THE WEALTH TAX: STRAIGHT-OUT THEFT The human rights for Germans only

The German Central Bank has proposed an extension of the "bail-in" operation to the level of European stats faced with default: a tax on the wealth of well-off citizens, only charged once, which would be a one-off, and should precede the request for European aid ("bail-out") made by a bankrupt government.

The idea seems reasonable enough - "Help yourself, before asking others for help".

The idea is not just an idea, but it also expresses the exasperation of the Northern states of the European Union, which have more balanced budgets, when it comes to the fact that their taxpayers' money is used to save the countries in the Southern area of the Union, which are in default or close to it.

This kind of programs have taken place in Ireland, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus and partially in Spain (as well as accompanied by interventions of the European Central Bank on the bond market for Italy, for example), and the Germans are sick of rescuing other people, at their own expense, (which is of course extremely petty when thinking about it logically, because it omits the fact that the Euro currency is set up to favor Germany and places the economies in Southern Europe at a disadvantage - a controversial topic - as well as the fact that the bail out funds are created using common contributions and are intended to be used to rescue any country that needs it).

• THE BOORS HAVE JOINED FORCES WITH THE HYPOCRITES AND THE TAX EVADERS

A study drawn up in April by the European Central Bank has legitimated the German boorishness, bringing to light the fact that the wealth of the households in the Southern area of the continent is a few times greater than that of those in the North (for example, the households of the Italians are more wealthy than those of the Germans, and their total wealth would exceed four times the total of the Italian sovereign debt).

The lack of discipline which is a characteristic of the Southern Europeans, causes the anger of the other Europeans, who are more inclined to comply with the rules: "It is unacceptable to request the solidarity to of the European Union taxpayers, as long as the rich Greeks show no proof of solidarity at all ", French politician Pascal Canfin was saying in 2011, when faced with the fact that the deposits of the Greek citizens in the Swiss banks alone amounted to approximately 200 billion Euros - in other words the equivalent of the Greek GDP, or two thirds of its debt at the time.

Even though Canfin's France isn't exactly an example of a balanced budget, let's remember that, during the time of French president Nicolas Sarkozy, some of the French would have wanted him to be replaced by ... Angela Merkel and therefore, even if the French are themselves lacking in discipline, they do admire it (the proverbial German discipline also becomes relative, when we look at the imbalanced budgets of some of their lands).

And let us remember that out of the first tranche of 13 billion Euros, received as part of the bail-out program, Greece has acquired French tanks worth 5 billion Euros (Greece counts as one of the remarkable military forces of the European continent, as a result of its tense relations with Turkey).

Therefore, there are some serious grounds for the lack of solidarity of the Greeks with their government and some solid reasons for the hostility they have against the European Union.

But like King Solomon would say, the others are right as well.

• THE GOVERNMENTS WANT TO (ALSO) LEGITIMIZE DIRECT THEFT

Even though the wealth tax has precedents in history, (in Italy there have been talks about it for three years now), still, the governments of so-called "democratic" states have usually confined themselves to (systematically) robbing their citizens only indirectly, through inflation, by paying their products and services with a devalued currency.

That is why, the Bundesbank insists that the direct robbing of the population, through the wealth tax, should be presented as a "one-off" measure, which would only happen once.

That, in other words, this second type of theft is not part of the "system".

In reality, the need to rob its own citizens is a result of the "system": the European Union has made it a goal for itself to have a low budget deficit together with low inflation, and now, the countries in the South in their quest for meeting a standard that exceeds their abilities, failed to meet the first requirement, and since they don't have their own currency, and they can't tinker with their inflation, they have to get from somewhere the money they so recklessly borrowed.

Where are they going to get the money and how?

From the population as always, naturally.

And if not through inflation, then through direct theft - "the one-off wealth tax".

Last year, the IMF had calculated that a tax of 10% on the wealth of the well-off citizens, in fifteen countries of the Eurozone, could bring the debt back to its 2007 levels.

• THE ACCOUNTING IMPRECISION SPECIFIC TO THEFT

If we are really going to take numeric hypotheses seriously, everything is up for discussion.

First of all, the notion of "well-off citizen" is ambiguous, as it has a different meaning in England, for instance (where one out of five people seems to be a millionaire in pounds), compared to let's say, Romania, where about 18 million citizens spend less than four Euros a day each (because that is all they have, not because they are cheapskates).

That is why, the amount of 250,000 Euros of a citizen's wealth (which includes homes, cars, money in their accounts, stocks, other businesses, collections etc. - which has begun being discussed as characteristic to the fortune which would be subjected to the "one-off tax") becomes extremely high for Romania (and would not have any significant effect towards fueling the budget, because it would exclude from taxation the overwhelming majority of the population), but on the other hand tends to be widely applicable in England.

Second of all, it is unclear how big the wealth of the middle class - which is the main object of the "wealth tax" - still is, after being eroded all of these years by the crisis of the Eurozone and the threat of confiscation at the end of last year by the European banks.

For instance (because we were already talking about Italians), in its bi-annual report on the wealth of Italian households, recently made public, the bank of Italy was seeing a 6.9% drop of the overall wealth, in 2012, compared to 2010, whereas the median wealth fell twice as much (the rich people lose less wealth than the poor do).

What are the current numbers?

Nobody has them.

Third, the notion of "sovereign debt in 2007" is in itself ambiguous: for instance, in the case of Greece, which debt are we talking about, the one for which the numbers were cooked by American investment bank Goldman Sachs?; and is the current debt taken into account the one which includes the subsequent bail-out packages?

We do have a "debt clock" which accurately indicates the increase of the world's public debt, but does anybody still believe in the accuracy of statistics?

