Content

1. Ecological Indebtedness and its Consequences

2. Economical Indebtedness

3. Effects of Economical Indebtedness - Part One: The Sinking Quality of Life

4. Effects of Economical Indebtedness - Part Two: The Necessity of Economic Growth

5. Economic Growth as a Beacon of Hope - Now more than Ever

6. Ecological Results of Economic Indebtedness

7. Comprehensive Sustainability

8. The Transformation - an Array of Measures and Strategies to Choose from

1. Ecological Indebtedness and its Consequences

Despite various efforts to protect the environment, the industrial nations continue to live - ecologically speaking - beyond their means. They transform considerable amounts of raw material hastily into waste. The high use of limited resources can be compared to the consumption of an interest-free inheritance: instead of leaving behind enough natural capital for future generations, we are consuming the gifts of nature - particularly raw fossil materials - within a comparatively small period of man’s history. The modern industrial society, however, not only lives off the geological processes of the earth’s evolution; it also uses nature as a gratuitous dumping ground for garbage and pollutants. The way how to deal with substances will result in far reaching consequences. The greenhouse effect (potentially dangerous changes in climate), the reduction of the ozonosphere are only some of them. And also through the use of nuclear energy and its long term effects as well as the risks involved in green gene technology. As a result of this behavior, future generations will have to deal with potentially negative consequences to their health.

The modern industrial societie and their accompanying lifestyles have resulted in much local pollution, as well as global ecological problems. A significant amount of the population in countries that were until recently industrially underdeveloped is striving towards the model of modern industrial societies and their way of life. If the modern industrial systems and their way of life were copied worldwide, our eco-system would collapse.

2. Economical Indebtedness

The fact that society is living beyond its means and at the expense of its youth and descendants can be observed not only in the field of ecology. Whereas ecological problems are fading more and more into the background of public discussion, the problem of direct and indirect national debt has moved into the limelight: the industrial nations are exhausting the future’s economical, as well as its ecological resources. The German Federal Government today applies a quarter of its tax income to interest on debt, which makes it the second largest budget expenditure after ”Employment and Social Order.”
Most countries do not pay off their national obligations. Instead, they cover them up with new credit. In other words: interest will have to be paid now and in the future on credit, whose equivalent is only partially or no longer available. Even if no new debts are taken on, there is still the burden of interest to carry. Assuming an interest of 5%, the total debt will double every 14 years - even without the burden of new debt! The reason lies in the exponential development of compound interest. The national debt will increase permanently and with ever-increasing aggression, it threatens to strangle public finances and, with them, the state.

The high national budget is bogged down for the most part in highly consuming expenditures that have no positive effect on the future. As much as the individual consumptive expenditures appear to demonstrate socially positive effects, the current result proves to be most unsociable: live well today; let future generations pay the price.

The possibility of financing expenditure through credit has in the past proven to be a hindrance to strict, efficient, goal-oriented budgeting. As long as there was no shortage of money from the public hand thanks to their debt-managing policies, the necessary pressure was missing. Whether environmental-, social-, or economic-politics, the amount of money spent qualified unquestionably as the measure of worth for activities undertaken.

The current continued indebtedness cannot be explained by economical reasons. There is a combination of causes at its root that may seem banal. First and foremost is the will of the people to consume as much as possible and to maintain a high standard of living independent of the economical efficiency. This drive meshed well with policy. By diverse direct achievements as well as transfer payments, those responsible in the seventies and eighties could make themselves indispensable and prepare their reelection. However, they did not finance their benefits through tax income - after all, the citizens would have needed this money for other purposes and they would not have supported this policy. More and more was paid for with credit.

Next to the direct and aforementioned indirect indebtedness, financial care for the elderly is in many industrial nations of additional significance to the public debt. Employees nowadays are required to make payments into the social security system, for which they will receive future benefits - however, the benefits paid back will not correspond to the amount of money paid in, as model calculations demonstrate. It is a question of covered up national debt: the state demands social contributions from its citizens, although it cannot adequately fulfill its obligations to them.

Living at the expense of the future is systematically organized. Every voice that speaks of temporary or imposed manifestations is threatening reality or acting against better judgment. The fact that debt alone through compound interest grows quickly, so that benefits reaped in the past are in never-ending repayment, as well as the large holes in social security, is to be questioned from a structured point of view.

