I think that this makes it obvious that the UIC is a state.
It is also true that the warlords each controlling a turf collected taxes, but the good thing about warlordism was that each warlord only controlled a very small geographical area with the result that people could avoid those warlords with unreasonable tax rates.
If there are numerous micro-states they will start competing about revenues with the result that the tax burden will remain limited. With a more uniform kind of governance this mechansim will not operate.
I also read that businessmen in Mogadishu offered the warlords shares in their business and in order to give the different warlords an interest in keeping peace with the other warlords a businessman erecting a factory on the territory of warlord A, offerd not only that warlord shares in his business but also warlord B, C and D. That was one of the reasons that peace prevailed between the various warlords.
In that sence I believe that warlordism was developing into a patchwork of peaceful microstates with reasonable tax burdens.
The present system is closer to a conventional state and will just like any other government expand more or less beyond it's proper functions.
Concerning the functions of government I also believe that the competition between various warlords about revenues would have led to a tendency of very limited government.
1 Comments:
I think that this makes it obvious that the UIC is a state.
It is also true that the warlords each controlling a turf collected taxes, but the good thing about warlordism was that each warlord only controlled a very small geographical area with the result that people could avoid those warlords with unreasonable tax rates.
If there are numerous micro-states they will start competing about revenues with the result that the tax burden will remain limited. With a more uniform kind of governance this mechansim will not operate.
I also read that businessmen in Mogadishu offered the warlords shares in their business and in order to give the different warlords an interest in keeping peace with the other warlords a businessman erecting a factory on the territory of warlord A, offerd not only that warlord shares in his business but also warlord B, C and D. That was one of the reasons that peace prevailed between the various warlords.
In that sence I believe that warlordism was developing into a patchwork of peaceful microstates with reasonable tax burdens.
The present system is closer to a conventional state and will just like any other government expand more or less beyond it's proper functions.
Concerning the functions of government I also believe that the competition between various warlords about revenues would have led to a tendency of very limited government.
Post a Comment
<< Home