서울시장 선거 우울하네요. 반백년 사는 동안 국힘당 한번 찍어본적 없지만 이번에는 박영선 후보가 되는게 반갑지만은 않네요. 박시장님이 뿌린 것 중 공무원들이 치를 떠는 업무를 하고 있습니다. 시민단체들이 시청과 구청에 들어와서 일을 합니다. 협치라는 그럴듯한 이름입니다. 근데 너무 힘드네요. 진짜 죽고 싶을정도로요. 시민단체어서 온 사람들이 예산을 자기들 사비처럼 써댑니다. 문제 제기를 하면 협치에 대한 이해가 없다고 난리고요. 어떤 사람은 작년에 회의 수당만 300만원 정도 받아 갔습니다. 자격도 안되는 아는 업체 물어오는 거도 예사고요. 최근에는 시설 위탁을 맡겼는데, 위탁 받은 업체(단체)의 등기 이사가 그 사업계획을 심사하는 위원회에 여러명을 넣었습니다. 이번 심사 시에 이해당사자로 제척해야한다고 며칠을 싸우고 나서, 두고두고 머라고 시비를 걸고 있고요. 시민단체들 해도해도 너무 뻔뻔한 거 같아요. 그냥 밑에 직원들 안다치고 저도 무사히 시간이 가길 바라지만, 그럴 수 있을지 모르겠네요 박영선 후보가 돼야 되는데, 되면 제가 맡고 있는 업무의 변화가 거의 없을거 같고, 그렇다고 안철수나 오세훈이 되는 것도 싫고, 많이 우울하네요/ 출처 클리앙 --->협치라는 이름으로 시민단체 놈들이 들어가 시정을 엉망으로 만들고 자신들의 이권을 챙겼다는 폭로이다. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- [칼럼] 망국적 현금살포, 재정위기 앞당긴다 오정근 객원 칼럼니스트 펜앤 2020.04.27 ---->작년에 쓴 글인데 점점 현실로 다가오는 듯하다. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 415총선, 부정선거 맞다!!! 자유-공정 선거 의무 국제규범에 국제인권법까지 위반. 국제조사보고서 발표. 백두산 캠프 https://youtu.be/0fY-BirbYEg ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 원래 北京歡迎你(북경은 당신을 환영합니다)라는 노래가 있었는데 그것을 개사해 중국의 황사와 현실을 풍자했다. 《北京沙塵暴歡迎你》 迎接維尼新時代 帶來全新災難 領導改變沙塵不變 整個北京朦朧 我家大門常打開 盡情呼吸等你 呼吸過了有了肺病 你會離開這裡 不管遠近都是韭菜 請大力呼吸 享受中共的禮物 我們歡迎你 我家種著萬年樹 全面小康拉倒 樹木沒了失去保護 災害直搗黃龍 陌生熟悉都是韭菜 請不用拘禮 第幾次來沒關係 空氣還是差 北京歡迎你 維尼開天闢地 流動中的空氣充滿著致命 北京歡迎你 在太陽下呼吸霧霾 在北京城呼吸空氣 我家砍樹中門開 沙塵直接進來 歲月長了報應來了 迎接這個日期 天大地大都是沙塵 請不要呼吸 拍照不用開濾鏡 就有復古感 北京歡迎你 像維尼感動你 讓我聚沙成傻去超越自己 北京歡迎你 有夢想誰都了不起 小學生也能當主席 北京歡迎你 維尼開天闢地 流動中的空氣充滿著致命 北京歡迎你 在太陽下呼吸霧霾 在北京城呼吸空氣 北京歡迎你 像維尼感動你 讓我聚沙成傻去超越自己 北京歡迎你 有夢想誰都了不起 小學生也能當主席 2021北京歡迎你！《北京沙塵暴歡迎你》原：北京歡迎你 https://youtu.be/sGFDWOwOVbU ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Grumpy Economist John Cochrane's blog Wednesday, March 24, 2021 Defining inequality so it can't be fixed In one of their series of excellent WSJ essays, Phil Gramm and John Early notice that conventional income inequality numbers report the distribution of income before taxes and transfers. After taxes and transfers, income inequality is flat or decreasing, depending on your starting point. 수입 불평등의 근거로 삼는 수치들은 납세 이전의 수치들이다. 세금을 제하고 나면 불평등은 그리 심하지 않거나 감소 중이다. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Economic Prosperity Is a Prerequisite for All Other Kinds of Prosperity Brian Carus Both Ludwig von Mises and Abraham Maslow understood that unless we first secure the benefits of economic progress, it becomes impossible to pursue higher human wants and needs. 경제적 번영이 있어야만 인간의 더 높은 욕구를 추구할 수 있다. --->한국의 경우도 마찬가지다. 경제가 일단 무너지면, 우리가 자랑하던 문화(한류)도 와르르 모두 사상누각처럼 무너지고 만다. 그리고 기타 의료나 교육과 같은 사회의 모든 혜택들이 같이 사라지게 된다. https://mises.org/wire/economic-prosperity-prerequisite-all-other-kinds-prosperity ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 재정적자가 문제가 되지 않는다면, 세금은 왜 걷으려 하나? 좌파들은 그들이 싫어하는 사람들을 벌주고, 그들의 동지들을 보상하며, 나아가 대중을 통제하기 위해 세금을 부과한다. 현대의 세금은 문명을 위한 댓가가 아니라 문명의 포식자가 되었다. If Deficits Don't Matter, Why Bother with Taxes? Peter St. Onge On March 18, Joe Wiesenthal of Bloomberg Markets had MMT economist Stephanie Kelton on the show. If you’re not familiar with modern monetary theory, they think governments should print more money because deficits aren’t a big deal. At one point in the show, Wiesenthal asked, “If we don’t need to worry about deficits, why do we have taxes?” Kelton’s response was illuminating. Now, the traditional excuse for taxes is, paraphrasing Oliver Wendell Holmes, that they are the “price of civilization.” Skeptics point out that, historically, societies with very low taxes were often far more civilized—think the Dutch Golden Age, Islamic Golden Age, Victorian England, the pejoratively named “Gilded Age” in American history—that thirty-year golden age when almost everything useful was invented. And, yet, throughout that period, federal receipts were one-fifth what they are today. Why so much civilization? Because much of what governments do today was done by charities or businesses competing for customer dollars instead of seizing their budget in taxes. When doctors, firefighters, and schools have to satisfy customers, things