After the European Union huffed and puffed at the ratings firms, and the United States went to court to sue the auditors, why should we lend any credence to what the IMF, the World Bank and the European Central Bank say?!

How big is the planetary debt?

Does anybody know?

Because the IMF doesn't.

Some people say that Earth has 370 trillion dollars in debt; others claim that it amounts to approximately 1.16 quadrillion.

What does the IMF base its assumption on when it says that 21 trillion Euros, collected from the citizens in the developed countries, would be enough?!

Enough to what?

To start over?!

Why would we finance governments that have proven themselves to be corrupt and incompetent?!

• COPS AND ROBBERS: THE TAX MUST BE SWIFT!

The IMF noted that the previous time the "wealth tax was applied" it was ineffective, because the operation was slow: "The experiences from German and Japan, after WW2, have suggested that the main issue of the wealth tax was the dallying of its introduction, which left room for its extensive avoidance and for capital migration, while in turn stimulating inflation".

Of course, to the IMF that doesn't mean that the victim tried to avoid being robbed, but it instead calls it "tax evasion".

The Bundesbank also notes that "in order to avoid tax evasion, the governments need to act fast".

It's like playing "Cops and robbers" on a continental level.

Except the cops are the robbers.

• GERMANS - TOP LEVEL EUROPEAN CITIZENS

Bundesbank is not reluctant in noting: "In Germany, the wealth tax will not be implemented, because it would affect economic growth".

Who said that Germans don't have a sense of humor?!

I mean, we definitely know that the wealth tax hurts economic growth, but you go ahead and hurt yours, we won't hurt ours.

"The effects of a wealth tax can be even more harmful", the deputy director of the Fiscal Department of the IMF noted in November, "discouraging saving and investments which generate future value".

Once the "wealth tax" became a topic of discussion, it seems that it is highly likely to be implemented.

It was the same for the confiscation of the bank deposits in Cyprus: initially it was presented as a measure applicable only locally, the European authorities assured us that it would not be expanded to the whole European Union.

And then, with complete impudence (to say nothing of stupidity), they have generalized it.

Well, perhaps this "wealth tax", which is only being suggested now, will become reality now (in fact, there are no other resources).

Let's imagine Europe, after the passing of the "wealth tax", as a rule for bankrupt states: the European Union will be divided in two - on one hand, the citizens afraid of some of their wealth being seized, and on the other hand the Germans.

The Germans will have their human rights.

The others won't.

• THE OPPORTUNITY WE ARE GOING TO MISS

We have the opportunity to avoid the European offenses: we are not part of the Eurozone, we have our own currencies and we can still save the appearance of a democratic state, by only stealing from our citizens indirectly, through inflation; and we aren't' members of the European Banking Union, so we can decide not to adopt the "bail-in" (the measure which consists of stealing the deposits from banks).

But president Traian Băsescu is an ardent supporter of the European Union - the totem who saved him from the Referendum.

He has informed us, a few days ago, that Romania's future has two goals:

One is more distant, the passing of the Euro currency (does the Presidency have an impact assessment for this decision?);

Another is closer, the joining of the Banking Union.

The president said that this goal is in the near future, possibly in March-April.

As a result, the president is rushing to give Romanian banks the ability to seize the depositors' money - to rob the few citizens who do save, but more important, to bankrupt the Romanian companies, for the benefit of banks (and let's not forget, the president supports the flight, from our banks of the capital of prudent companies).

Because the domestic banks will get this right to seize money, as soon as we join the Banking Union.

Knowing the fact that over 90% of the equity of the Romanian banking system is foreign, let's draw the conclusion: the Romanian president Traian Băsescu enthusiastically accepts allowing foreign banks to seize the savings of Romanian citizens and destroying Romanian businesses.

Obviously, the state budget will suffer huge losses, and as a result, we will pass the "wealth tax", to feed it.

Our journalists paid to hate Băsescu are incapable of going beyond his boorish behavior, and his association with "Udrea and Cocoş"; if they paid attention to see what his stupid solidarity with the leaders of the European Union actually engenders, they would be shocked and there would be no need to for them to be paid to write against him.

If we were to practice contrarian thinking, we would then note that this is a moment of great opportunity for us.

It would enough to refuse to join the Banking Union, for Romania to become a beneficiary of the migration of the European capital, looking for refuge, faced with the peril of seizure through a "bail-in".

We wouldn't become a "tax haven", we would just preserve our normalcy, in contrast with the Eurozone.

Of course, our authorities showing wisdom and courage is nothing but an unrealistic hypothesis; the government recently announced that it wants to lower the maximum daily amount allowed for cash payments by half.

As a result, it not only gave banks "an undeserved advantage", according to some opinions published in BURSA, but instead gave them more money to possibly seize.

• THE GLOBAL PONZI SCHEME

A so-called "Ponzi scheme" is a vicious financial mechanism, in which the newer investors pay off the old ones, (a business which doesn't rely on exploiting the collected capital using profitable investments, but rather on "taking from one man and paying off another").

I have mentioned in this article, the notion of "planetary debt" and regardless of how different the estimations concerning may be, it is, anyway, at least five times higher than the value of the GDP of Earth.

So then, how does the global economy work?

Simply through the principle "take from one man and pay off another".

We are in a global Ponzi scheme, promoted by the financial-banking system and legalized by the authorities.

The direct robbery of the citizens, which the European Union is getting ready for by seizing the bank deposits of its citizens and through the "wealth tax", are the signs that the global Ponzi scheme has exhausted the limits of the flexibility of the system that we are living in.

Just like in any Ponzi scheme, the row is bound to happen.

We can postpone it, if we get some aliens to finance the scheme.