Ancient Economic Wisdom Still Applies
Today
March 9, 2010
(This originally appeared in the Huffington
Post on March 9, 2010.)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nathan-lewis/ancient-economic-wisdom-s_b_491697.html
You've probably never heard of Ibn Khaldun. He was a 14th century Arab
historian. At least, he is remembered as a historian, although that was
only his hobby. His real job was serving as a high official in several
governments in North Africa, Spain and the Middle East. At his death,
he was Egypt's Minister of Justice.
From his vantage point as a high government official, he witnessed the
rise and fall of several states in the region. Regarding economic
policy, he concluded:
At the beginning of the dynasty,
taxation yields a large revenue from small assessments. At the end of
the dynasty, taxation yields a small revenue from large assessments. ...
When tax assessments and imposts upon the subjects are low,
[businesspeople] have the energy and desire to do things. Cultural
[economic] enterprises grow and increase, because the low taxes bring
satisfaction. When businesses grow, the number of individual imposts
and assessments mounts. In consequence, the tax revenue, which is the
sum total of (the individual assessments), increases.
Royal authority with its tyranny, and sedentary culture that stimulates
sophistication, make their appearance. ... The individual imposts and
assessments upon the subjects, agricultural laborers, farmers, and all
the other taxpayers, increase. Every individual impost and assessment
is greatly increased, in order to obtain a higher tax revenue. ...
Gradual increases in the amount of the assessments succeed each other
regularly. ... Eventually, the taxes will weigh heavily upon the
subjects and overburden them. Heavy taxes become an obligation and
tradition, because the increases took place gradually, and no one knows
specifically who increased them or levied them. They lie upon the
subjects like an obligation and tradition.
... The result is that the interest of the subjects in business
activity disappears, since when they compare expenditures and taxes
with their income and gain and see the little profit they make, they
lose all hope. Therefore, many of them refrain from business activity
all cultural activity. The result is that the total tax revenue goes
down, as (the number of) the individual assessments goes down. Often,
when the decrease is noticed, the amounts of individual imposts are
increased. This is considered a means of compensating for the decrease.
Finally, individual imposts and assessments reach their limit. It would
be of no avail to increase them further. The costs of all cultural
enterprise are now too high, the taxes are too heavy, and the profits
anticipated fail to materialize. Thus, the total revenue continues to
decrease, while the amounts of individual imposts and assessments
continue to increase, because it is believed that such an increase will
compensate (for the drop in revenue) in the end. Finally, civilization
is destroyed, because the incentive for buisness activity is gone. It
is the dynasty that suffers from the situation, because it (is the
dynasty that) profits from business activity.
If (the reader) understands this, he will realize that the strongest
incentive for economic activity is to lower as much as possible the
amounts of individual imposts levied upon persons capable of
undertaking businesses. In this manner, such persons will be
psychologically disposed to undertake them, because they can be
confident of making a profit from them.
The secret of economic success is the Magic Formula:
Low
Taxes Stable Money
It should be intuitively obvious that a capitalist economy cannot
thrive with high taxes and an unstable money. However, if we look at
the economic policies of most governments today, they are clearly on a
path toward higher taxes, and probably some monetary excitement as well.
The halls of power are filled today with advisors saying that we "need"
higher taxes. It is a conversation no different than might have taken
place in a minor sultanate in the mid-14th century.
The usual result of this strategy, Khaldun says, is the "end of the
dynasty." Do we "need" to grind this nation into the dust of history?
Or do we "need" to encourage business activity instead?
Look at this graph:
What do you see? I'll tell you what I see: a straight line.
The graph shows U.S. Federal tax revenues as a percent of GDP. It comes
directly from the Congressional Budget Office. There is a little minor
variation, mostly corresponding to the business cycle, but the line has
basically been flat for sixty years.
During this time, tax rates have gone up, down, up again, and down
again. Exemptions have grown or shrank. None of it has made a bit of
difference.
As Khaldun says, higher tax rates won't bring in any more revenue.
However, they can definitely have an economic effect. If a tax hike
doesn't increase the revenue-to-GDP ratio, but GDP declines due to the
economic effect of the tax hike, what is the net effect? Obviously, the
same ratio multiplied by a lower GDP equals lower tax revenues,
compared to doing nothing at all.
The tax hike results in lower revenues. Just like Khaldun said.
I know there will be a thousand -- nay, a million! - people saying I'm
wrong. It doesn't matter. It's not a matter of opinion. It's a matter
of cause and effect.