Skip to main content

harry potter - How Does the Ministry of Magic Obtain their Funding?


It's Friday night and for some absurd reason, I'm going over 1099s and getting my taxes ready so I'm not rushing them to the accountant on the last day and I'm saying, "I bet Harry Potter doesn't pay taxes!"


Or does he? Then I got to think about how big the Ministry of Magic is and how many people are employed there. And the aren't going to be working there if they aren't making money.


So how does the Ministry of Magic raise their funding? Does the government in the magical world have taxes? Or is there some magical way they have of getting money for the government that doesn't create havoc in the economy?



Answer




There is never any mention of how they come by the money. Neither in books nor in any JKR interviews. I searched for "money", "funding", "tax/taxes/taxed", "ministry" and "government". Zero relevant hits.


The ONLY exception is a note in OotP that Malfoy has great access and pull with the ministry since he funds a lot of causes:



'What private business have they got together, anyway?'
'Gold, I expect,' said Mr Weasley angrily. 'Malfoy's been giving generously to all sorts of things for years . . . gets him in with the right people . . . then he can ask favours . . . delay laws he doesn't want passed . . . oh, he's very well-connected, Lucius Malfoy.'



Somewhat ironically, once JKR got all billionairish herself, headlines such as this could be easily found:



LONDON (Reuters) - Harry Potter author J. K. Rowling has donated 1 million pounds ($1.83 million) to Britain's ruling Labor Party to provide a much-needed boost to Prime Minister Gordon Brown as he fights for political survival. (src: Reuters feed, 2008)




... and she spoke openly about wanting to prevent Tories from passing laws she doesn't like, and using her celebrity status to sway people to vote Labour.




WARNING: Controversial political analysis:



Based on JKR's non-HP political writing (especially her essay on why she will never vote Tory), she belongs to a political/philosophical school of "money grows on trees, not comes from other people who are taxed". This was especially true when she was writing her first books (and she planned out all 7 books then) and didn't have much money.



.



So for her, the question of what it takes to make a normal economy function (and especially, how government funding is obtained) is utterly unimportant and un-interesting. She sees government (in the real world) as a benevolent entity helping people, NOT an entity which takes money from some people by force and gives that money (after siphoning off some for itself) to others. Not too surprising considering that her life idol (after whom her daughter is named) was an avowed Communist.




.



It's curious to note that in Harry Potter world, everyone with much money is evil/dark (ranging from rich Death Eaters to experimenting-bad-jinxes-on-first-years morally ambiguous Weasley twins), with the lone exception of Harry himself - the latter having been explained by Rowling herself as a Mary Sue moment "I did it because I never had enough money". She basically seems to firmly believe a standard Soviet doctrine of "You can't make money with honest work" - Weasleys vs. Malfoys being the prime example of that attitude, in many places in the books.





To plagiarize my own separate answer - to misquote an apocryphal Tolkien-derived work "The last Ring-Bearer": "It is rather hard to analyze the reign of the first Princes of Ithilien, Faramir and Éowyn, in political or economical terms – it appears that they had neither politics nor economics over there, but only a never-ending romantic ballad".


In other words, Potterverse has no economic system we can coherently and logically deduce or find, because Rowling didn't put one in.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...