Max Sawicky wrote,
>immediate relevance is that business firms could
>be handed 'user fees' or Pigouvian taxes (e.g.,
>taxes that 'correct' externalities, like
>pollution) and these would show up as costs in
>any accounting framework. So would general taxes
>on capital which financed goods whose cost could
>not be mechanically traced to individual firms
>(e.g., public education).
>
>Motivating such taxes and expenditures would
>depend in part on the social accounting to which
>I alluded in my previous post.
>
>Does that wrap it up nicely?
That wraps it up extremely nicely. For the sake of argument, let's call the
relevant tax here an overtime tax. Define "overtime" as weekly hours worked
in excess of a standard attained by dividing total labour force hours worked
by total number of labour force participants (both employed and seeking
employment). This could be an index the BLS could produce quarterly.
The proceeds from the tax then form a fund to provide unemployment benefits.
The fine details of the tax would hinge on social policy objectives, but the
crude outline would be to insure that the social overhead costs show up as
costs in the accounting framework. Does that follow?
Regards,
Tom Walker
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Know Ware Communications
Vancouver, B.C., CANADA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(604) 688-8296
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