3. Effects of Economical Indebtedness - Part One: The Sinking Quality of Life

The national debt is not a new phenomenon. Loans and debt transfer were already commonplace in ancient Greece and national debt began to take its course in the Middle Ages. The Twentieth Century, however, will go down in history as the Century of Debt, with emphasis after 1970. This is particularly noteworthy, because the primary historical reason for public debt lost its meaning around this time, as national debt was usually the result of war.
High debts deteriorate the public hand’s power of action and require money that could be more sensibly invested otherwise. Through the burden of debt, the forced expenditure shortages affect primarily those posts which are neither contractual nor prescribed by law. These are often investment expenditures - expenditures which would prove useful for the future. A multitude of social benefits will fall victim to the direct and indirect pressure of public debt. Their deconstruction is already underway. The Social Security System will be greatly affected for a long period of time.

The public debt will, as we have seen, drastically increase, as long as repayment is not undertaken. The problem is compound interest: its development will stagnate only after repayment of the capital has begun - that is, when the state makes higher payments than are necessary just to meet the interest requirements. One day the credit and bond markets will punish the public hand for its continually worsening financial situation with interest rates that are no longer feasible (high risk surcharges) - at which point (no later than), the state will twist mightily on the taxscrew in order to raise enough money to pay off its debt. The taxpayers will have to do penance for government benefits from yesterday and today in that their purchasing power will be withdrawn and their quality of life lowered.

If the resourcefulness of current financial policy is yet devoted to creative bookkeeping and putting off the burden, then its imagination will soon jump ahead to the goal of significantly increasing the tax income. Here, history shows a wide variety of repeating measures. First of all taxes will be increased. If in the past, the public’s coffers were empty, the government waived exceptional taxes, which were, however, for the most part soon regarded as necessary. Governments were continually creating new taxes and raising the tax rates with impressive creativity. Policy still dreams of falling tax rates; the dynamics of debt will, however, stimulate exactly the opposite. Next to sinking quality of life, this leads to economic difficulties, which will further increase the burden for the impacted generation.

In the effort to reduce an overwhelming burden of debt, the road from additional taxes to more or less deceitful measures is not long. Historically, a multitude of measures are verifiable. Governments cut back the interest on loans and refuse all interest payments; they delay repayment of their debt, cut it back or refuse partially or completely to acknowledge it. If the state finally loses its good reputation and no longer receives enough money on loan, it controls the flow of money out of the country or forbids the investment of money outside of its own borders. The next step is then forced loans: the citizens are required to loan their money to the government for its fixed low interest rates.

Another well-liked method of shifting the burden of public debt onto the people is to be found in inflation - the devaluation of currency. If a government has direct access to the central bank, then it can supply itself there with as much credit as it wishes. The central bank procures the necessary financial means by printing more money. The effect is inflation; the devaluation of currency leads to a partial reduction of the public debt. Those who suffer are those in possession of money - those who have saved, as well as those who receive (such as through wage payment or government social benefits). Through this manner of national financial procurement, the people are betrayed the fruits of their labor and savings. Inflation works like a tax, from which all credit is affected. Compared to real taxes, inflation grants those responsible the advantage of silence. Economy is also highly affected by inflation.

National bankruptcies have long been a favored method of passing along the burden of public debt. If we were dealing with concealed bankruptcy in the earlier remarks, the currency reform is an open bankruptcy - uncovered and apparent to all. The ruined monetary system is restructured. Monetary reforms prove to be the lasting, logical consequence of long-term debt policy and its momentum, as well as of the citizens’ lack of trust in politics and cash value. In its less harmful variety, the existing money is simply replaced with new money of lower value. However, that is not the case with the widely circulated confiscating money reforms, in which the public is not given a fair chance to exchange its entire monetary possessions. These reforms work expropriatingly - which is in part both un- and intentional. Even real estate holders are burdened, because they have to pay financial compensation after the monetary reform, for which they have to acquire debt in new currency. Monetary reforms follow hyperinflation and, therefore, present at first no real danger. However, if stopping the debt spiral on a long-term basis is not successful, that will potentially change in the 21st Century.

It is not alone the insufficient inclusion of the true economic effects to whose bitter realization we close our eyes. The effects of ecological indebtedness remain almost completely unheeded by economic contemplation. How will the greenhouse effect be considered in the future? Or for that matter, the ozone hole? What economical consequences will the drastically increasing number of environmental refugees have? What will happen if the risks of atom and gene technology come to fruition? What will the effect on the economy be if there are shortages of important raw materials in the next century? None of these aspects are to be found in the happy-go-lucky investigations of politicians.
 

