I will give you one instance, to prove this, which is very striking and
which happened in my own experience. A man I knew gave in his income
tax returns a few years ago. He had a secretary at home to whom he paid
a fairly large salary, and he also used a secretary in town. Their
salaries came out of money which he had earned in business but appeared
in his taxable general income, for he was not allowed to take it off
as an expense. Meanwhile, both the secretary in the country and the
secretary in town were paying tax on _their_ salaries, though they came
out of a total income which had already paid taxes, and anyone making
an assessment of the total income of England would certainly have
written down from the official books: “Mr. Blank, so much a year; his
secretary A--, so much a year; his secretary B--, so much a year,” and
added up the total. Yet it is clear that the money put down to A and B
was imaginary.
I cannot tell you the thousands of ways in which this simple case of
overlapping goes on in modern England, for it would be too long to
explain, and I have only given you very simple instances, but you may
be certain that the economic imaginaries of this kind form at least a
quarter of the supposed income of the country.
If there were no other form of imaginaries than this it would be
very simple to understand them, and perhaps allow for them in making
an estimate of total wealth. Unfortunately, there are any number of
different forms much more difficult to seize and cropping up like
mushrooms everywhere more and more in a complicated and active society.
For instance: you have (2) the economic imaginary due to _luxurious
expenditure_.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account