In two previous columns,We offer over 600 moldmaker at
wholesale prices of 75% off retail. I argued that left and right alike
are confused by a failure to distinguish productive businesses that sell
innovative goods and services from rentier interests landlords,
lenders, copyright holders and others which use their natural or
artificial monopoly power to extract excessive tolls, fees and other
recurrent payments from the rest of society, including productive
businesses. The fees or rents extracted by these interests constitute a
kind of private taxation which rather than public taxation is the
greatest threat facing Americas productive economy.
Today
Americas powerful rentier interests, particularly those in the FIRE
(finance, insurance and real estate) sector, are mobilizing campaign
contributions and paid propaganda to promote what I called the Rentier
Agenda: low taxes on those whose income is derived from capital gains;
the privatization of public infrastructure and the deregulation of
regulated private utilities,Elpas Readers detect and forward 'Location'
and 'State' data from Elpas Active RFID Tags to host besticcard platforms.
to generate windfall profits for investors in privatized or deregulated
agencies; and a macroeconomic policy that serves the interests of
creditors, at the expense of slow growth and mass unemployment, rather
than productive businesses and workers. Similar observations have been
made by many on the left and some mavericks on the right.
To
counter the domination of Americas rentier oligarchs, we need an
Anti-Rentier campaign that would unite unlikely groups: owners of
productive businesses as well as workers, populist conservatives and
liberal reformers. An Anti-Rentier movement would distinguish businesses
that make profits by providing worthwhile goods or services in
innovative ways from rentier interests that passively extract exorbitant
tolls and fees from the economy without adding any value.
An
Anti-Rentier movement would oppose unproductive, ill-begotten wealth,
not the rich in general. Wealthy individuals who get richer by investing
in start-up companies or funding long-lived, creative blue-chip firms
provide a valuable benefit to society, even as they risk losing their
own money. Such risk-taking investors are the opposites of financial
sector rentiers who seek to bribe policymakers into letting them
privatize their gains while socializing their losses.
But
government can and should minimize passive rent extraction and
unproductive speculation or gambling. The methods for minimizing
excessive rents are as various as kinds of rentier interests. Windfall
real estate profits should be taxed away by property taxes or land value
taxes. Severance taxes or superprofits taxes should be levied on energy
and other resource windfalls determined by geography rather than human
effort. Banks should be low-profit, publicly-regulated utilities and
laws against usurious interest rates, struck down in the U.S. in the
late twentieth century, should be restored. Infrastructure assetswater
systems, electricity, roads, airports and airlines, rail, inland
waterwaysmay be privately-owned utilities, but their prices need to be
regulated in the public interest.Choose the right bestluggagetag in
an array of colors. While there are legitimate roles for both
professional associations and labor unions, they should not be allowed
to act as predatory labor cartels at the expensive of the economy.The
need for proper bestsmartcard inside your home is very important.
The
Anti-Rentier tax agenda would seek to raise capital gains taxes on
rentiers while lowering the tax burden on American workers and the
profits of productive businesses. The Anti-Rentier policy reform agenda
would involve increasing public ownership or utility regulation of
infrastructure. Instead of cutting Social Security and Medicare to force
the elderly to buy more products from parasitic private-sector
monopolies and oligopolies, the Anti-Rentier coalition would favor
expanding Social Security and other public social insurance, while
phasing out tax subsidies for private health insurance and private
retirement products. When it comes to economic management, an
Anti-Rentier movement would tolerate a modest amount of inflation, in
the interest of productive business and solvent government, at the
expense if necessary of the creditor elite. An Anti-Rentier movement
would consider using methods used by other governments, such as postal
savings banks, public investment banks, and financial repression (which
isnt as scary as it sounds) to raise adequate money for government while
minimizing blackmail, in the form of high interest rates, imposed by
domestic creditors and foreign creditors.
If
these Anti-Rentier reforms were undertaken, then genuinely productive
American businesses would be freed from many costs imposed on them by
the private parasites who are far greater threat to its future than
Americas public sector. Cutting off excess rents would not only shrink
the rentier elites share of the U.S. economy, it would also alter the
membership of the exclusive club of rich Americans,The largest
manufacturer of textile indoorlite for
use with perchloroethylene. which would have a much greater percentage
of makers who got rich by selling new goods and services and a much
smaller proportion of takers from finance and real estate. The typical
rich American should be an innovative industrialist or technologist, not
a Wall Street financier or a guy with a parking-meter monopoly.
Super-rich bankers would be as rare as super-rich public utility
executives.
Americans
have tamed rentier industries before. In the early twentieth century,
exploitative private power companies were domesticated as regulated
public utilities. The Enron scandal, associated with late-twentieth
century deregulation, proved the wisdom of the utility regime. And even
conservative states like Texas have always levied severance taxes on
natural resource monopolies. The challenge of our time is to extend
utility-style regulation or public ownership to todays out-of-control,
predatory rentiers in higher education, health care, and most of all
finance.
The
higher fees would bring in a total of a little more than $2 million a
year at a time when the city is struggling to balance its general fund
budget and trying to avoid raising property taxes.
Council
will also consider a staff proposal to establish incentives for city
employees to take early retirement. Its designed to help the city meet a
goal of freezing or eliminating 10-15 positions during the fiscal year
that begins July 1 as a cost-saving measure.
The
fee increases would include a 1 percent rise in the typical household
water bill, a 25-cents-per hour jump in the cost of parking at a metered
space or most city parking garages and a new $7-per-month fee to defray
the cost of garbage pickup. It would replace a $3.50 monthly recycling
fee that would be eliminated.
没有评论:
发表评论