4. Effects of Economical Indebtedness - Part Two: The Necessity of Economic Growth

Many nations have been living beyond their means since the sixties; as a result of which their national finances have been ruined, their social security and welfare systems are heading at high speed towards benefit insufficiencies, and many societies are stuck in the middle of structural problems. In this situation, policy sets out for economic growth, because according to currently believed facts: only if the economy grows strongly will tax income increase accordingly, so the state can retrieve at least a portion of its liberty of action; only if the economy grows strongly will social contributions increase so much, that the support system can retrieve a portion of its liberty of action; only if the economy grows strongly will the reduction of job positions stop and new positions be created - absolute necessities for welfare and social security.
 

5. Economic Growth as a Beacon of Hope

The result of the necessity for economic growth is partially strange and dubious measures that arise from short term thinking, yet can bring about dangerous consequences in the long run. In this manner, hope for growing industries, such as bio- and gene technology and the nuclear industry, is propagated and promoted under insufficient risk calculation. Policy, industrial associations, business enterprises, and factory committees demand the most unhindered weapon export possible in almost unheard of unison in order to stimulate growth and, with it, the job market. Large, questionable projects are carried out as spearheads of growth and activity with large subsidies. Our efforts to protect the environment in many cases do more to ease our conscience than to protect the environment. With regard to economic weaknesses and rising nations, the industrialized world is still cutting off its markets. And in the end: aid for national development officially and ever increasingly serves the demand for export instead of its goal of providing ”aid for self help” to the receivers. In the struggle for economic development, policy and industry work all too often with only slightly differentiated arguments.

Exponentially growing systems develop a monstrous dynamic. For instance, if the economy grows 5% annually, the annual economic achievement will double itself about every 14 years. If the debt-dynamic of the public hand - resulting from interest and compound interest - is to be stopped primarily through economic growth now, the economy would have to grow at a markedly higher percentage rate than that which the current market interest amounts to, which the state generally has to pay. The number of products increases with rising economic achievement - despite all hope for ”qualitative growth”, as the past demonstrates. It remains unclear who should give impulses for that necessary growth. All of the big industrial nations are suffering from net indebtedness and set about the sale of goods in foreign lands in order to realize growing economic achievement and to bring financial resources into the domestic market. Of course, every country can hope for a trade surplus. But such is not possible for all to achieve, since exports and imports maintain their own global balance - after all, all exported goods must be imported somewhere. In principle, industrial weakerly nations provide markets for the expansion of exports and the building up of trade surplus. But these nations are yet deeper in debt than their stronger industrial counterparts, so that their financial resources are extremely limited.

On the whole, the belief that economic growth could permanently support and revitalize the state’s finances or social system proves to be an illusion. Modern industrial society is no longer capable of consuming enough products as necessary to revitalize the economy, the national budget, and the social security system - or to do away with unemployment. In the end, in a closed system such as the earth, permanent growth is not possible.

In the effort to achieve economic growth in order to stabilize the finances and social system of the state whithout increasing the existing problems (unemployment, empty coffers, and holes in the social security system), the state intervenes in great measure in the economies of a whole row of other nations. Financial help and tax reductions cost the state money that it does not have. In the end, those measures increase the burden of debt and aggravate the problems further. This is more so, because the results of many programs are limited and, in part, dip into the negative. A policy whose goal is the growth of the economy can hardly be considered market economy friendly.
 

6. Ecological Results of Economic Indebtedness

Because society is living beyond its means, the economy must be constantly animated into growth. That is particularly accommodating for businesses, whose goal it is to increase turnover and gain profit. However, economic growth generally leads to the increase of environmental problems, despite the increasing importance of services and reduced specific environmental pollution (pollution per unit of production). What counts is the total environmental pollution, which consists of individual pollution occurrences.

Now, if we consider the debt spiral and the economic growth which necessarily follows, we will not arrive at a good prognosis for the environment. Within 60 years, an annual economic growth of 5% will lead to an annual economic achievement which is 18 times larger than at the beginning. Even if the specific pollution (here: environmental pollution per unit of gross domestic product) was generally reduced by half, the sum pollution would increase by a factor of nine! The environment would not be able to buffer such a drastic increase of effects. It does not matter which way one looks at it or with which assumptions one calculates, the exponential development of the (economic) growth checkmates all efforts to protect the environment. Additionally, the natural systems with their complex connections do not behave linearly. As it is, a slight increase of emissions may throw systems of balance in the end.

