It is highly demonstrated by economic theory that markets in competition with competent human agents assign resources much more efficiently than in a monopoly or oligopoly and that they favour the consumers and final users of the different goods and services, in price, as well as in their availability and variety. For that reason, I will not tire of repeating that the Darwinian and Cainian visions of competition, where the continuity and survival of some means the destruction and disappearance of others, is an intentionally deformed vision of reality for reasons ideologically verifiable. If, by scorning competition in freedom, what is sought is to control and to better organize certain sectors and production by means of subsidized privileges and monopolies, even if it is with the greatest intentions, it ends up harming all the end users who will have less supply and at a higher price.
Something like that happens with any type of subsidized prices when it is sought to impose maximum prices that are below the balance prices that would settle down in the markets with freedom to compete. The maximum prices forced in those circumstances, always give rise to search for preferences, favouritism and privileges and it especially ends up creating a black market where the worst off are the most ignorant people or those with less means to pressure. With prices lower than those of the market, tensions are created because demand at those established prices is always greater than supply. The unsatisfied demand searches and presses for non-discrimination and the normal companies that respect the rules of the game, cannot act with the purity and effectiveness that the cleaned up markets require.
Another pernicious effect is added to the previous one when fiscal, bureaucratic and statistical pressure that accompany all systems based on subsidy, increase in an abusive and significant way. A time always comes when individuals and companies begin to work less and deviate their activities towards leisure and the black economy. Consequently, in turn, they save less, creative investment diminishes and the creation of employment becomes impossible. We can speak of a situation in which "greed breaks the bag." The abuse in the desire for fiscal collecting has produced, in fact, paralysis of the human productive system and a smaller collected total.
This development of fraud because of fiscal over-saturation has been especially visible for example in the housing markets. There is a wide range of contributions on housing: Income Tax, Corporate Tax and Value Added Tax among the State ones; General Property Tax, Inheritance and Gift Tax, Estate Tax and Tax on Documented Juridical Acts among the Autonomous ones; and Tax on Real Estate, Fiscal Licenses or Tax on Economic Activities, Tax on Construction, Facilities and Works and Tax on Increase in Value of Urban Land among the Municipal ones.
Before this cascade of taxes that fall on housing, and that has a direct repercussion on family income and well-being, it is not surprising that the phenomenon of concealment of property and later of returns or value, is the dominant note in our real estate history in many people's opinion. We can add in connection with these facts that the situation is exacerbated by situations of tributary injustice that are worsened by the increase of tax weight on the proprietors that fulfil their revenue obligations, while the fraud pocket that does not pay is maintained. Proof of fiscal capacity and urban under-valuation is for example that the cadastral value of real estate wealth in Spain is inferior to the real one. If cadastral valuations were taken into account, even already revised, it would be clear that transmissions have been used as a means of hiding black money.
We can conclude by saying that calm competition without stridencies in any of the markets that we analyse is harmonized peacefully in a system of dynamic collaboration where all participants are beneficiaries, and where creativity and innovation are fostered in different sectors and productive processes that compete with each other. The distortion of that healthy competition through local, autonomous, state or European subsidies, ends up deteriorating authentic economic development.

José Juan Franch Menéu
Business Gazette