Monday, December 24, 2007

Food for Thought

I wish to recommend this article by Brad Edmonds, though I have a real issue with the complete remission of the duality of liability for the Stockholder. This reminds too much of the Nazi excuse that they were only following Orders. Liability should pensively resume at such point that Stockholders become aware of structural Wrongdoing. Such a position insists that Stockholders themselves share the responsibility to ensure obedience to the Law. It is nonsensical to protest that beneficiaries to the commission of a Crime, should be absolved of liability for that Crime, it being actually committed by individuals in their employ; tacit acceptance of the commission of the Crime for the Profits from it, returns the liability to the Crime. Edmonds also denies the real existence of a link between Corporations and the State, but the link does exist, and is identical to the Stronghold banditry and Letters of Marque of Old, though the substance of the agreement is limited to the nonviolent.

Here is a Post which is most informative, but has a totally erroneous attitude to the current Trend. The basic fallacy resides in the thinking of Economists, who believe that absolute maximized full Consumption fulfills all requirements for the Economy. It first stretches the Consumer, leaving them without the financial reserves to sustain setbacks. It encourages such Business practice which makes inferior, short-life Product, where more durable Product would consume less material resources in Production, less energy in usage, and actually increase Consumer financial reserves. The perfect Scenario is a Consumer who buys three Houses per lifetime, all of which have already been built, and about an equal number of vehicles for Transport. We need Houses which last for 125 years, vehicles which last 15 years, and Computers and TVs which provide 20 years of Service without maintenance. Clothing should last 20 years, or survive through 1,000 Washings: Second-Hand Clothing stores should sell approximately 70% of all Clothing by volume.

How to obtain such Visionary desires? Property taxes on Housing should be set at the time of construction, a definite finite amount defined by 60% of the original Cost, and made an integral element of the Mortgage; paid within the same Installment system, and coming due in full with payment of the Mortgage. Purchase of already-constructed Housing will have an identical Property tax based as 60% of the price of the home, paid in the Installment plan of the Mortgage. The Ringer, here, is that the Property tax decreased in Cost to all Homeowners with longer residence in the Housing; the worst scenario is paying off the Property tax twice, and still paying off a third allotment of Property tax. Motor Vehicle manufacturers should receive Tax Credits based solely on the number of their vehicles still on the Road after Twelve years. This would impel design for endurance of vehicles, because it would provide Incentive to Car companies. Regulation could insist on a Clothing Buyback program for Retail clothing stores, where new Clothes could be returned within 3 years for 50% of the Purchase price, and second-hand Clothing could be returned for 50% of the Purchase price within 3 years. Clothing Retailers would get very interested in the Resale value of Clothing. lgl

No comments: