For those who do not have formal jobs but engage in some form of monetary economic activity, it is of analytical importance to be able to measure this part of economy. This part of economy is known as the informal economy. The informal economy may be observable or unobservable, but it does not mean that they are illegal. For example: street vendors or online ride-booking service drivers may be unobserved and informal, but they are likely to be legally taxed. The production of informal economy has developed in varying ways in different countries. The informal economy is likely to be encouraged if the motive is simply to survive or just to achieve a flexible working style.
Rongcheng is a microcosm of what is to come. The national credit system planned for 2020 will be an “ecosystem” made up of schemes of various sizes and reaches, run by cities, government ministries, online payment providers, down to neighborhoods, libraries, and businesses, say Chinese researchers who are designing the national scheme. It will all be interconnected by an invisible web of information.
But contrary to some Western press accounts, which often confuse existing private credit systems with the future schemes, it will not be a unified platform where one can type in his or her ID and get a single three-digit score that will decide their lives. This caricature of a system that doles out unique scores to 1.4 billion people could not work technically nor politically. The system would instead expand and automatize existing forms of bureaucratic control, formalizing the existing controls and monitoring of Chinese citizens.
The social credit system is just really adding technology and adding a formality to the way the party already operates.
People were rarely penalized for failing to do their jobs; if anything, they were punished for assuming too much responsibility. All that mattered was that they could tell a good story when they reported the imaginary results of their imaginary work.
Over the years that Vladimir Putin has been running Russia, the Soviet combination of powerlessness and pretense has been recreated. Ever-swelling numbers of state employees are afraid to make a move unless directed to do so by a higher-up. But, just like their predecessors, they are finely attuned to expectations and always ready to say whatever they feel the audience is waiting to hear.
La bureaucratie désigne, pour les libertariens, dans la fonction publique, la caste d’individus vivant exclusivement de la coercition et de la spoliation étatique, généralement installée dans des bureaux, d’où son nom – les dits bureaux servant à isoler les bureaucrates de fâcheux appelés « contribuables », « assujettis » ou « usagers ».
Dans le privé, elle désigne l’appareil administratif entourant les fonctions plus commerciales de l’entreprise, avec un sens péjoratif.
Mais qu’est-ce que la bureaucratie en tant que telle ? C’est essentiellement un monde dans lequel il est impossible de savoir si les ressources utilisées sont employées au mieux. Comme les notions de profit, de calcul économique et donc de satisfaction du client n’y ont pas cours, il est impossible de connaître l’efficacité réelle d’une administration, ni même de savoir si cette efficacité existe. Les fonctionnaires et autres bureaucrates ne supportent jamais personnellement les conséquences éventuellement négatives de leur travail. Ils dépendent avant tout de ce que pensent d’eux leurs supérieurs hiérarchiques. La bureaucratie est donc le règne opaque de l’irresponsabilité.
Quand on n’a pas vu l’administration de l’ancien régime à l’œuvre, en lisant les documents secrets qu’elle a laissés, on ne saurait imaginer le mépris où finit par tomber la loi, dans l’esprit même de ceux qui l’appliquent, lorsqu’il n’y a plus ni assemblée politique, ni journaux, pour ralentir l’activité capricieuse et borner l’humeur arbitraire et changeante des ministres et de leurs bureaux.
Our loves and friendships are not immune from the weight of taxes. They contribute to broken marriages, ruined friendships, the breakup of businesses and the downfall of states.
Democratically elected governments try to tax as heavily as they think they can get away with so that those who win elections can distribute the revenue in the hope of getting re-elected. The taxpayer is both beneficiary and victim, and the balance between the two is often not in the taxpayer’s favor.
The taxpayer strives to reduce his cost but knows that it is unlawful to evade taxes. If done deliberately and fraudulently evasion is a crime.
The tax minimization industry consists mostly of accountants and lawyers who scour the tax code to find ways for Amazon, Starbucks and Depardieu to lawfully reduce the amount they pay. A move to a low tax jurisdiction is a simple solution. But in the war between the state and the taxpayer the state has more weapons.
Governments are notoriously bad at managing the money they collect. In fairness, the obstacles are many: incompetency, corruption, the sheer complexity of disbursing huge sums, the multiplicity and difficulty of the tasks at hand — defense, education, health, prisons, courts, police, disaster relief, regulation of markets, banks, drugs, food safety. The result is the state is always in need of more money. No matter how high the taxes, there is never enough.
>A: Come in. M: Ah, Is this the right room for an argument? A: I told you once. M: No you haven’t. A: Yes I have. M: When? A: Just now. M: No you didn’t. A: Yes I did. M: You didn’t A: I did! M: You didn’t! A: I’m telling you I did! M: You did not!!
If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.
The higher you fly, the more you will be shot at. Success breeds criticism. Prepare to be a target and prepare for bad news – or prevent it – before it happens. Admit when you are wrong and never adopt a bunker mentality.
I bought a doughnut and they gave me a receipt for the doughnut. I don’t need a receipt for the doughnut. I give you money and you give me the doughnut, end of transaction. We don’t need to bring ink and paper into this. I can’t imagine a scenario that I would have to prove that I bought a doughnut. To some skeptical friend, “Don’t even act like I didn’t buy a doughnut, I’ve got the documentation right here. Oh, wait. It’s in my file at home, under ‘D’.
Хотя бюрократы вызывают не меньший ужас, чем садисты, они на самом деле страшнее, потому что они даже не ощущают противоречия между совестью и долгом: совесть приказывает им выполнять свой долг, а человек как объект сострадания и доброты для них вообще не существует.
Massive layoffs with no end in sight. Wave after wave of acquisitions and mergers fueled by the excesses of artificially cheap capital. Widespread fear that an entire industry and its contributions will stall or simply stop.
As the web, software, and news become a single industry, the stability and security we knew when our founding institutions were big and strong are gone and will never return. Gone with them are the sclerotic bureaucracy. Gone with them is the feeling of giving up changing anything because you can’t even figure out how many people to ask for permission.