The impact of the pragmatic "The Taxpayer Takes from the People and Uses for the People" is enormous, not throwing a pebble on a calm lake, but dropping an atomic bomb into the sea - it does not set off a ripple, but a shocking and monstrous wave.

Since Emperor Taizu Gao, I have always been known for my light and thin gifts, and people's livelihood, why do you not learn from high and pragmatic, but prefer to learn the harsh government as fierce as a tiger in the former Song Dynasty?

How famous was the former Song Dynasty's "harsh government"? When the Ming people mentioned it, it was often said that their harsh taxes were ten times that of the Han and five times that of the Tang Dynasty, so that "no children" appeared widely.

Lifter, raise also. To refrain from raising children is to refuse to raise the children of oneself. To put it more bluntly, it is also called "not raising a child", that is, not raising a child, drowning or throwing away the baby.

The heavy tax burden of the Song Dynasty was one of the main reasons for the widespread infanticide and infanticide customs.

It stands to reason that phenomena such as "not raising children" generally occur only in a very small number of extremely poor families, or in times of human struggling during natural disasters and wars.

However, in the Song Dynasty, which was "known for its wealth", even in the stage when there were no disasters and wars, there was still a widespread phenomenon of "not raising children", and even evolved into a social custom - infanticide.

Su Shi said in "A Book with Zhu Ezhou": Jinghu North Road, "The villains in the fields between Yue and E, for example, only raise two men and one girl, and kill them after this." He was demoted to Huangzhou, and saw "The small people of Huangzhou, the poor have many children, and the newborn is easy to be immersed in the water basin" from "Dongpo Zhilin".

Zhu Xi's father Zhu Song also said in "Wei Zhaiji: Quit Killing Children" that in Wuyuan, Jiangxi, the people "stopped having two sons, and they didn't care about men and women, and threw them into the basin to kill them." ”

However, if you want to say that the custom of drowning young babies is the most prosperous, I am afraid it is still Fujian. Zhu Song is an official in Fujian, "I heard that Fujian people don't like to have many children, and they often kill people...... Although there is a law, it cannot be defeated. Wang Dechen's "History and Customs" said that under normal circumstances, "if Fujian has many children, the fourth son will not be raised", "If the woman does not stay for three, she is often in the middle of the day, and the water is stored in the vessel, and the drowning is called washing." ”

At that time, some scholars and doctors severely reprimanded this wind, "the custom of not raising children in the southeast hurts people's reason" "Song History: The Biography of Fan Rugui", and demanded that the imperial court strictly prohibit it. It is true that the government has taken various measures to try to stop it, but the custom of not raising children has not improved, not only has it not stopped, but it has even become more and more severe in some places.

The records of similar situations are by no means scattered and scattered, and they are really too numerous to mention, which shows that the tax burden of the Song Dynasty has been so heavy that people can't even scruple about the humanities. In fact, not to mention that morality cannot be regulated, even severe punishment and strict laws cannot be contained.

When Zhu Yuanzhang founded the country, he took the harsh government of the Song Dynasty as the key, but Gao Pragmatic still did not fear to take the Song Dynasty as an example and compare it in the sparse text, not that he was impatient, but that some of the simple data were already very illustrative of the current problems.

Since the "productivity" of the Song Dynasty was inferior to that of the Ming Dynasty, the richness of its real wealth was naturally inferior to that of the Ming Dynasty. However, even in areas where the Song people were prevalent in the style of "not raising children", people still had "two sons and one daughter" before they began to kill infants, what does this mean?

It means that although the taxes are heavy, the three children are barely able to feed.

Then the problem arises: the income of the Song Dynasty was nearly ten times that of the Ming Dynasty, which was equivalent to ten times the tax burden of the Ming Dynasty, but even so, the poor family could still support three children. So, by extension, wouldn't the poor home of Daming be able to support thirty children? Is this still called a pauper? This...... Is it true?

The above inference is definitely not the true situation, and there is no need to say anything else, just say that many people in the Ming Dynasty who seek to be eunuchs from the palace are all unlucky eggs who fell from the sky?

Naturally not, most of them are landless peasants, who have been exploited badly, and once something happens to a natural or man-made disaster, they have no choice but to make this decision.

But there is still a slight difference, that is, the people who can't survive in Daming are mainly farmers, and some military households in the guard are great. However, the people who could not survive in the Song Dynasty were almost regardless of their professional attributes, except for a very small number of people such as court officials, imperial relatives and nobles, everyone could not survive.

If we look back in this way, we will find that the merchants and craftsmen of the Ming Dynasty must have at least been in a much better situation than the peasants, and although their "theoretical social status" was worse than that of the peasants, in fact they were far better off than the peasants.

Is this reasonable? Obviously unreasonable!

