Recently there has been criticism within the party towards those who are not in line with the party stance. The accusation is odd, stating that those rebellious people are eating the food provided by the Party and smashing the pot for cooking. And some disagree: Who is eating the food provided by the Party? It is the taxpayers who provide for the party and government officials.

The majority thinks that tax payers are feeding the government and party officials. However, the questions remains. It may seem to be easy, however, basic rules of economics is involved, that is the creation of value. Let me ask again, then: who creates value? Those who create value need not to be fed by others. Only those who don’t live on those who create value. These people live on the value created by others, which makes them exploiters.

We normally think that those who are paying provide for those who are receiving. Therefore, we usually uphold that the customers should be treated as god since they provide for us by buying our products. Deducing from this, it can also be said that as tax payers pay tax which provides for the government and party officials. However, this is wrong if put in the context of economics.

The fallacy can be recognised once a comparison between parenting and taxpayer providing for officials. The former reflects affection and selfless love, while the latter is an exchange of labour (or service) by the government officials for money. There is no reason for us to say that capitalists are provided by workers as they are paying the workers. In the same light, it does not hold water to say that tax payers provide for government and party officials as they are paying taxes. Now it can be established that government and party officials are not provided for by tax payers. They are providing for themselves.

Many false statements can be made in this regard which need to be clarified. For instance, everyone needs to eat, therefore everyone is living upon the crops grown by farmers. However, one with rational thinking may question: as farmers sell their grains to those who eat, and those buyers pay to get the grain, therefore, those buyers should be the god of the famers. That is to say farmers are living upon the buyers of their grains. Who is providing for whom? Is it the buyers are providing for the farmers who grow crops, or the other way around? It can be concluded that to decide who is providing for whom is a false argument.

In the era of agrarian economics, exchanges seldom took place. People were self sustained. Everyone needed to eat, therefore, everyone was working in the field and ate off what they grew. Later, rudimentary division of labour emerged where some people did not have to work in the field but they traded grains for a living when the majority of the population were stuck in agriculture. In the times of market economy, only a limited amount of people are growing crops when the majority of the population are operating in other industries. People demand more than crops. They want better accommodation, more convenient transportation, and more diversified entertainment. That is when the society is running according to the principle of “one for all and all for one”. It is also when it gets impossible to tell who is providing for whom. But one thing is clear, everyone needs to make money to sustain themselves. [Page]

In market economy, making money refers to the creation of wealth. By providing valuable labor, right use of assets, or subletting natural resources such as land, people are creating wealth. However, the illegal incomes from corruption and embezzlement, drug smuggling, and producing and selling counterfeited products can not be considered as wealth creation. In modern societies, a particular service is needed due to the complexity of the organisation, that is the public service, including police, court, public transportation, national defence, environmental conservation, and urban planning. The society may go into chaos without such services. In order to fulfil the need of the public, professional personnel are hired by the government and paid according to their services. This payment comes from taxes collected from the citizens. Such labor relation bears little difference from that between corporate and workers. This relation is also based on exchange, that is exchange between labor and salary. The salary involved is a part of the wealth creation process, which is the income of the labour providers.

What’s said above is based on the assumption that the government and party officials are hired according to the principle of fair competition in order to provide their services to the government. However, in reality, some officials are hired not to serve the tax payers, but to interfere with people’s liberty, even violate citizens’ constitutional rights. They interfere with citizens’ freedom of speech and publication, freedom of demonstration and protests, and violate citizens’ private property, some even control the liberty of citizens. These government and party officials think they hold big powers and are beyond the jurisdiction of the law. They have get used to it and do not see any improperness.

As China is not a democracy, the arrogance of power has been a common practice of officials. If the citizens do not stand up against it, the hope for China to be a country of rule of law will diminish. As for these officials who interfere citizens’ liberty, they have become the parasites of the society. What the government needs to do is to fire these parasites, which can also lead to the decrease of the stability sustaining fee. Taxpayers will never be willing to hire such people to interfere with their lawful rights. A decrease of the stability sustaining fee is also a reduction of the tax burden.