Said a student of John Maynard Keynes,
"Would ideally fall
Between 'nothing at all'
And the rate at which Buffett complains."
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
The Ideal Rate
Said a student of John Maynard Keynes,
"Would ideally fall
Between 'nothing at all'
And the rate at which Buffett complains."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Popular Posts
-
"Though college, I felt, was a sure thing, As of now, unless gold I'm unearthing, To pay off my loan, I'll have to postpon...
-
"After proofing each check and gratuity, We've determined beyond ambiguity: Your expenses look funny, If none of this money ...
-
Said a Harvard professor of econ, "That Google's got something unique on: They have cash by the score, Yet still borrow more; T...
-
I'm buying a Powerball ticket (Or several, or even a thicket), In hopes I may win A billion bucks in The unlikely case that they pic...
-
"In reviewing your earnings per annum, We're less than impressed, and we pan 'em. The bank may have gains, But this letter ...
-
The US has always depended On a rate of consumption that's splendid, By consumers for whom The means to consume May soon have them over...
-
The economy once ago sank From abuses at many a bank, Which Congress attacked In a really big act That went by the name of Dodd-Fran...
-
Economists show the proclivity Toward lamenting the lost productivity When Americans cling, From the first day of Spring, To basketball ...
-
The price of petroleum's slacking With all of that pumping and fracking Maintaining supply At a level so high, While demand, at...
-
Said the Lehman bankruptcy inspector Of the repo transactions that wrecked 'er: "The Feds, who were looking At books that were ...
Dr. Goose's Blogs of Note
Posts
I suppose that the core question is: Should tax policy be used to maximize government revenue and fund a government, or to pursue egalitarian social goals? Put another way: If we could fund our government without taxing the citizenry, should the government still try to address unequal economic outcomes?
ReplyDeleteI am not an economist, and I have no hard data at the moment with which to debate this point, though it seems that these two goals, while not mutually exclusive, are not entirely without conflict.
From my layman's perspective, it seems that our country has always favored capital over labor to promote saving and investment, tolerated a larger gap between rich and poor if the mean is higher. Indeed, I would rather be poor in Hartford than poor in Mogadishu.
That said, I temper my Rand-ian outlook knowing that even if I think, correctly, that most people fail through faults of their own, I do not want to have to live in a gated community or hire private security to keep them at bay. So if I need to bribe the malcontents a little to reduce their contempt, so be it.
How Bismarckian of you, Mr. Lawry!
ReplyDeleteMy own view is that taxes should be used only to fund the government and not to create incentives for or against anything. The pain should be spread evenly (which does not mean that everyone pays the same rates!), such that people generally don't consider the tax effect of any decisions they have to make; they should be indifferent.
Hey now! "Bismarckian" is a tad too strong an adjective to describe my position. I only advocate bribery of the malcontents JUST ENOUGH so they stay in Zuccotti Park, and don't hop on the northbound train to my beloved Connecticut. Then again, I suppose good old Otto bribed his malcontents just enough to keep them from leaving Germany for America.
ReplyDeleteGlad we find common ground. I truly enjoy these Limericks. Thanks.
Well, if you would hop on a southbound train to Manhattan sometime, we could meet for a pint. Click on the e-mail link in my profile, if you're interested.
ReplyDeleteCheers!