Re: [Re: General Theory Seminar --Savings and Investment]

["Harry Veeder" <veed0001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----------
>From: "??×ð?ý HenryC.K.Liu  ?»?l?¡" <hliu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: POST-KEYNESIAN THOUGHT <pkt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [Re: General Theory Seminar --Savings and Investment]
>Date: Mon, Mar 6, 2000, 8:05 pm
>

>
>
>Harry Veeder wrote:
>
>> My 2 cents...
>>
>> The only reason for government (or economists) to measure and record aggregate
>> investment and saving behaviour is the futile attempt to *control* aggregate
>> investment and saving behaviour.
>>
>> All theories that require the measurement I and S are theories
>> of control and this leads to the bizarre pronoucement that
>> we have no freedom to save.
>>
>
>If freedom is defined as the ability to take action without penalty, then on we
>do not have freedom to save if the government puts an financial penalty on
>savings, either through a tax on savings or other market distoring measures.  In
>the same manner, we do not have freedom to rob a bank, although some still do,
>for there is penalty of imprisonment associated with such action.
>
>Henry C.K. Liu
>


I am considering the nature of economic freedom absent
penalties. Keynes believes our saving activity will always lie
beyond our conscious control regardless of the presence or
absence of taxation. That is what I find bizzare.

The trouble with most taxation schemes is that they
are primarly devised as sources of government revenue rather
than as tools to regulate economic growth. This makes
all taxation appear bad for economic growth whereas
well a planned tax can actually enhance economic growth.

Just an example. Last century a system of taxes was implemented
on the movement of railway frieght *within* the USA to encourage
the movement of material goods to those regions of the USA
that were materially lacking. I believe a Tobin Tax should work
in a similar fashion to move financial goods and services to
those sectors of the global economy that are financially lacking.


Harry Veeder