--- Michael Pollak <mpollak at panix.com> wrote:
>
> So if we're dreaming, what you want it to change the
> tax discourse
> permanently. And for that, you want to say this is
[WS:] This also strikes me as a rather timid dream. A far more radical proposal would be socialization of the financial sector, that is, public ownership of financial institutions, like banks, stock exchanges and insurance.
An argument in favor of such a proposition can be made on the grounds of either the the market failure theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_failure or public theory http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_good which is mainstream economics. Baasically the argument is that these instituions are the lifeblood of modern economy so thier proper functioning is in everyone's interest, but only public ownership can ascertain their flawless functioning.
An addition argument in favor of such a proposal is that surpluses generated by intermediating financial transactions can be used to offset tax liability of citizens and corporations - which I am pretty sure would win a lot of public support.
Not to mention the fact that such surpluses should be publicly owned from the point of view of marxist theory of value.
In short, if one is dreaming about exploiting the current crisis, why not dreaming big? Why stopping at a wussy liberal proposal of taxing the rich instead of a really radical one of changing the ownership structuere of the economy?
Wojtek
____________________________________________________________________________________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com