Tom Walker wrote:
> 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/
Presumably layoffs, work which produced more than average injury, death,
mental illness, and addiction would also be taxed as well.
Gar W. Lipow
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
815 Dundee Road, NW
Olympia, WA 98502
PH: 360-943-1529
