Trending

Newsletter

Bolivia Opposition Denounces Persecution for Questioning Evo Morales’ Third Reelection Bid

By: Karina Martín - Apr 17, 2017, 12:57 pm
(Twitter)
“I don’t debate with the opposition, they do not have programs, I can only talk with the people” (Twitter).

Español

Six opposition leaders denounced political persecution for opposing the current president Evo Morales‘ candidacy.

Former presidents Jorge Quiroga (2001-2002) and Carlos Mesa (2003-2005), former president Victor Hugo Cardenas (1993-1997), the governor of the region of Santa Cruz, Ruben Costas; the mayor of La Paz, Luis Revilla, and the leader of National Unity party, Samuel Doria Medina, accused the government of “breaking the limits of independence” between powers and transforming the judiciary “into an instrument of political persecution.”

“Most of us, like hundreds of fellow citizens, are subject to processes and trials whose sole purpose is to decapitate anyone who expresses different ideas and positions and criticisms of those who govern to avoid the formation of democratic alternatives,” said the joint statement.

The manifesto in which they denounce the opposition’s persecution also rejects the ruling party’s intention to nominate Evo Morales again, because it is “unconstitutional and would imply that they have turned their back on Bolivians’ inalienable sovereignty.”

The opposition leaders said that the complaint about the “critical situation that Bolivian democracy is going through,” will be presented before international organizations.

Likewise, the opposition leaders asked to for the opportunity to debate with Morales, in order to address issues of democracy and human rights in the country. However, the president rejected the invitation.

 

“I do not debate with the opposition, they do not have programs, I can only talk to the people,” said Morales.

Morales also took the opportunity to comment on the meeting and the opposition’s joint manifesto, underestimating it.

“They are taking aim at the justice system, but they do not have the morale to do it. The US embassy used to be in charge of the justice system,” he said.

Sources: El Nuevo Herald; El Deber; Agencia EFE; Hispan TV

Karina Martín Karina Martín

Karina Martín is a Venezuelan reporter with the PanAm Post based in Valencia. She holds a bachelor's degree in Modern Languages from the Arturo Michelena University.

The U.N. Has Absolutely No Idea How Economic Growth Works

By: Daniel J. Mitchell - @danieljmitchell - Apr 17, 2017, 12:37 pm
united-nations

I’ve been at the United Nations this week for both 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. As you might suspect, it would be an understatement to say this puts me in the belly of the beast (for the second time!). Sort of a modern-day version of Daniel in the Lion’s Den. These meetings are comprised of tax collectors from various nations, along with U.N. officials who – like their tax-free counterparts at other international bureaucracies – don’t have to comply with the tax laws of those countries. In other words, there’s nobody on the side of taxpayers and the private sector (I’m merely an observer representing “civil society”). Read More: Why Activists Should Think Twice about #DeleteUber Read More: Three Myths that Distort US Debate on Immigration I could share with you the details of the discussion, but 99 percent of the discussion was boring and arcane. So instead I’ll touch on two big-picture observations. What the United Nations gets wrong: The bureaucracy assumes that higher taxes are a recipe for economic growth and development. I’m not joking. I wrote last year about how many of the international bureaucracies are blindly asserting that higher taxes are pro-growth because government supposedly will productively “invest” any additional revenue. And this reflexive agitation for higher fiscal burdens has been very prevalent this week in New York City. It’s unclear whether participants actually believe their own rhetoric. I’ve shared with some of the folks the empirical data showing the western world became rich in the 1800s when fiscal burdens were very modest. But I’m not expecting any miraculous breakthroughs in economic understanding. googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1459522593195-0'); }); What the United Nations fails to get right: The bureaucracy does not appreciate that low rates are the best way of boosting tax compliance. Most of the discussions focused on how tax laws, tax treaties, and tax agreements can and should be altered to extract more money from the business community. Participants occasionally groused about tax evasion, but the real focus was on ways to curtail tax avoidance. This is noteworthy because it confirms my point that the anti-tax competition work of international bureaucracies is guided by a desire to collect more revenue rather than to improve enforcement of existing law. But I raise this issue because of a sin of omission. At no point did any of the participants acknowledge that there’s a wealth of empirical evidence showing that low tax rates are the most effective way of encouraging tax compliance. I realize that these observations are probably not a big shock. So in hopes of saying something worthwhile, I’ll close with a few additional observations I had no idea that people could spend so much time discussing the technicalities of taxes on international shipping. I resisted the temptation to puncture my eardrums with an ice pick. From the moment it was announced, I warned that the OECD’s project on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) was designed to extract more money from the business community. The meeting convinced me that my original fears were – if possible – understated. A not-so-subtle undercurrent in the meeting is that governments of rich nations, when there are squabbles over who gets to pillage taxpayers, are perfectly happy to stiff-arm governments from poor nations. The representative from the U.S. government never expressed any pro-taxpayer or pro-growth sentiments, but he did express some opposition to the notion that profits of multinationals could be divvied up based on the level of GDP in various nations. I hope that meant opposition to “formula apportionment.” Much of the discussion revolved around the taxation of multinational companies, but I was still nonetheless surprised that there was no discussion of the U.S. position as a very attractive tax haven. The left’s goal (at least for statists from the developing world) is for the United Nations to have greater power over national tax policies, which does put the UN in conflict with the OECD, which wants to turn a multilateral convention into a pseudo-International Tax Organization. P.S. The good news is that the folks at the United Nations have not threatened to toss me in jail. That means the bureaucrats in New York City are more tolerant of dissent than the folks at the OECD. Daniel J. Mitchell is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute who specializes in fiscal policy, particularly tax reform, international tax competition, and the economic burden of government spending. He also serves on the editorial board of the Cayman Financial Review. This article was originally published on FEE.org. Read the original article.

Weekly E-Newsletter

Get the latest from PanAm Post direct to your inbox!

We will never share your email with anyone.