rate will be low. Maybe the banks will even demand more money because they are keeping your money. In that case, no one would want to make too much money.

But is just a full stomach enough? Where's the yachting? Where is the reputation for service?

I guess it wouldn't be easy to find people to serve in this situation.

I wouldn't want to serve anyone if I had enough to eat. I don't think anyone would!

Then it will probably be necessary to find someone who doesn't mind serving. Maybe not someone, but something. Robot servants, for example!

But nobody wants to work more than enough in this system. Who will bother to develop robot servants? Still, if there's money at stake, someone might invest in it.

Then no one will produce more than enough, everyone will produce enough for themselves if they are producers! 

In other words, since the agricultural sector will not produce as much food as it does now after all the difficulties and hard work, not enough food will be produced. Money is worthless, so no one will try to make money. 

There is another problem of course, all this money released into the market will create a financial glut. In economies it is essential that this money is somehow returned to the state, especially through taxes. Since there are no taxes, how will the return of money to the state be balanced?

I think the answer can be thought of as revenues from state-produced products. After all, there are a lot of raw materials and intermediate products that the state produces, from minerals to minerals. The state can also produce more technological products and the money can be collected back to the state by selling these products to the market at a certain price. And we do not cancel fines and service fees. From garbage collection to road, water, electricity, sewerage, etc., there will be services that will be provided for a fee. We are only canceling taxes!

If there is too much money returned to the state, it will be disposed of somehow. In other words, the state can somehow adjust the balance between the money released to the market and the money collected.

It's not easy though, there might be a bloat somewhere. 

How will all this work? We call it laziness, we call it an abundance of money.

But isn't the aim to bring the economy into equilibrium under these conditions? The equilibrium could be in a very different place than the one we are living in now!

I think whatever is needed for a price can still be produced under market conditions. 

For example, if an agricultural producer earns well, he will continue to produce. So maybe the value of agricultural products will be understood. Perhaps the value of labor will also be understood!

I wish I had the opportunity to test this theory. 

Perhaps a balance could be achieved in the economy by taking measures according to where problems arise. Who knows? Since there is no one to test it, it is impossible to know!

But if it were possible to test it, then perhaps an economic order would be established in which everyone would be satisfied without taxes.

How much would the state pay for daydreaming in such a system? 

Do you think it would be worth a bread wage to dream?

Love and respect to everyone from Moscow.