In order to achieve economic growth, products must be made with ever decreasing lifespans - whether it is through poor quality or technical constraints. In this manner, many older, dependable products are no longer compatible with current developments and are therefore only further useful in limited applications. Short-lived products lead not only to economic wastefulness, but just as surely to avoidable pollution through disposal and replacement production. The insufficiently analyzed progression of high risk technology as the bearer of hope for economic prosperity will lead to environmental problems in the middle- to long run.

The more difficult the budget situation, the shorter the political timeframe will be, so that short-term and shortsighted measures win the upper hand. The concentration of activity depends on the poignancy of current suffering, whereas activities for environmental protection lose their immediacy.

The effects of national debt will affect - shortly or at length - the economy in the form of higher taxes, inflation, weaker currency and sinking domestic buying power. The economy building on growth will fall into serious crises. In the effort to strengthen the economy and to reach high growth aims one day, policy can not encumber businesses with additional burdens. The environmental legislation will no longer be so tightly controlled; instead, control will be relaxed and pollution will rise.

Polls from recent years show that, among citizens with rising economic problems, the meaning of environmental protection is sinking in comparison to questions of existence, such as the workplace and livelihood. If the quality of life is in danger, then long-term points of view are reduced in significance.  In the long or short run, economic indebtedness will, however, lead to just such tendencies: the economy will be crippled and wages and salaries will sink for those, who still have a workplace and unemployment will increase. Tax burdens will increase as well, through which the total money available for the individuals will continue to shrink. Inflation - a likely possibility - will depreciate partially to far-reaching savings.
 

7. Comprehensive Sustainability

The modern industrial society lives economically, as well as ecologically, beyond its means and consumes the resources of the future. Presumably, the economic pressure of debt will influence life in the industrial nations quicker than the ecological indebtedness, which will need time to gather strong momentum. Generally, it can be asked: how is society to act in an ecologically future-oriented manner, so long as we are unable to solidly manage our money (on which everything is dependent)?
The task of orienting our behavior in such a manner that future generations will also have the opportunity to fulfill their material and immaterial needs, is as necessary as it will be difficult. In ecological discussions, under the key word sustainability, a far-reaching discussion concerning intergenerational burdens has kicked off. From an ecological point of view, the economics of sustainability is simply considered as those actions, which do not destroy ecosystems on the one hand, and which preserve raw materials on the other. If we accept this definition as the standard, it becomes clear how much the modern industrial societies have already overdrawn their ecological savings accounts.

A first step toward taking the economical aspects of sustainability into further account, is delivered in the economical concept of sustainability. The concept will prevent an indebtedness which is too high from occurring, in that it not only limits the income side of the public budget (the taking on of credit), but also takes the expenditure side into account. It is a concept that primarily aims at insuring the state’s ability to pay at any time. Indebtedness is then manageable if the current amount of debt is no greater than the present value of future primary budget surpluses.

Primary budget surpluses are to be considered those surpluses remaining after the refund of the interest payment on the public debt.

The present value of future primary budget surpluses means: the future primary budget surpluses minus the sum total of interest payments to be paid on current debts until the budget surpluses become effective.

The concept makes it clear that today´s indebtment must be payed off, along with compound interest in the future. Either through higher taxes or decreasing expenditure. The only exception: the current investments lead to a corresponding increase in income in the future through higher tax income.

The concept of economic sustainability relies on an intergenerational way of looking at the problem, just as the concept of ecological sustainability does.

Sustainability can realized only under a system of social fairness. But as correct and important as this statement is, it always serves to support the demand for further expansion of federal benefits and the politics of redistribution. This behavior, however, goes against the principle of economical/ecological sustainability, especially because meaningful changes in the financial policy of the public hand are not demanded at the same time.
The development from a market- to a growth economy [growth economy: an econmy which is politically stimulated for growth] hinders the motivation of the individual towards sustainability: instead of efficiently handling of ecological and economical resources, waste is demanded. At the same time, systems for motivating the behavior of sustainability are missing. In that manner, the power of solidarity went astray, along with the power of trust, self-organization, and the value of comradeship. The growth economy is partially responsible for the turn away from values of solidarity, from the sense of community, and from self-organization. The system of long-term economic growth at all costs which must awaken needs, which places material in the limelight, which views citizens primarily as users, which places the global in front of the local, and which constantly dissolves personal points of reference, also destroys these characteristics and values. This leads to egoism and materialism.