In this way, coupled with the "ten-fold theory" deliberately exaggerated by Gao Pragmatism, anyone who calculates this account will feel that Daming's "light and meager endowment" does not seem to be of great help to farmers, but it is too much for craftsmen and merchants - they have almost no tax burden.

In this way, we don't have to tax according to the harsh and fierce former Song Dynasty, at least I levy one-eleventh of the former Song Dynasty, which is not too much, right?

The miscellaneous taxes of the former Song Dynasty add up to 70 million guan, even if only 11 of them are levied, then there are 7 million guan!

Okay, even if our taxes are not as many as in the former Song Dynasty, let's just make a discount, but that's still 3.5 million yuan!

Note: The two dynasties have always been equal to one tael of silver, but the purchasing power of one tael of silver was not equal in the Song Dynasty and in the Ming Dynasty, and even in different periods of the Ming Dynasty, there were many discrepancies referring to the Wanli accounting record. It's just that it's too complicated, and if I were to write it like that, I guess it would be a fiscal history, and there was no need for it.

If the Ming Dynasty forcibly increased its annual income by 3.5 million taels of silver, what would it mean? It almost means that even the matter of opening the ban can be ignored for the time being! And now that the ban cannot be stopped suddenly, it means......

Officials who had little to do with the "possible increase in commercial taxes" suddenly became excited, while officials who were likely to be affected by the increase in commercial taxes in nine times out of ten became angry.

Don't look at Gao Pragmatic's special point out of the issue of the use of the imperial court in "Access and Use", saying that it is necessary to strengthen supervision, but the officials know that no matter how you strengthen supervision, it is not good to be greedy for ink. But at the very least, the richer the court, the more powerful the officials who control the money, which is always irrefutable.

What's more, once the court has money, at least it won't give us any more favors and owe it, right? Maybe you can add some more "allowances"!

As a result, some officials who are "not afraid of paying commercial taxes" began to support high pragmatism, while another part of officials who are "afraid of paying commercial taxes to death" began to strongly oppose high pragmatism.

Of course, there are always reasonable people in the world, not only in the group of keyboard warriors in later generations, but also in the Ming court. As a result, some officials also appealed, some said that the implementation of commercial taxation was "mixed pros and cons", some said that the matter was "unpredictable whether it would be successful or bad", some said that "it is a big matter, it is better to slow down", and some said that "it is necessary to study in detail and then make calculations".

All in all, it's either with thin mud or with tai chi.

However, the nonsense of these rational scholars cannot become the mainstream, and at the moment when the real school and the heart school are competing against each other, only the attitude of these two factions of officials is the most important.

There are two types of inscriptions in the practical school, although because of the high pragmatism of the high arch, so in general, it seems that they both support high pragmatism, but in fact there are still differences.

One group is the hardcore supporters of high pragmatism, who fully agree with high pragmatism, and almost want to start tomorrow - no, to start a full commercial tax collection today, and to immediately form an "audit office" and a "customs office".

The other type is the officials who originally disagreed or were a little hesitant to do so, they just had to agree against their will because they were pragmatic and had to express their approval against their will under the banner of inheriting Gao Gong's legacy, so after they agreed, they were also like those reasonable guests, and said a few words to "ease the atmosphere", which is probably whether we should first carry out a pilot implementation, or we will become a country, or we should not easily spread it out in an all-round way.

Despite this, at least this time the overall performance of the Shixue school is much more united than before, and at least no one jumps out to express its opposition.

However, the Mind School is different, and their performance is more united - all strongly opposed. The intensity of his words is almost like scolding the street, and Gao Pragmatic is compared to Sang Hongyang, Cai Jing and other traitors in the text, which is a lot of people.

In this way, Gao pragmatic set a record for himself: he was "impeached by the Manchu Dynasty" on the fourth day of taking office.

If it is only impeached for the means of governance, Gao Pragmatic can ignore it for the time being and wait for the emperor to express his position first. But now that he is being scolded as a traitor, according to the habits of Ming officials, he can only close his door and refuse to go out to see things.

Shen Shixing is the highest official who has a clear stand against Gao Pragmatic's "Taking and Using Shu", but as the first assistant, he is very particular about the wording of the inscription, and he will never be arbitrarily promoted and scolded Gao Pragmatic for being a "traitor", just talking about things and looking for flaws in Gao Pragmatic's sparse text.

Shen Yuanfu felt that the biggest flaw in Gao Pragmatic's essay was the new fiscal system he formulated because he wanted to collect business taxes.

