Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
... since reversion to a system of regulatory permission required for large cross-border capital transfers would also prevent capital flows from systematically reinforcing inequality.

That is, after all, what was in effect during the 1950's and 1960's, when persistent systematic declines in national income inequality was far more common than today.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Jan 11th, 2009 at 11:50:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
However a reversion to national regulation also assumes that the economy can be renationalised.  However if the global economy is dominated by global corporations with opaque internal transfer pricing etc. it is doubtful whether that genie can be put back into the bottle.  A standard global corporation profits tax payable wherever the profit is generated would remove the incentive to to cook the books or divert resources for purely tax avoidance reasons..

notes from no w here
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jan 11th, 2009 at 12:49:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Don't forget that its the second age of globalisation, not the first ... we reverted to national controls on capital flows after the first age of globalisation drew to a close with the rise of the trading blocs in the early 1900's.


I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Sun Jan 11th, 2009 at 02:44:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Most of the transnats wouldn't survive two seconds of determined trust-busting. Most of them are monopolies and oligopolies on the style of the railroad robber barons.

And besides, any company with a turnover equivalent to the GDP of a moderately sized African republic needs to be either nationalised, broken into itty bitty pieces or taken out behind the woodshed and shot. To prevent it from buying politicians like they were toy cars, for no other reason.

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Jan 11th, 2009 at 05:34:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
That should be "if for no other reason."

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Sun Jan 11th, 2009 at 05:35:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series