The current strategies cannot be successful in the long run. High expenditures - especially on credit - cannot eliminate the system’s limits or hold back change. Instead of waltzing around the symptoms of individual problems, society must lay the causes of all important questions bare and find the connections between them. Environmental protection and solid state finances are then not so easily played off against job slots and social compensation - nor social security against economic promotion.
 

8. The Transformation - An Array of Measures and Strategies to Choose from

A row of superordinate prerequisites for sustainability can be enumerated. Above all are openness and realism. Society has to put an end to the currently prevailing betrayal. At the same time, it has to drastically increase its readiness to implement change and to begin transformation. Instead of attending to the consequences of problems, it has to focus on their causes. That the timeframe of action must be widened is unavoidable, as long-term consideration must be given to all actions. Whether under the aspect of the environment or the economy, it makes no difference: wasteful behavior must to be brought back in line and the efficiency of actions must be increased. Only when society meets these requirements completely, can it consider itself social.

At the federal level, indebtedness can no longer remain a normal instrument of financing. New debt will have to become an exception and, should be allowed only for well-defined and specific measures whose motives are transparent and open to public inspection. Such a strategy would offer the chance to escape the debt-trap in the long-term - a prerequisite for which, nevertheless, would be to reduce the currently existing obligations in order to escape the dynamic of compound interest.

The necessity to oversee the state’s tasks is unavoidable on the road to sustainability. The expert committee of the German Government, ”Schlanker Staat” (Slim State), suggests the following standards for assessing the state’s tasks:

• the principle of necessity
• the principle of proportionality
• the principle of (financial/economic) achievability
• the precept of corresponding cost-benefit analysis (by economically measurable administrational achievements and/or responsibilities) and
• the precept of justifable administrative expenditure.

Without the encumbrance of ideology, excellent solutions can be found for a mixture of federal services and such that would be carried out, of course, under the guidance of the public hand, though not by it. The subject matter is then the point of focus - not the individual interests of the participants. Independent of the manner and scope of the tasks themselves, there exists a large potential for reorganization in the public administration.

In order to stop waste and improve the efficiency of public activities, it is important to set the proper general conditions, instead of enacting innumerable and - to a certain extent - contradicting rules. This reduces bureaucracy in the government and economy, results in a stronger, goal-oriented procedure, avoids contradiction and counterproductive developments, and at the same time, establishes more dependable general conditions. The request is then for more market economy - though, not in the currently predominant alleged form that holds the market to continual growth and, in many aspects, more resembles a planned economy. Necessary is a market economy that uses the creativity of businesses in order to achieve economic and social goals, and which motivates them to move in the desired direction.

In order to arrive at sustainability, it is also important to raise the efficiency of federal benefits. However, due to the inefficiency of the principle of giving everyone a slice of the cake, proper distribution of these benefits in many European countries is poor. In this uncoordinated manner, some people enjoy benefits, who do not necessarily need them. Walter Wittman, professor for public finances, calls for the relief of subjects instead of objects: relieve, for instance, those citizens who cannot meet their insurance payments and/or market standard rent, instead of health insurance and welfare housing. The market would stay untouched from the constantly growing federal intervention in the economy and could then develop more efficiently, while at the same time, more fairness and intended social leveling could be achieved. Wittmann has further in mind to consolidate the innumerable authorities that are preoccupied with social transfer payments. All that would remain to the citizen for his financial support through the state would be the address of a central public bureau, to which he could turn in need, and which could organize all aspects at once. Simplification of administration and drawing closer to the citizen would occur at once.

The government offers its benefits, according to Wittman, while covering up their total costs. For the first time, the public hand and citizens will experience what individual benefits cost. Transportation-, health-, and educational systems will no longer be supported as objects. Instead, they will have to cover their costs through those citizens who make use of them. Society will win back its feel for the value of its benefits in that the government presents its citizens with the true costs. Whosoever cannot provide the proper (which respect to the current system’s ever-increasing) remuneration, will receive subject support from the government - that is, financial support. The system of social security displays a particularly high need for change in many countries. Future generations should no longer have to bear the cost of today’s benefits - the usufruct principle, in the generation spanning sense, forbids it.

