Xinshun 1730

Chapter 1360 The Wealth of Nations ([-])
Since the textile industry in Manchester and Lancashire cannot be regarded as a typical example of the development of free trade.

So, is it true that the textile industry in Manchester, Lancashire must have developed wrongly?
This is a question of whether to take "free trade" as the bible.

If "free trade" is regarded as the "Bible" of the new era, then many problems can be resolved.

That is, because he does not conform to "free trade", even if his textile industry develops, it is wrong.

Once you hold the idea of ​​"free trade" as the "Bible", you will often have a very special idea.

This idea, in simple terms, can be roughly described in one sentence:
I would rather cede land and pay compensation, and stay innocent in the world.

It is better to have great unemployment in the whole country, and to integrate the truth in the Quartet.

Generally speaking, new doctrines generally appear in two situations.

Take the UK as an example.

One is to hold a frisbee.

The typical one is the Whig view of history—the status quo is that I am very good, so why am I so good?Because I've always been great.

The other is to counter the status quo.

A typical example is the British free trade trend of thought.

The free trade theory is a very typical "call what you lack".

What is missing in the classics is what you call it.

Because there is no free trade in the country at all, it is called for free trade.

So even the two "suggestions" at the beginning of this pamphlet sound like they're outrageous.

But in fact, including George III, they were not too surprised or too difficult to accept.

Because, this is not the first time they have heard similar views.

On the contrary, they often hear similar views, and even many views are more radical and outrageous than this one.

After listening to a lot, the threshold is high, and then listen to the suggestions of these two radicals compared to the UK, which are not outrageous, and they will not feel that there is anything unacceptable.

In other words, even Liu Yu, who wrote the core of this pamphlet behind the scenes, thinks these two suggestions are too outrageous.

But in fact, people in the UK have put forward ideas that are dozens of times more outrageous than this. Liu Yu's little suggestion is not even in the forefront of outrageous.

Why does this happen?

To understand why there is such a radical free trade theory in the UK, or why the free trade theory in the UK is different from the Whig view of history that explains why the UK is so bullish, but is actually radically anti-Britain system?

To understand this, one must first know what kind of country Britain is at this time.

No need to look through history books, just think about it with simple thinking.

Under the technical conditions of the 18th century, what kind of country must it be to receive fiscal revenue of "13.5% of the national GNP"?
Actually, let's just say it.

At this time, Britain, at least on the issue of trade, was almost the utopia of the "Qin Law".

It is the closest actual country to the book "Guan Zi".

It is a country that truly implements those legendary harsh punishments to the countryside.It is a country that can make imperial monarchs like Da Ming and Da Shun envious of their imperial power.

Give a few simple examples.Here we do not use Christ to record the year, but use the year name to record the year.

such as:

[Elizabeth's eighth year, the third decree stipulates: Anyone who exports sheep, lambs, and rams to the outside world, if the first offender confiscates all his goods, he will be imprisoned for one year, his left hand will be beheaded in the city, and it will be nailed to the public in the city].

[Recommitment, that is declared as a felony criminal, sentenced to death. 】

Another example:
[Wool owners within ten miles from the coast must report in writing to the nearest customs office within three days of shearing the wool with the amount of wool sheared and where it is stored]

[The report should include: How many sheep were sheared?How many sheep do you have at home?How much wool was sheared?Where are you going to sell it? 】

[Before any part of it is resold, the same report shall be made with the number of bales and weight of the wool, the name and address of the buyer, and the address of removal]

[No one who lives within fifteen miles of the sea shall buy any wool without a pledge to the king and a report to the west]

[If no such report and guarantee is made, the wool is transported to the seashore. Once found, the wool will be confiscated and the offender will be fined three shillings per pound... Make a guarantee that in the event of losing the lawsuit, in addition to all other penalties, three times the legal fees must be paid]

Another example:

[William III's eight-year decree: Where wool is traded, wool must not be packed in boxes, barrels, or boxes to prevent escape]

[Only in cloth or leather packaging, with "Wool" or "Wool" written in large characters three inches long on the outside, otherwise the goods and their containers will be confiscated, and a fine of three shillings per pound will be paid by the owner or packer]

【Except between sunrise and sunset, the wool shall not be carried by horse or carriage, nor shall it be carried by land within five miles from Haida, otherwise the goods and carriages shall be confiscated】

If we say, this is not like "Qin Fa".

