Commenting upon this abnormal situation, a sometime Minister of Finance remarked some years ago, in an official document which attracted attention by the energy and sincerity with which it was written:—
“Our budgets have constantly increased of late years. It is notorious that the personnel of the Administration is excessive, just as it is notorious that useless and expensive sinecures have been created, with the sole object of giving places to persons whose influence has been such that the State has undertaken to support them. Bureaucracy is increasing; industry, commerce, and all the spheres of free endeavour and of individual effort are abandoned by the sons of the country, who seek salaried employment or the exercise of intermediary professions which demand no effort. The number of young men who waste their time in seeking a place, instead of devoting their activities to work, in a country which offers wealth to all who will employ a little energy, a little perseverance, is surprising. But all want an easy life, even though it be poor and without horizon; all wish to live on the budget, and in order to gain their object they exhibit all kinds of ingenuity; they go seeking recommendations, and employ every means at their disposal.
“This host of pertinacious beggars of place results in the creation of new employments and new services, all equally useless. The national and provincial administrations pay more than $65,000,000 in salaries and pensions. Each inhabitant contributes six golden dollars—£1, 4s.—towards the upkeep of an army of employés, which is an enormous sum. The public services of other countries cost, per inhabitant: in Switzerland, 4s. 9·6d.; in the United States, 6s. 4·8d.; in England, 8s. 2·88d.; in Holland, 9s.; in Austria, 11s. 2·88d.; in Belgium, 12s. 0·48d.; in Germany, 12s. 0·96d.; in Italy, 15s. 9·6d.; and in France 19s. 2·88d. These figures, taken from Paul Deschanel’s work on Decentralisation, show us that we have outstripped all other nations in the matter of expenditure on the administration; even France and Italy,
where bureaucracy is regarded as a calamity and as one of the causes of their economic decadence.
“We must check this avalanche by suppressing all useless employments and all superfluous services. It is essential to turn our young men aside from their present path, in order that necessity shall force them to exercise their energies in the vast field which is offered them by a new country, full of natural wealth, with a fertile soil and a benign climate.”[96]
[96] See Mémoires des Finances de 1889, by J. M. Rosa, Vol. II., p. 174.
The reaction which Señor Rosa, in his genuine patriotism, had hoped for, took place a little after his departure from the Ministry of Finance; but unhappily its direction was the reverse of that he anticipated.
We have examined the expenses of the public administrations; we have measured the weight of the public debt; we must now examine the treasury receipts, in order to discover what are the most important sources of the revenues which fill it, and what elasticity they possess.
The Argentine Constituents, after having explained, in the sententious preamble which serves as a preface to their great political code, what place was theirs who were building the great edifice of the State, turned to consider from what sources the revenues for the Treasury might be drawn, in order to satisfy the necessities of the administration of the country.
To this effect they enacted that these resources should be: “The taxes upon imports and exports; the sale or allocation of lands forming part of the national territory; the postal revenues, and the other taxes, which the General Congress will impose equitably and in proportion to the population; also such loans and credit operations as the same Congress shall decree for the urgent needs of the nation, or for undertakings of national utility.” (Article 4).