Many people will find the principle of usufruct unattractive. If the government withdraws from the (co-) financing of many benefits, their costs will increase. In the end, citizens will have even less than today. However, the usufruct principle offers the potential to simplify complex processes and increase the transparency of federal activity, consequently reducing the indirect cost of benefits and the waste of financial means. All in all, it is unavoidable that the individual’s financial affordability will be reduced. However, there is no getting around it if we are to stop acting at the expense of the future.

Sustainability of public finances can only be implemented if the subsidy jungle is drastically weeded. Subvention regulations would contribute to making government actions transparent, dismantling bureaucracy, efficiently allocating resources, and steering society in the direction of economical sustainability. At the same time, it would help halt the growth economy and install environmentally tolerable structures.

The current requirements place many new demands on policy and administration. A society which significantly shrinks indebtedness and subsidies constitutionally, places its social support system (specifically old-age pension) on solid ground, implements the principles of usufruct and subject support, stands behind flat hierarchies, subsidizing, and transparency, reduces federal tasks while designating new ones, dismantles bureaucracy and sets proper general conditions instead of enacting countless individual ordinances which contradict one another - such a society must revolutionize its administration. Open-mindedness is an absolute necessity not only for the finances of the public hand. The financial system must be clearly and comprehensibly organized with regard to all points which directly and indirectly contribute to indebtedness, as well as all potential risks And it needs to contain best-case/worst-case considerations. Generation balancing must be a self-evident instrument. The budget must be separated into one administrative budget for the ongoing expenditures and one for investment. Next to administration, policy must change and/or the political system must be adapted. Citizens must be better integrated into decision making processes, and personal responsibility, self-organization, and solidarity must be strengthened.

Despite the enormous economic challenges, ecological problems must not be overlooked. Of course, it is to be expected that the effects of direct and indirect national indebtedness will become difficult to bear sooner than those of the ecological indebtedness. Nevertheless, it is necessary to tackle the environmental problems, because, should we be successful in achieving economical sustainability, little would be won in the long run if the uninhibited waste and destruction of natural goods was not been stopped at the same time. It is important to take care of the earth’s natural resources without succumbing to the illusion of the cyclic economy. Because of its statistically limited availability and its high significance for chemistry and pharmacy, this is particularly important for petroleum, which is not recyclable. It is therefore necessary to reduce the dependency on these raw fossil materials, which is to a large extent responsible for the global indebtedness crisis. On the road to sustainability, the abuse of air, water, and soil as dumping grounds for harmful substances must be further reduced. The limits for polluting the environment have to take the principle of precaution much better into consideration than is the case today, and it must also extensively shut out the possibility of taking larger risks to nature and health. At the same time, the combination of effects are to be considered. The greenhouse effect and the gradual elimination of the ozonosphere must be made into a common, serious theme by the world’s politicians. In this matter, the countries of the industrialized world are largely responsible for the atmospheric changes with regard to those countries which bear little responsibility for pollution, but nevertheless will have to bear the consequences.

Considering their high risks and long-term ecological effects (due to accidents, insidious contamination, terrorist attacks, war), it will be necessary to get away from atomic energy and the plutonium industry - considering which, a necessary condition for the use of green gene technology will have to be in each case a clearly defined advantage for society.

All of this will only be successful if society can disengage itself from the necessity for expansion, and instead suceed in installing an ecologically sustainable economy, as well as setting new goals for itself that replace the current postulate “bigger, faster, more”. In order to come closer to the colorful bouquet which is the aforementioned goal, a multitude of changes are necessary - from the behavior of the individual to the state, policy, and economy. At the same time, with a certain amount of preparation, the adoption of tax reform plays a key role, which gives ecological goods a significant value. As long as raw materials qualify as virtually free products of the earth’s history, and the three elements of earth, water, and air are used as irredeemable waste products and/or storage places for harmful substances, whereas human work is highly taxed and occupied with high side expenses for the social system, the environment will further remain overused in a variety of ways.

Of course, the current structural problems of many industrial nations restrict the readiness for new orientation, although these are particularly important in this situation. Only a tax reform offers the chance to significantly slow down the uninhibited destruction of nature and halt the endless dismantling of job slots. In the end, the current form of tax laws - as well as the waste of natural resources and rationalization is to be supported.