Then, with the addition of the following two, it will definitely not run.

[Anyone who illegally sells wool will be fined...]

[If any two of the residents execute the referee, the referee's fine will be repaid by the taxes of the whole village]

[If someone has an affair with officials in Xiaoyi in order to reduce the fine, he will be sentenced to five years in prison]

【Anyone can report】

【Whistleblower is exempt from crime and punishment】

also:

[According to the provisions of Article 20 of the eighth year of William III: the export of looms or machinery is prohibited, and violations will not only confiscate the loom or machinery that is exported or even attempted to be exported, but also impose a fine of forty pounds]

[This decree encourages reporting.A fine of 40 pounds, half to the king and half to the informant]

[The other decree... If you sell it privately, the goods will be confiscated, and the offender will be fined [-] pounds.

[Half of the fine goes to the whistleblower]

These decrees are only a small part of the numerous decrees.

When a leaf falls, you know the arrival of autumn.

And that's just the wool part.

If you add salt, wood, indigo, turpentine, grain, etc., it can be said to be spectacular.

Read these laws.

It is also understandable why a book like "Leviathan" is written by the British.

People can only imagine what they have seen, how do they think about things they have not seen?
Those oriental monarchies that are "sarcastically" called Leviathan, whether it is Ming, Dashun, or even the earlier Tang and Song Dynasties, can really only say that sentence: I am a fart Leviathan?If I were Leviathan, could I be like this?

It can even be said that a hundred generations of bullshit practiced the Qin law, and a shabby household like Da Ming Dashun deserved to say that he practiced the Qin law?
Read these laws.

It can also be understood why the group of people in North America yearn for "freedom" so much.

Why did Britain send people to rule North America? It was such a fear.

Why did Franklin want to turn Pennsylvania into a royal colony? Originally, it was to better deal with taxation and land distribution issues. As a result, the people of Pennsylvania would rather let the Bin family continue to be the big landowners of Pennsylvania, and opposed Franklin’s turning Pennsylvania into a royal colony. idea.

It can even be said that the United Kingdom at this time is extremely strict in terms of law, encouraging reporting and encouraging whistleblowers to share fines.

Economically, it is the closest country on earth to the set of things in "Guanzi".

none of them.

Only by understanding this background can we understand why it is said that Whig’s view of history is a frisbee, and I am bullish because my policies are right; while free trade theory is anti-British system, thinking that everything Britain does is wrong.

If the free trade theory is interpreted as "an explanation for the fact that the sun never sets in Britain", it is exactly the opposite.

The introduction of the free trade theory is precisely "If the UK doesn't care so much, the UK will have taken off earlier, and it will definitely fly higher than it is now."

Although, judging from Liu Yu's three views, it would be pure bullshit.

If the UK did not do this, the UK would not have taken off, but the UK would have exploded.

From wool to wool, from shipbuilding to sugar, from cotton to bone china, if there were no protection and restrictions, it would have been blown away long ago.

If you really want to play free trade, how can your British shipping industry compete with the Dutch sea coachman?

How can your British textile industry compete with India?
How can you compete with Spain in the quality of your British wool?
Even, how can He De compete with France in the British sugar industry?

Even Adam Smith, a true Englishman of this age, said that the British sugar industry could not compete with France.

For: [(Sucrose Island Colony) Laws which give slaves little protection from their masters seem to be more likely to be enforced in a politically very despotic colony (absolute France) than in a politically completely free colony. more effective. 】

[In countries with unfortunate slave laws, such as France, magistrates, in protecting the slaves, interfere to a certain extent with the administration of the private property of the masters. 】

[In a free country, the master is either the representative of the colonial assembly or the elector of the representative, so the magistrates dare not interfere with them without due consideration.The magistrate has to put them in his eyes, which makes it difficult for him to protect the slaves]

[The autocratic nature of the French government enables them to have better management methods for black slaves, and to give slaves a little protection so that they are not easily invaded by their masters...]

In short, it is autocracy to introduce laws to prevent the upper class from oppressing the lower class without a bottom line.

However, dare not interfere, the upper class is the local tyrant, and cannot interfere with the master's disposal of "private property (slaves)", which is freedom.