First of all, if these systems are to be realized, they must increase the number of officials. For example, Gao pragmatic said, "Entering and exiting accounts is not a one-person account; In and out of the warehouse, not one person can be in charge. ”

This means that all those who are in charge of accounts throughout the country must be set up with a "system of left and right chief officials", in which the left chief official is in charge of the accounts and the right chief official checks the accounts. Not to mention whether this will cause hostility between the left and right officials, cause discord or even infighting, just talking about the additional officials to be sent by the imperial court in this way, it is by no means a small number.

According to the idea that the Ming people are accustomed to "small government", you are artificially increasing redundant officials and increasing court expenses. In other words, it is a disguised increase in the burden on the people.

This is true for the keepers of the accounts, and the same is true for those who are in charge of the various types of warehouses. And Shen Shixing knew very well that there were many "warehouse management personnel" in the Ming Dynasty - because there were all kinds of warehouses built in various places, such as grain and grass, military weapons, cloth, contributions, honor guards, etc.

In this way, the warehouse management staff will also be doubled, how much financial waste will this cause?

Not to mention whether the highly pragmatic strengthening of supervision can put an end to the greed for ink, it is also a matter of doubt.

Shen Shixing, who is well aware of the way of officialdom, knows too well that he is tired of this, not to mention anything else, just say that although you can supervise the left chief, but if the two of these left and right chiefs conspire and share the spoils together, what should you do?

Oh, you said you still have the Audit Commission? Okay, then let me ask you, how big does your Audit Office need to be to supervise such a huge number of accounts, warehouses and other institutions in the world? I'm just giving you a metropolitan procuratorate, I'm afraid you won't be able to manage it!

Shen Shixing's recital is written here, and it begins to lead to the "Taoist level argument" of their Xin School: to govern officials, we still have to look at education, and we can't just rely on these means of "increasing manpower for no reason", only when everyone is a gentleman, with outstanding morality, and self-discipline and rigor, can we rule clearly, and can we really pay attention to the meager endowment and live with the people.

After Shen Shixing's recital was submitted to the celebrant supervisor, he looked at the impeachment of Gao Shishi by the hundred officials. This one was unbelievable, and he realized that something might be going to happen.

The key is that the impeachment is mixed with a lot of impeachment of high-pragmatism as a "traitor", "poison" and even "slander the king".

Among them, what shocked Shen Shixing the most was the impeachment of Gao Pragmatic for "slandering the king".

Slander? Why did Gao Pragmatism slander the king?

There really is, these swords all grasped a passage in Gao Shishi's "Taking and Using Sparse" and began to denounce angrily:

Or say: In ancient times, there was Tang Chang, and there was also a Ji Xuan. My emperor is a solid god and a saint, but do you know that future generations will be virtuous? If there are one or two unscrupulous, the small endowment is still limited, and the heavy tax is not an abuse of the people? ”

Some people say: In ancient times, there were both Ming monarchs like Shang Tang and Zhou Wen Jichang, as well as tyrants like Xia Wei and Shang Xuan. Although my emperor is extremely wise and martial, how do I know that the emperor's descendants are all as perfect as the emperor? In case there are one or two unscrupulous descendants, if the system of our dynasty is lightly taxed, it will not have much impact, because there is still a limit to the amount of money that the unscrupulous emperor can waste; But if heavy taxes have already been collected, wouldn't this unscrupulous emperor be squandering with the blood and sweat of the people? That's abusing the people!

From the perspective of writing, Gao Pragmatic's passage belongs to "questioning", because he has a "self-answer" after him. From a logical point of view, there seems to be no problem, because this is a very normal assumption - who can guarantee that they will never have bad offspring?

However, the problem is that it doesn't matter if you assume that someone's family may have unscrupulous descendants, but how can you assume that there will be unscrupulous descendants in the heavenly family!

Why can't that be assumed? Because even if the heavenly family really has an unscrupulous descendant, when this unscrupulous descendant becomes the emperor, he is still your king, and if you say that he is unscrupulous, it is still "slandering the king"!

Therefore, the "slander of the king" here does not mean that he slandered the present, but slandered the emperors of the future!

Is this what you should and can do as a courtier?

As a result, many impeachments put the charge of high pragmatism in the first place, but the first assistant Shen Shixing looked at it in a cold sweat.

Broken......

----------

Thank you for the support of the book friends "The First Emperor of the Ages" and "The Treasure Vase of Frost", thank you!

Thank you for the monthly pass support of "Book Friend 20191124105331057", "Jiahui", "Book Friend 20180208230738556", "Streamer Sword Language", "The First Emperor of the Ages", "Dust * Ai", "My Sweetheart is My Man", "Cao Mianzi", "Yue Xiaoyao", "Panda Little Panpan", thank you!

PS: Something happens tonight, update in advance.

Another PS: I don't know why, the book review I replied to doesn't seem to be displayed, can I still be banned or deleted by the system in my own book review area? What the hell is this, my mobile phone typing reply is already slow, and it is swallowed......