I’m doing my third field trip to the United Nations.
In 2017, I was a credentialed observer to the 14th Session of the Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters, as well as the Special Meeting of ECOSOC on International Cooperation in Tax Matters. I somehow survived having to spend several days listening to government officials wax poetic about various schemes to extract more money from the productive sector of the economy.
This year, I”m at the U.N. participating in the 17th International Forum of the Convention of Independent Financial Advisors. My panel focused on taxation and the U.N.’s Sustainable Development Goals.
Here are the goals, which presumably are widely desirable.
The controversial part is how to achieve these goals.
Many of the folks at the U.N. assert that governments need more money. A lot more money.
To put that number in perspective, the annual GDP (economic output) of the United States is about $20 trillion.
My concern, whether the number is $300 or $300 trillion, is that folks at the United Nations have a very government-centric view of development.
Which is why I tried to explain that the only successful recipe for progress is free markets and small government.
Take a look at this list of the top-25 jurisdictions as ranked by the United Nations.
And what do these places have in common?
They generally became rich when government was a very minor burden.
This means the 1800s and early 1900s for nations in North America and Western Europe.
And it means the post-World War II era for some of the Pacific Rim jurisdictions.
I concluded with my challenge, asking participants to identify a single nation – anywhere in the world at any point in history – that became rich with big government and high taxes.
The answer is none. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
The bottom line is that many people at the U.N. have a sincere desire to help the world’s less-fortunate people. But they need to put facts and empirical data above statist ideology.
P.S. Maybe the U.N. doesn’t do the right thing about fighting poverty because it has some people who are very dishonest about the topic?
P.P.S. I don’t know whether to classify this as absurd or dishonest, but Jeffrey Sachs actually claimed that Cuba ranks about the United States in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals.
In 2012, I spoke at a conference that was grandiosely entitled, “The High Level Thematic Debate on the State of the World Economy.” I was a relatively lonely voice trying to explain that a bigger burden of government would hinder rather than promote economic development.
In 2017, I was a credentialed observer to the 14th Session of the Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters, as well as the Special Meeting of ECOSOC on International Cooperation in Tax Matters. I somehow survived having to spend several days listening to government officials wax poetic about various schemes to extract more money from the productive sector of the economy.Here are the goals, which presumably are widely desirable.
The controversial part is how to achieve these goals.
Many of the folks at the U.N. assert that governments need more money. A lot more money.
Needless to say, $300 trillion is a lot of money. Even when spread out between now and 2030.A new Fund to support UN activities that will help countries achieve the Sustainable Development Goals was launched today by UN Deputy-Secretary-General Amina Mohammed at a ministerial meeting to review financing for sustainable development. …Ms. Mohammed said the new Fund will “provide some muscle” to help UN country teams support countries’ efforts and priorities to achieve the 2030 Agenda – the global agenda that sets out 17 goals to promote prosperity and improve people’s well-being while protecting the environment. “It will help us hit the ground running and to pick up the pace,” for financing the Goals, she said, cautioning that it was still only part of the estimated $300 trillion that will be needed.
To put that number in perspective, the annual GDP (economic output) of the United States is about $20 trillion.
My concern, whether the number is $300 or $300 trillion, is that folks at the United Nations have a very government-centric view of development.
Which is why I tried to explain that the only successful recipe for progress is free markets and small government.
Take a look at this list of the top-25 jurisdictions as ranked by the United Nations.
And what do these places have in common?
They generally became rich when government was a very minor burden.
This means the 1800s and early 1900s for nations in North America and Western Europe.
And it means the post-World War II era for some of the Pacific Rim jurisdictions.
I concluded with my challenge, asking participants to identify a single nation – anywhere in the world at any point in history – that became rich with big government and high taxes.
The answer is none. Zero. Zilch. Nada.
The bottom line is that many people at the U.N. have a sincere desire to help the world’s less-fortunate people. But they need to put facts and empirical data above statist ideology.
P.S. Maybe the U.N. doesn’t do the right thing about fighting poverty because it has some people who are very dishonest about the topic?
P.P.S. I don’t know whether to classify this as absurd or dishonest, but Jeffrey Sachs actually claimed that Cuba ranks about the United States in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals.
No comments:
Post a Comment