![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
charameiThe latest tax kerfuffle got me thinking, always a dangerous thing in any citizen of a supposedly democratic state.
The two big issues of this election, all parties agree, are the state of the economy and the 'public disconnect from politics' (which, roughly translated, means 'people have noticed that national politicians are all as corrupt and sleazy as one another, and given up'). Both of these are, to be fair, to them, real problems.
I'm particularly interested in something the Tories have been batting about (but that isn't, depressingly, in their manifesto) - an attempt to get people involved in local government via greater autonomy and devolution. I heard some ambitious target to get everyone in the country involved in at least one voluntary community activity come out of Cameron's mouth last week.
Whether or not he follows through on it isn't the point, though. The point is, he's talking about reintroducing direct democracy to combat public disinterest.
In other words, he's effectively reaching back 2,500 years to what Solon did for ancient Athens. And I find myself wondering: is there some way we can do the same for the tax problem?
So. Taxes. Or rather, liturgies. A quick history lesson:
Pre-Delian League* Athens didn't tax for very much, all things considered: the biggest uses for taxation were things like jurors' pay. But then there were the liturgies as well.
*Post-Delian League, it started pulling in tribute from its 'partners'...
Liturgies were more like religious duties than social ones. The richest, er, 10% (?) of society were expected to pay for important, yet expensive, state goods: ships for the navy. Big religious ceremonies and, relatedly, theatre productions. The idea of taxing the rich more than the poor isn't new, but the Athenian system was much more direct: a trierarch, having drawn his lot, paid for the upkeep and/or building of a trireme for a year before passing over to somebody else. An equivalent would be, oh... Alan Sugar having to provide and upkeep a military helicopter and pilot.
There are obvious problems with the system. The lawcourt speeches are full of people dodging liturgies by claiming to have become suddenly poor, or tying up their assets to make then uncountable: and 500 years later Augustus, suffering under a similar system, had to provide incentives to get people to build boring old roads instead of grand, shining temples or gymnasia.
But like all Athenian government devices, it was direct. People might grumble and moan, but they could see exactly where their money was going and how it would benefit the polis. And more than that, it gave them something to boast about. "Gentlemen of the jury, I have performed five trierarchies! Look how wonderful (and rich) I am! Look how good I am to have around! Love me!"
This system could simply not work with the big national budgets of today in the same way. But is there any reason we can't try it on a local scale? People buy park benches all the time. Why not let us buy bins, new lamp-posts for the high streets, contract people to go and fill the potholes in the road rather than waiting for the council to do it? Maintain the public loos properly, install drinking fountains? Hell, why not let us buy our own street decorations?
If they want us to be involved, they need to give us back some control over taxes as much as politics - otherwise it doesn't quite work. As much as anything, people are angry with what politicians are doing with our money, so how about cutting taxes with the caveat that now we have to do the things the taxes were paying for ourselves? Cut out the middleman, as it were.
It might force people to be involved, rather than easing them in gently (though if you believe the myths, that's what Solon did too, and it worked for him). It might also backfire spectacularly, culminating in the wheel coming off a bus just before it falls down a six-foot pothole in the middle of the blackened, unlit night.
Or, people being the generally responsible and naturally societal animals we are, it might work.
Maybe I'm crazy, but a little bit of direct economy doesn't sound any less plausible to me than a little bit of direct democracy.
The two big issues of this election, all parties agree, are the state of the economy and the 'public disconnect from politics' (which, roughly translated, means 'people have noticed that national politicians are all as corrupt and sleazy as one another, and given up'). Both of these are, to be fair, to them, real problems.
I'm particularly interested in something the Tories have been batting about (but that isn't, depressingly, in their manifesto) - an attempt to get people involved in local government via greater autonomy and devolution. I heard some ambitious target to get everyone in the country involved in at least one voluntary community activity come out of Cameron's mouth last week.
Whether or not he follows through on it isn't the point, though. The point is, he's talking about reintroducing direct democracy to combat public disinterest.
In other words, he's effectively reaching back 2,500 years to what Solon did for ancient Athens. And I find myself wondering: is there some way we can do the same for the tax problem?
So. Taxes. Or rather, liturgies. A quick history lesson:
Pre-Delian League* Athens didn't tax for very much, all things considered: the biggest uses for taxation were things like jurors' pay. But then there were the liturgies as well.
*Post-Delian League, it started pulling in tribute from its 'partners'...
Liturgies were more like religious duties than social ones. The richest, er, 10% (?) of society were expected to pay for important, yet expensive, state goods: ships for the navy. Big religious ceremonies and, relatedly, theatre productions. The idea of taxing the rich more than the poor isn't new, but the Athenian system was much more direct: a trierarch, having drawn his lot, paid for the upkeep and/or building of a trireme for a year before passing over to somebody else. An equivalent would be, oh... Alan Sugar having to provide and upkeep a military helicopter and pilot.
There are obvious problems with the system. The lawcourt speeches are full of people dodging liturgies by claiming to have become suddenly poor, or tying up their assets to make then uncountable: and 500 years later Augustus, suffering under a similar system, had to provide incentives to get people to build boring old roads instead of grand, shining temples or gymnasia.
But like all Athenian government devices, it was direct. People might grumble and moan, but they could see exactly where their money was going and how it would benefit the polis. And more than that, it gave them something to boast about. "Gentlemen of the jury, I have performed five trierarchies! Look how wonderful (and rich) I am! Look how good I am to have around! Love me!"
This system could simply not work with the big national budgets of today in the same way. But is there any reason we can't try it on a local scale? People buy park benches all the time. Why not let us buy bins, new lamp-posts for the high streets, contract people to go and fill the potholes in the road rather than waiting for the council to do it? Maintain the public loos properly, install drinking fountains? Hell, why not let us buy our own street decorations?
If they want us to be involved, they need to give us back some control over taxes as much as politics - otherwise it doesn't quite work. As much as anything, people are angry with what politicians are doing with our money, so how about cutting taxes with the caveat that now we have to do the things the taxes were paying for ourselves? Cut out the middleman, as it were.
It might force people to be involved, rather than easing them in gently (though if you believe the myths, that's what Solon did too, and it worked for him). It might also backfire spectacularly, culminating in the wheel coming off a bus just before it falls down a six-foot pothole in the middle of the blackened, unlit night.
Or, people being the generally responsible and naturally societal animals we are, it might work.
Maybe I'm crazy, but a little bit of direct economy doesn't sound any less plausible to me than a little bit of direct democracy.