Chanda,

Your arguments remind me of the time when I was counter-campaigning the forgiveness of Zambia's debt in 2000. I was thinking along the same lines as you are, especially when you categorize funds as Unused, Misused and Abused. Yes these reasons are very difficult to reconcile to when you are embedded with the advocates of higher taxes.

And you cannot help but appreciate the shortcomings of the present and the past administrations regarding fiscal management. The standard operating practices are strewn with loopholes knowingly or unknowingly created by bureaucrats. These problems, for obvious reasons, have dogged us as a nation for as long as we have been independent.

We have to understand that when Lawrence Katilungu, Daudi Yamba, Munakayumbu Sipalo, Arthur Wina, Harry Nkumbula, Reuben Kamanga, Chibesa Kankasa, Christine Mulundika, Alex Shapi, Mulenga Chongo (Chikamoneka), Mwansa Kapwepwe, Mungoni Liso,Dr.Fwanyanga Mulikita, etc, were "casting stones", they were doing so with very little, if any experience of managing a community, let alone a national government. They learnt fast, but only that which was presented to them. Socialism at the time appealed more to their political whims than any other form of ideology.

Socialism was an alternative to something that they did not fully understand just as they did not understand Socialism itself completely. They had an option to choose one or the other as the then world superpowers were fencing and bickering. In the wake of abundant information and education, we can fault them for signing on to socialistic principles but we should give them credit for not aligning with either superpower.

Today, we see socialistic tendencies being displayed in public discourse and influencing public policy. That should not come as a surprise. Kaunda felt incumbered to reorient the nation in socialist principles and philosophies and he had the government machinery to back it. And then he clung on to power for 27 years, coercing the masses to follow his lead.

Chanda, you would be deluding yourself if you thought you could reverse the quarter century effects through articles on Zambia Online. Perhaps you are right when you say that you are hoping that the future generations will find these articles useful. That, perhaps, is the right thing to do; hope.

What is done cannot be undone. Let's work with what we have now and what we can do as we step cautiously into the future.

MINERAL ROYALTIES

I personally support the increase in mining taxes because I see a clear and complete disconnect between the fiscal competency of the administration and the rewards of the nation's return on its assets.

I will give you a couple of examples of what exactly I mean.

1. Let's suppose you own a house with two extra bedrooms. Two strangers walk up to you and ask if they could rent some sleeping space in your house, to which you acquiesce. You sign a lease agreement and go on your merry ways. Nine months in to the lease you come back and say, "Folks, it is about time to renew the lease and going into the next year, the lease will go up by a certain percentage."

The decision to sign on the dotted line of the new lease does not have to be predicated on the fact that you were not managing your personal finances well. The two are separate and distinctly different from each other.

2. The philosophical difference that separates Democrats from Republicans are in part due fiscal policy formulation and implementation strategies. While Republicans want to present themselves as eminent "haters of taxes" in this inarguable capitalistic United States, taxes remain an integral component of their fiscal policies. George H.W. Bush's infamous phrase, "read my lips..." emanates from backpedalling on that promise. And he was actually referring to income taxes and not corporate taxes. Now when you increase taxes during hard times, every economist worth the salt will tell you that the regular folk are in a double whammy situation because inflation will not spare them.

Point is, even in the country that mothered Capitalism, and still retain the title of "model of capitalism" taxes do go up for whatever reasons.

While you may choose to agree with me on any of the foregoing points, you would not convince me that the government of the USA knows how to manage public funds well. This is one of the most wasteful organizations you will ever come across. The bickering between the two sides of the house is about one idea of waste taking precedence over another. It is my opinion that a government that abuses, misuses and sends some funds back to the general fund is better than that which misuses, abuses and borrows to support its bad habits of misuse and abuse which end up burdening the future generations.

3. It is a pure hardcore capitalistic stance to entitle yourself to a fair return on the property which you own. The fairness in this return is not subject to the definition of another but you as a willing participant in the market. Whether that definition would have a negative bearing on your interests has nothing to do with the interest of the other participants in the market.

Finally, I do agree with you, though that we MUST demand better planning and accountability from our government. That is a task each one of us has to take on seriously beginning with points of service on up. I read the budget speech for 2008. It left me wondering about what is contained in the detailed budget. Now, this is something which we cannot afford to just criticize but share in the responsibility by offering solutions.

---