Therefore, in the Age of Enlightenment, when you read words such as "freedom" and "dictatorship", you must first think about whether it is what you understand, and why the thought suddenly popped up in your mind. The steel seal felt that it meant what he understood.

And, why do you say that when the French High Court faced the issue of "checking out the acres", they said that this violated the tradition of freedom in France since ancient times. The "freedom" mentioned here is not freedom in the philosophical sense.

Why were the British able to write Leviathan?
Why do those who flee to North America fear the direct British rule so much?

Why the United Kingdom can receive 13.5% of GNP in its finances, but France can't even do half of it; it's hard to say whether the Ming Dynasty in the Central Plains can receive 13.5% of GNP, let alone 1.35%.

Why in the 1700s, the overwhelming trend of free trade began to appear?

Why is it said that the most outrageous two of the six proposals put forward this time will have a wide audience in the UK, and no one, including the King of England, thinks this is too scary?
Does the original version of "The Wealth of Nations" explain reality?Or do you want to change reality?

The original version of "The Wealth of Nations" is because Britain has free trade, and the book proves that free trade is good?Or is it because the UK is going towards the absolute opposite of free trade that a book is published to promote free trade?

The original version of "The Wealth of Nations" is more about rational thinking, reasoning, logic, and deduction.

At this moment, the 2.0plus version of "The Wealth of Nations" annotated by Liu Yu has added some realistic confirmation and evidence.

Or rather, twisted advocacy.

This makes this booklet even more convincing.

Most of the people belong to Mu Qiang.

And many times, or in this era, economics and even philosophy are busy explaining the world and history.

Just as Voltaire and other "essentials", "essential Confucianism", and even the French Physiocrats talked about the superiority of the Eastern system...

From Daming to Dashun, until now, its rich image, magical porcelain silk cotton cloth, elegant tea lacquerware, etc. have made many Europeans wonder what caused the prosperity of the East.

Is Dashun poor?
poor.

Send it to the southwest mountainous area, to the desolate land in Gansu, and to the Lianghuai salt households before the salt reform. After experiencing it for a while, you will know what poverty is.

Is Dashun rich or not?
rich.

At least the external image is rich. Tea silk, exquisite cotton cloth, these things are all standard cultural exports, and they all promote the prosperity of Dashun overseas.

There must be a reason for being rich, right?

Since it is to explain the world, there are always different angles.

From what angle does this booklet, or Liu Yu’s distorted commentary come from?

Whether it is Daming or Dashun, does the land have exclusive ownership?

Regardless of whether it is Daming or Dashun, can the land owner with exclusive ownership be used to fulfill tax obligations and debt obligations when the land owner is unable to fulfill tax obligations and debt obligations?

Whether it is Daming or Dashun, have they ever subsidized the cotton textile industry?Is there subsidy support for the cotton textile industry?
Whether it is Daming or Dashun, is there a special decree prohibiting Sichuan from rubbing cotton or Guangdong from rubbing silk?

Whether it is Daming or Dashun, is consumption tax levied on almost all commodities?

Whether it exists in reality is one thing.

Theoretically, whether there is legal name or not is another matter.

Theoretically, Daming has an internal unified market.

In reality, [-] mile a bill, [-] mile a tax, so that there is such a thing as going to a certain place to sell things, halfway there, I feel that I have to pay for my pants, and I don’t even want the goods, and I run away overnight.

But this is not important, what is important is that in name, including Dashun, its "tax rate" is very low.

There is no money in the local area, whether it is apportionment or fire consumption, the imperial court is a standard "gentleman stays away from the kitchen", and the tax rate of the imperial court is low in name.

Even, in name, even Mencius' ten and tax one did not reach.You know, if the tax is less than ten and the tax is one, Mencius directly identified it as a barbarian. Because the barbarian has no organization and no administrative agency, it is only [-] tax one, and what a normal country does. Twenty tax one, thirty tax one, Then it is about to slide into incompetent and low-administrative barbarians.

To put it bluntly, even in the era of extremely advanced information dissemination in later generations, many people's understanding of distant places is still based on their own imagination, and they even want to imagine an ideal country at every turn.

At this time, there is no need to mention it.

And Liu Yu's distorted "commentary" captures this point.

The prosperity of the East through tea and silk in the West is attributed to "free trade".

