Re: a consistent position?

["John O'Donnell" <jackodonnell@xxxxxxxx>]

"Henry C.K. Liu" wrote:

<<SNIP>>

> No, that is the classic neo-liberal argument.  If return on capital is
> regulated to a 15% ceiling,

Another of those so often stated simplistic remedies. Not to
put to fine a point on the obvious -- Who determines what is
capital?

This just presents an excuse to furnish offices with
expensive fine art and other necessary adornments to
increase the "capital" subject to the 15% return. Placing
the legitimacy of superfluous expenses that earn such
returns can, of course, be subject to "approval" by an
oversight committee but that just expands the field for
corruption.

Let markets determine profit and LOSS and such foolishness
becomes mot.

<<SNIP>>

--
			-- jbod

		Tax Privilege, Not People
___________________________________________________
Come visit and see a new economic perspective --
       http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1067
           Comments/arguments welcome.
.