How to Destroy a Nation in 2 Generations


Posted originally on Apr 3, 2024 by Martin Armstrong

Inheritance 2

QUESTION: I believe you analyzed inheritance and how altering it had contributed to society’s decline. Politicians here in Australia are talking about when you die; everything should go to the state because it is not fair that one person inherits more than another.

I would greatly appreciate any comments you might have historically on that subject.

Bret

Inheritance Tax

REPLY: Yes, I forgot when I did that analysis. It was a long time ago. Inheritance Taxes are Marxist and highly destructive economically. Suppose you have a company worth $100 million; your children must pay 40% taxes. They have to fire people and sell assets to cover the tax. This has been HIGHLY destructive in farming. Heirs have been forced to sell off farmland to pay the tax. This is how large farming companies and Bill Gates have accumulated farmland. This exploitation of the heir reduces productivity and thus reduces GDP and employment.

Before Marxism, inheritance became the primary reason the first son inherited everything during the Middle Ages, and the second son was donated to the church to become a priest, whether he liked it or not. In ancient times, if you had many children and evenly divided an estate among them, you effectively destroyed society’s productive capacity.

Charlemagne 11

There had previously been two types of marriage in France, temporary and permanent, until the Catholic Church insisted on only permanent marriages. Charlemagne married all his daughters in only a “temporary” marriage, meaning that they possessed no legal right to the throne or property. That was the distinction between the two types. The question of inheritance was a major issue historically.

The ancients knew the consequences of dividing estates (partibility) among heirs. Sparta in Greece rewarded fathers based on the number of children. Sparta wanted soldiers, so the more children, the better. But Sparta undermined its own economy in the process. Production of children was rewarded in Sparta, and the fathers of three or four sons were exempted from military service and other economic burdens. Aristotle is sharply critical of this practice and wrote:

“It is obvious that, if there were many children, the land being distributed as it is, many of them must necessarily fall into poverty.”

If you create a major company like Ford Motors and you die, then the government is only interested in grabbing taxes. They think nothing about the jobs this company creates. The ancients realized that even dividing it up equally among the heirs destroys the productive capacity of the entity. This is why they evolved into the first son who inherited everything to preserve the estate rather than destroy it.

Jefferson Greatest Threat

After 2032, we MUST prohibit any such idea of direct taxation (income/inheritance) as the Founding Fathers of the US Constitution intended. They understood this lesson from the past – Marx was a hateful, jealous person, only concerned with not having as much as his neighbor. This is what has brought us to the brink of disaster. Our government has followed Marx rather than those who created the Constitution out of experience.

Paine on Govt

Thomas Paine was famous for saying: Give me liberty or death. But he also made it very clear why history repeats fro the people refuse to ever learn:

“Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worse state, an intolerable one.”

Digital IDs Ramping Up in Australia


Posted originally on Dec 4, 2023 By Martin Armstrong 

Digital Identity Chart

Australian federal Finance Minister, Senator Katy Gallagher, has introduced legislation for a national digital ID. The new program aims to create a single platform that unites a person’s identification documents and connects it with government services such as myGov, Centrelink, and the Australian Tax Office. The government claims that the digital ID will have strong privacy provisions built in; however, the information is accessible to both the public and private sectors.

The Ministerial Digital ID Expert Panel has stated the program will cost $1.5 billion annually. The digital ID will contain sensitive documents such as a person’s birth certificate, driver’s license, and passport.  The current AGDIS program will  be phased out as this national ID is all-encompassing. As of October, over 10.5 million Australians have already enrolled in the program.

Liberal Senator Alex Antic has emassed nearly 95,000 signatures on his online petition to scrap the “digital identity power grab.” The petition states:“The Labor government wants to take your most sensitive personal data. They want to cram it into a central government-run database – the perfect target for a hacker. They want to generate a ‘digital identity’ with this data. Then they will force you to use this ‘digital identity’ to transact online or access online services. The worst part? This is the first step in a Chinese-style social credit system. If you don’t toe the line, your ‘digital identity’ could be cancelled, meaning you’d be cut off from the world of online services that people now rely on. This is a fundamental threat to your freedom and our democracy. You and I need to send a strong message now that Australians will not take this lying down.”

The Australian government created the program with “input from various stakeholders,” a nod to who will own your data. After passing the legislation, the government plans to incorporate state and territory-issued IDs to the framework. Then, the government will link the system with the private sector. Banks and other agencies will have access to your financial information through the digital ID.

Australia’s government has failed to protect user data numerous times. Webber Insurance found 44 data breaches in the first six months of this year alone. Last year, the data of over 12 million Australians containing sensitive information such as medical records was leaked from the Tax Office. There were reports of hackers selling MyGov accounts for a mere $1 USD.

This policy is a gross infringement on human rights and privacy. The government does not need to track us like cattle. Worse, why are they selling personal data to the private sector and how will that data be kept securely? The Australian government showed just how tyrannical it has become after the COVID lockdowns and is ushering in this new reality of government surveillance. The goal is to build a GLOBAL database where we will all be accessible through the click of a mouse.

Harris – Reducing the Population is a Real Goal


Armstrong Economics Blog/Population Re-Posted Jul 20, 2023 by Martin Armstrong

The White House claims that Vice President Kamala Harris made a gaff by saying that the goal was to “reduce population” when she should have said pollution. Of course, the immediate claim is that anyone disagreeing with that statement is engaging in a conspiracy theory. As they say, actions speak louder than words. She actually said the truth, and it is not a conspiracy theory. In Washington, they have been concerned with reducing population, which is the entire agenda behind climate change.

This entire LGBTQ is being pushed, but not for equality, for they won that in the Supreme Court. The military also had Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. This transgender push is to reduce the population. Only 1.6 million people in the entire United States identify as transgender. This is only 0.0048% of the population. Yet you would think it is really a sale effort to increase that to a majority to reduce the population. Speaking to people I know who are gay, they are suffering the blunt edge of this movement, for they are being thrown into the same category. They have chanted at Pride events, “Give us your children,” but if Jeffrey Epstein said they would petition for his execution.

This is NOT ending discrimination – it is creating it! Pushing it in schools and now separating boys’ and girls’ gyms in school is somehow identifying you as racist and far right. When military parades used to take place, it was just those of the various armed services. No longer. There has to be a “pride” flag. How about flags for every religion as well?

It was NOT a gaff. They tried to change it to pollution after the fact because of the backlash. This is by no means a conspiracy theory. This has been a movement funded by the rich people behind the climate change agenda. They both go hand-in-hand on the same path to hell. Don’t forget Gates’ fund to chip all women like a dog so he can use 5G to turn off the ability even to have children.