Or rather, it comes down to much of the original version of The Wealth of Nations.

For example, according to the original version of "The Wealth of Nations", when talking about why the North American colonies are rich, there is one reason:
[In Pennsylvania, the right of primogeniture was abolished, and the land, like movable property, was equally distributed to all the children of the family]

[The laws of the three states of New England, like the Law of Moses, allow the eldest son to get two shares...but after only one or two generations, the land may be fully divided and distributed to all the children of the family...]

Well, whether it is the Ming Dynasty or the Dashun Dynasty, if you look through the history books, you will know that among the people, it is the law of equal inheritance.

It is often the big landlords who, after several generations, become small landlords, and then become self-cultivating farmers...

Obviously, if Liu Yu wanted to distort the scriptures, he could completely compare many contents of the original version of "The Wealth of Nations" with many policies of Dashun.

In fact, it's basically the same.

Land trading, land private ownership... These things have been played much earlier.

He could give countless examples, with a slight twist.

As for whether he believes it or not...

It can only be said that Liu Yu's reforms, based on the four words "primitive accumulation", are the most ruthless in mercantilism and Kerberism.

It is so ruthless that even the size, specifications, number of guns, and academic qualifications of the captains of merchant ships trading with Japan are strictly controlled.Relying on Japan's state-locked mentality and the Tokugawa shogunate's desire to monopolize trade for profit, the two sides jointly brutally suppressed the "freedom hero mongers" who broke through Dashun's strict monopoly franchise.

It's not that he doesn't believe it. In fact, he quite believes it. At least in this era, he believes it relatively more than most people.

only……

In China, if you believe this, you can’t stand the land private ownership plus exclusive ownership transactions, resulting in land annexation, a cycle of chaos, and a wave of major uprisings in the past 200 years.

Relying on chanting scriptures, the common people who cannot recite will do obediently and starve to death, maintaining the sanctity of free trade.

In foreign countries, if you believe this, you can’t resist the British ban on cotton cloth and the French executive order that the French East India Company should not import lacquerware and silk, which seriously affected the export of Dashun.

Relying on the scriptures, at the very least, you cannot read the British "Cotton Cloth Prohibition Order", "Tea Tax", "Subsidy Measures for Listed Commodities such as Hemp, Silk, Canvas, Pine Oil, Indigo, etc."

It is precisely because of part of Thaksin's letter that he was able to come up with the 2.0plus version of "The Wealth of Nations" according to his ideas, and prescribed such a prescription for Britain.

And in this prescription, the proposals for the UK to "increase the trade deficit" and "strive for two-thirds of domestic silver outflow within 20 years" can use a higher-dimensional perspective to gain the support of the British people.

Just like in the original "The Wealth of Nations", Adam Smith slammed the British angle——

[The designer of this system is not difficult to determine.I believe that it is definitely not the consumer, because the interests of the consumer are all ignored]

[It must be the producers, because the interests of the producers are so carefully looked at...the interests of the consumers, or rather other producers, are sacrificed to the interests of the manufacturers]

[Consumption is the sole end of all production, and the interests of producers should be attended to only so far as they promote the interests of consumers.The principle is so self-evident that it hardly requires proof. 】

Since consumption is the sole purpose of all production.

So, why didn't Britain consume all the silver it had accumulated over the years?
Why not reduce tariffs or even cancel tariffs, so that cheap Dashun cotton cloth, French wine, French molasses, Spanish tobacco, Dashun porcelain, North American grains, etc. will flood in frantically, thereby boosting the living standards of the British people?
Wouldn't it be wonderful to make a 10-pound family live the life of a 30-pound family?
How to put it, I have saved 150 years of family background.

As long as you let it go, within a few years, this method of relying on family resources will definitely satisfy most people, and even many years later, some people will miss this time of relying on family resources, and call it the golden age.

Since Spain began to issue banknotes, Britain has suffered and worked for 150 years, and its accumulated family background is thick enough.It's time to spend well, and strive to spend all the silver accumulated for 150 years within 20 years.

For most Britons, this is a tempting option.

And the opponents... The opponents, that is, the new British class, the new aristocrats, and the industrial capitalists, were beaten to death by the industrial capital of Dashun, and they no longer had much strength to oppose.

(End of this chapter)