as human beings, have been designed to produce goods and
services of a highly superior value compared with the goods and
services which we’ll consume. We might say that we’re capable of
producing 50% more than we consume.
acknowledge the certainty of this indisputable difference
between the human species and the animal kingdom, and
independently of whether we concur that its cause is
metaphysical, let’s analyse what happens in reality.
Only 10% of
people achieve their 50% surplus objective.
whom we call enterprisers. Either because they delimit a plot of
land, invent a machine or buy it, they can generate surpluses in
potency of their human objective manages to drag with it another
objective, as important as the human one, or more so: When they
work with assets, they make that capital also produce 50% more
than it consumes. In this manner, the wheel is set in motion,
the most exquisite virtue of human beings: progress.
The rest of the
people, the ones we call salaried, don’t achieve their objective
because they don’t count on capital, and must use their boss’s
capital. And since their boss doesn’t pay them for what they do,
but rather for what they need, they end up producing scarcely a
little above what they consume. In this aspect, they give the
impression of existing more like an animal than a human being.
If the boss
would pay them for what they do, he would surely cause his
personnel to achieve their transcendent objective, so that this
“driving forward” would make their capital also achieve revenues
four times higher than at present.
To do this, the
boss would have to calculate the percentage that his company is
achieving. He should compare the profits of his enterprise with
the sum of the costs of frozen capital and those of his
personnel, which is none other than what both protagonists
should apply that percentage as a plus over the salaries.
However, he’s satisfied with lower yields because he resolves
his own problem.
Yet the outcome
is that his objective is not a social one.
State should endeavour that labour relations attain viability
for this transcendent objective of the salaried, because this
would not only eradicate poverty but also make the progress of
overall society constantly escalate.
strangely enough, the State does exactly the opposite. It taxes
the profits of the firms but instead of redirecting that money
towards the personnel of said firm, it uses it as assistance for
the poor that its own error is generating.
The State is
affixed to unnatural doctrines that constrict the greatest
energy that exists on the planet: the attitude of the salaried.
reason, the damage becomes infinitely potent.
If Profits Tax
were redirected towards the own personnel and the outside
personnel of all enterprises, the salaried could achieve their
objective (physical, psychological and spiritual) of producing
around 50% more than they consume.
And all the
capital invested in production would be highly profitable, doing
away with unemployment and poverty.
It should be
pointed out that Profits Tax punishes principally the
enterprises with a higher load of personnel. And that is the
chief reason why unemployment exists.
we have been designed to produce far more than we consume.
Besides, that innate interior potency which we all posses and
which resides in the psyche (exclusive to human beings), is
capable of making the capital used with the aforementioned
objective, even if it’s not our own, also produce far more than
it consumes, in identical proportion; that’s to say, it can
achieve exceptional revenues.
to call the virtues of these novel labour relations “Driving
from the Spanish by Silvia Maclagan de Grosso, September 2007)