get quite civilized. Still, even if we accept a “night-watchman state” argument for, say, national defense or salaries for Supreme Court justices, it gets tricky if government can simply print up the fresh money to pay for all that civilization. Kelton’s answer? Taxes would still be needed, because they make us poor. And because they can punish people she doesn’t like. Specifically, Kelton likes that taxes “remove dollars from our hands, so we can’t spend them,” leaving more purchasing power for the government. So taxes make the people poor, and that’s a selling point to her, presumably because she thinks governments are really good at lifting people out of poverty. Anybody who’s spent time in America’s inner cities, where government money is pretty much the only money, might disagree. Ah, but it’s not just about spending our money more wisely than we ever could, Kelton adds two secondary reasons she loves taxes: to punish particular people by redistributing their money, and to punish people for doing things she doesn’t like. Such as failing to buy energy-efficient appliances (no, really). In other words, social engineering with carrots for your friends, sticks for your not-so-friends. Aside from the morality of preying on our neighbors, demanding they pay an ever-growing “fair share” that invariably exceeds what, say, a journalist or professor pays, using taxes for redistribution and punishing—“nudging,” in the fashionable parlance—carries enormous collateral damage. Because redistribution arranges society into hostile factions either trying to violently dispossess one another or defending against that dispossession. Moreover, redistribution isn’t simply innocently shuffling the chips; it is wholesale destruction. A paper coauthored by Christina Romer, former chair of Obama’s Council of Economic Advisors, found that each dollar in government spending leads to between $2 and $3 in lost economic activity. A separate study by Harvard economist Martin Feldstein came to similar deadweight estimates that “may exceed $2 per $1 of revenue.” In other words, in order to move a dollar, you have to destroy at least two to three dollars. There is a similar mix of moral and practical costs to using predatory taxes for social engineering. It also breaks the social compact to live and let live, rendering our every decision subject to public vote, from what we eat, to where we vacation, to what kind of bag we use to carry our groceries. There is nothing outside the realm of the nudgers, no detail too small. Moreover, by mass imposition of what are effectively judicial fines for noncrimes, such taxes can achieve a level of control that would never be constitutional if written as law. For example, today in the United States, 90 percent of students attend public schools, despite the terrible quality of education. Why do they stay? Because each voter must pay for public schools whether or not they use them, but would have to shoulder $11,200 per child per year for opting out of the public system, while continuing to pay that $12,600 per year in taxes for the “free” public system. Especially for the working class, this penalty becomes prohibitive for all but the most committed. Pair these facts—no detail too small for the social engineers and their ability to achieve near-universal obedience via fines and subsidies—and we risk a totalitarian “permissioned” society where we are free on paper, but using that freedom comes with ruinous fines. If, indeed, the only remaining justification for taxes in an inflationary regime is to redistribute and punish—to erode social harmony in a fiscal war of all against all while impoverishing society and enabling a creeping totalitarianism—then it is much closer to the mark that modern taxes have become not the price of civilization, but the predator of civilization. Peter St. Onge blogs on economics at Profits of Chaos. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------