Knzn brought up an argument I have been touting for a long while, though from a different viewpoint. We believe that high-end Tax Progressivity actually encourages Incentive effects increasing Productivity. Knzn makes a good attempt at presenting an ideological basis for this encouragement, while I have always relates the argument to statistical measures–the length of time which Business Executives and Management actually worked, the degree of Planning which went into Production efforts, the amount of Management time devoted to reducing Production Costs, along with the increased Wage rates granted to Skilled Labor. One of the great restrictions to Productivity today reside in the wastage in Time by Executive personnel in expenditure of their over-just Rewards.
Here(skip the listed Download) is another indication that the Rewards system for Business Incentive may be structurally large, with the extremely rapid increase in Millionaire Households in China; remembering that China has an extremely high confiscatory Tax system. It goes to prove the vital point that high Taxes provide Incentive to Those committed to Wealth Accumulation as a Social Attainment. I would also suggest without Evaluation that it is likely that Employees within the Businesses generating this great Wealth worked under higher-Incentive Pay, than do equally-skilled Labor in less Profitable comparable industries in China. The higher Tax Progressivity will both generate intense Incentive and greater uniformity of Wage differentials, and still bring rapid growth.
Paul Krugman worries that Democrats might be wobbled by Wealth. The Danger is very real, but unity among Congressmen, Senators, and President could eliminate the threat. One Party need not even hold all three institutions, or even more than one. The unity they need is to Vote as a block on Issues, not based upon a doctrinaire platform, simply by Voting their Conscience on Issues. Special Interests and Lobbyists could not abandon these Individuals, else they would lose all influence. The perfect Timing would be immediately after the next Presidential Election, when all three institutions are bound to have a new Leadership–whether replaced or weathered incumbent, still revitalized. This grants Time for Special Interests to lose residual angers before Reelections. The real need is for both Parties to define a sound program of action before the Election, for implementation after the Election. Legislators must themselves learn Risk-bearing attitudes. lgl
No comments:
Post a Comment