Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal
Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal
Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal
Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal
Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal
Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal
Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal
Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal


Chapter 9

The Decision on Ministry of Awareness of Systems
The crime of corruption is like a recessive gene that amplifies under suitable circumstance (opportunity). It seems that it adapts to every event. It is one subject of social man where it needs to be recognized that only approximation rather than exactness is possible.


Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal

Part II — Household Income Tax

Social Engineering — Dynamic System of Taxation for Consumption

Man’s action and that the future is uncertain are by no means two independent matters. They are only two different notions to establish one thing —the future is hidden to conventional wisdom.
Innate “gunas or traits” and “karma” (capacity to work but acceptance of outcome —pre-determinism) and “purushartha” and innate “gunas or traits” (capacity to work and desire —self-determinism) establish each other and not allow either to dominate. Like many others, these are “pair of opposites” felt by the body senses and the mind–intellect. [Descriptive of Oscillating Logic, p62.]
To an extent governance (government and household) and management (market and household) are pair of opposites, for the first we accept uncertainty of outcome and in the second we desire to achieve. [See Figure 1.5 on p13, Note 5 on p161.]
To complete the journey, people need to barter goods for biological–genetic need; interact for biological–genetic–social necessity; and exchange mind–intellect for biological–genetic–social–political desire.
To facilitate such exchanges and interactions, man symbolized one common commodity and called this symbol ‘money’. It is symbolic of capacity for exchange and status–authority. For each household it is important to acquire and preserve this symbol because it not only represents immediate means of exchange but future capacity as well. [See Chapter 6.]
Amount spent annually by a household, on final goods and services is consumer expenditure that usually parallels the economic capacity of the household. The concern is the actual amount spent during the year without specifying the economic life of the good.
The government, and for that matter all rulers such as those who control the money–symbol, remain busy in finding ways to skim part of the money in such exchanges and interactions (supra) and name these ways as tax of one type or another, commission, rent or surcharge etc. In fact it is with the intention to control the population, development and to fulfill their motives. Rarely of their own, the rulers exert to study failings of intentions. On the other hand household remains busy in minimizing the loss in exchange —these are pair of opposites (see Figure 9.9).
In conclusion, each household, on behalf of its members, pays cost (tax or rent) for having disclosed its intention to exchange or desire to interact (supra). To simplify, one can imagine a unified tax/rent on the household in anticipation of barter of goods for biological need, interaction for social necessity and for exchange of mind–intellect or all. These actions are capacity dependent. Thus it should be possible to devise a dynamic taxation system of consumption. It will reduce the vast presence of bureaus that interfere with the human mind. My concern here is operational efficiency.

Corruption Impact, Corruption Type: By S.C. Bansal

 

@All copy rights are reserved.