Xinshun 1730

Chapter 1363 The Wealth of Nations ([-])
George III agreed with the views of the two.

Especially on the issue of tariffs, if Dashun can really control the monopoly of oriental commodities and ensure that countries distribute tariffs according to sales, then he quite agrees with this trade model.

In the world, Dashun is not the only one who talks about "taking history as a mirror".

The same goes for the UK.

In particular, they are more inclined to talk about more recent history.

After all, Europe is not a stable society. The past history is too different from the present, or the level of productivity is too different, and the social structure is also completely different.If a history that is too long is used as a mirror, it will inevitably look like a rusty bronze mirror, and I am afraid that nothing can be discerned.

In the more recent history, George III did have some lingering fears about tax collection.

An important reason why Walpole was opposed by everyone at the beginning was that Walpole wanted to increase consumption tax and reduce land tax.

And because of the limitation of the technical level at this time, Britain is surrounded by sea smuggling like a mud wall in winter.

This led to the "Search Act", which was hated by the whole of Britain.

And the backlash that led to the "Castle Doctrine" protesting against the law of using search warrants to search homes for contraband.

This matter is not a simple so-called tax resistance issue, nor is it a simple issue of resistance by smugglers.

But the British mercantilism itself has reached a pervasive level. The dissatisfaction and resistance of the British people, including the people of Ireland, Scotland, and North America, are justified.

After that, the failure of the "Molasses Act" in 33, that is, the fact that it had been implemented for 20 years and the money was basically confiscated, made George III a headache for taxation.

To put it simply, due to the insufficient technical level at this time, insufficient anti-smuggling methods, and the excessive mercantilism of the United Kingdom, the smuggling profits are too large.

Therefore, it can only lead to the UK leaning towards taxation on the production side.

The "Cider Act", which historically caused George Grenville of the Patriot Party to be laughed at, is also an extension of this problem-taxation on the sales side and the transportation side cannot be done.Then we can only think about taxation on the production side, which greatly intensifies the contradiction.

This kind of contradiction will inevitably be intensified. If you want to levy a tax on alcohol, but you can’t control the sales and transportation, whoever grows apples will go to the house to collect taxes. Isn’t this bullshit?

The taxation on the production side has even caused some British industries to make many wonderful technological changes.

For example, glass tax is levied at the production end, and it is levied by weight.

As a result, the glass industry in the UK began to appear "clamping" technology, which reduced the weight of glass.

Is it possible to realize this idea of ​​taxation on the production side?
can.

For example, Lianghuai salt and Chuanjing salt after the reform of the Dashun salt administration are taxed at the standard production end.

But this premise is to support large enterprises, kill the handicraft industry, and through the high efficiency, low price, and intensification of large enterprises, the introduction of new technologies such as steam engines and large salt ponds, so as to form an institution similar to the "National Monopoly Trust", and then Taxes can be levied directly on the production side, while relying on high efficiency and intensive production so that product prices are not higher than before.

However, the UK obviously cannot do this.

Take the "Molasses Act" as an example, if you want to solve it, how can you solve it?

Hamilton gave a solution, using violent means and tax regulation to force small workshops to death, strengthen large factories, and use the efficiency of large factories to ensure that small workshops still have a crushing price advantage after taxation, forming several big ones , and then the cost of tax collection can be reduced, and taxes can be collected at these major companies.

This is a purely technical low-cost tax collection plan, which must be compatible with the current administrative capabilities and anti-smuggling technical level.

But now, the UK can't do it.

Large and small winemaking workshops in New England have sprung up like mushrooms, relying on the markets in North America, Central America, the Caribbean, and West Africa to continue to grow.

Britain neither dared nor was able to levy taxes, because to levy meant rebellion.

At this time, the administrative efficiency and technical level also determined that either the East India Company should be established, taxes should be collected on the production side, or real estate taxes should be collected like window taxes and land taxes.

For example, the window tax, after the house is built, you can't hide the windows.

And checking the windows outside can reduce contradictions-the existence of the castle theory makes it more tolerant of the British to check the windows and collect taxes without entering the door on the street.After all, you don't have to go into the house to check the windows.

Under such circumstances, Dashun proposed a behavior similar to "collection of customs duties", which undoubtedly sounded to George III as a feasible, reliable, non-judgmental, and achievable good method.

In this way, if tea, cotton cloth, etc. are regarded as the production of "regularly refreshed in Amsterdam every June and July", then this can be regarded as an efficient model of taxation on the production side.

As for whether this model is "free trade"...

This, first of all, we must define what is called "free trade".

