Date:
Mon, 7 Jul 2003 07:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Michael Bindner
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Redistribution
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I was reading The Capitalist Manifesto last week and I came upon some
interesting passages in the last two chapters about using redistributional
income taxes to hasten the Capitalist Revolution. It seemed clear in
my reading that Kelso and Adler believed that redistributional income taxes
could be of assistance in bringing about the revolution and that tax reform
to rely less on personal and corporate income taxes would come after the
Capitalist system was well established, although these tools would still
exist to break capital monopolies (as well as inheritance taxes).
My question to the Kelsonians is this: is there a writing where
his opinion on these matters changed? When I look at the CESJ
literature on Social Security Reform it appears to me that they seek an end
to both progressive income taxes. Is this a Kelsonian position or is
it unique to CESJ?
In my reading of the Manifesto, I also see that the question of large
families is mostly ignored (although it appears that CESJ gets around this
by starting capital homestead accounts at birth rather than during the
career, which is what Kelso and Adler proposed in the Manifesto. It
seemed that Kelso and Adler would not have made these accounts universal
when they wrote their manifesto, at least initially, but would have started
with those professional men (they do not mention women) who are able to make
their investments wisely.
I am wondering if there is any treatment available which addresses the
evolution of their theory from its past to its current form (which seems
very different in some respects).
I am also interested in when Value Based Management was developed, and
who developed it. It is actually somewhat in line with my own
management theories, although I am a bit more of a leveler inside the firm
(since I would have managers bid for their positions in open auction and
have workers vote to break ties).
