Helping with Adventurer Party Management

Episode 368: Where the Discussion Goes

What is happening in the field? If they have gained some experience as civilian, they should know the facts from the books.

So the priests can't answer. As far as pre-construction is concerned, taxes are to be half.

In practice, however, many territories take headcount taxes, levies, etc. in addition to taxes that provide labor like an endowment by a lord. And there is a trend to say that the more tax squeezed deputies from the territory, the more competent they are.

"That's right. The facts are different. Even if the tax from the harvest was half, there are other taxes that do not appear on the books. It is only by washing them all out and actually figuring out what is going on that the real tax burden on the inhabitants can be calculated.

To that end, let's apply the idea of indicators. The harvest shall be converted into money, and the headcount tax, tax and labor of the servant shall also be converted into money. Substantial tax proportions on the harvest can then be calculated. Don't you think that would lead to an assessment of whether justice in taxation is being done?

"Do you mean that tax due diligence is a justice rating... not by faith and law, but by numbers"

"That's right. If it's right to tax half, that is, 50 when the whole thing is 100, don't you think I should be able to figure out if it's 60 or 65 now? If I can't make 50 what was 65, if I can make 60 the following year, can I say it's doing justice"

"Wouldn't that be an endorsement of a reality where the law is not respected"

"Hmm."

Continuing the debate on the abstract theme of justice and reality, changes the direction of the debate because it can be an aerial battle in the name of theological controversy, the so-called watershed debate.

When arguing in different positions, if you're not used to arguing, you want to deny all of the other person's opinions and personalities with hateful reasoning until the kid hates you.

That brings the productive debate to an end.

The trick of making it a meaningful argument will require prerequisite work to be carefully packed without bothering to ask what the agreeable part is in order to reveal the difference.

Explain your intentions to your surroundings, as it also means setting an example regarding the format of the discussion.

"I think I understand that in the debate so far, the two of us are in different positions. I am going to see what I can agree on in order to prevent the debate from spreading. Any objections?

"There isn't. I think it's a necessary act."

Having obtained Paperino's consent, we will see what we can agree to.

"Okay. First of all, there is the reality that the law is not respected about taxes. Can you agree there?

"I agree"

"Do you think that reality should be improved? Can you agree there?

"I agree"

"Can you agree with the figure that justice in taxation should be taxed by 50 out of 100?

"I agree"

"Then the difference in our position is how much the real tax imposes on farmers. How do you grasp that percentage and describe it as a requirement to be managed? It's just that technical difference. Can you agree to that?

"... I agree"

Paperino is biting his lips hard enough to turn white.

"What do you think should be expressed in terms of the burden that does not appear in the tax records imposed on farmers"

"... on reason, I think money, or something by grain, is appropriate. It does. So what I've been learning in church was a mistake?

Respond to Paperino's shouting claims.

"No. There's no mistake. There were simply challenges in previous methods that needed to be improved. So from now on, consider and adopt improved methods. That's all. It's not like there are correct and incorrect answers. I'm not competing for a win or a loss."

Paperino had his eyes closed for a while to rebut the words, but he spoke in polite words as he slowly opened them.

"... Still, my vision was wrong. From now on, I would like to come with a change of attitude. Thank you for your continued support."

With that said, the two priests, Paperino and Claudio, bowed so deeply that they wondered if their heads would be on the floor.