However, no matter how you define it, this thing is not so much "free trade" as it is a deformed "international monopoly cartel" as Ilich said.

Take the 1884 World Rail Cartel, a very typical international monopoly cartel in history, as a comparison.

The steel rail cartel in 1884 was due to the relative excess of production. The countries sat down to discuss and finally determined that Britain had 66%, Germany 27%, and Belgium 7%.

And now that Dashun has made this thing, it really looks like a deformed cartel.

Take tea as an example.

Originally, the East India Companies of various countries competed disorderly, and smuggled tea from various countries ran around.

Now, Dashun directly monopolizes the production and transportation of tea.

After the refresh in Amsterdam, the CIF price is unified across Europe, and the price includes the unified tariff.

For example, a tax of 3p per pound.

Then, the ratio of tariffs received by the governments of various countries depends on how much each country sells.

That is to say, as much consumption power as the colonies and native lands of European countries have in total, then the governments of each country can get as much tariffs, and the merchants of each country can get as much profit.

The governments of various countries are actually beneficiaries of "profit".

And how much each country can sell depends on how many people, how many colonies, and how many spheres of influence each country has.

Unless, of course, this is considered a deformed cartel.

Then, it can also be regarded as a kind of "free trade".

After all, after arriving in Amsterdam, the CIF price is unified throughout Europe.

Theoretically, isn't it just that the cost of the shipping industry is lower, the cost of shipbuilding is lower, the navigation technology is higher, and the market building and sales channels are better?

How to interpret, does not affect the results.

Whoever collects high tariffs will smuggle tea to areas with high tariffs.

The key here is whether Dashun can guarantee that it will be refreshed regularly in Amsterdam every June and July?And other places will not refresh?

These are two problems.

The former is the production end of Dashun's tea gardens, can it ensure sufficient supply?Can Dashun's navigation skills guarantee annual voyages?

The latter means whether Dashun can do it without anyone else sneaking over the tea leaves?

The former is easy to say.

The latter is easy to say.

After Portugal, Denmark, Britain, and France, Dashun can actually do it. Except for Amsterdam, it will not be spawned in other places west of the Cape of Good Hope.

Because the tea had not been stolen to Ceylon and India at this time, it was absolutely impossible for Dashun to leave the mountainous areas in Hunan, Hubei and other places alone and go to Ceylon to grow tea.Therefore, it is still difficult for tea to flow to Europe by smuggling.

This is the practical reason why Dashun and Britain can talk.

Chanting scriptures does not mean that you can negotiate by chanting scriptures.

The key is to come up with a plan that is not so nonsense while chanting scriptures, and to take into account the reality that "the country still exists and the government needs taxation".

If you have to read scriptures, it is not unreasonable to say that Dashun's operation is "free trade" and does not conform to the characteristics of an international cartel monopoly alliance caused by relative overproduction.

Since it is feasible to raise a toast at the technical level—in fact, it is also feasible. Countries can only go to Amsterdam to get goods, and they have to register the subordinate countries to facilitate the distribution of tariffs afterwards. In fact, the sales scope of merchants in various countries can be It can only be the country and its colonies.

The reason why tea smuggling was rampant in the Netherlands before was because the Netherlands was completely ruined. Merchants won the ruling power of the inter-provincial parliament. They neither need to maintain a standing army, nor build a navy, nor build a military port. Therefore, there is no tea tax on Dutch tea. Naturally, it can be sold all over the British colonies.

Although the Dutch ended up playing like this in history, it ended with the third Anglo-Dutch war being broken by the United Kingdom, forcing Dutch business capital to buy British treasury bonds, and the transfer of the European financial center to London.

But now... isn't Holland living well?Who said that there must be national defense and government spending?
Dashun’s actions in North America, to support France and the Indians, are to educate the North American people and make them more agree with Franklin’s Albany vision: there is no defense expenditure, and the situation in North America is not universal.

But the actions in the Netherlands have created another kind of magic: no national defense, no navy, no standing army, and several major powers will protect me alone, so I can live happily ever after?

However, in fact, except for the Dutch, Britain, France, Austria and Russia do not think so.

Therefore, Dashun's negotiations are only feasible in the UK, because Dashun offered to impose tariffs on Britain.

As for asking the UK to impose tariffs, or what to do with tariffs, that would be too sinister.

Obviously, these people in the UK also know that once the old system collapses, many industries will collapse, and of course there will be many people who don't want to be An An and starve to death.

If you have no tariffs and no money, what can you do?
Even the previous land enclosure movement did not rely on the national consciousness of the UK, and the farmers consciously gave way to the landlords.

(End of this chapter)