Date: Thu, 27 Apr 95 20:50:05 BST From: Chris Burford <cburford-AT-gn.apc.org> Subject: Re: globalizatio of capital Thanks Paul for the suggested financial reforms. I agree they look serious candidates for shifting the balance of class forces and bringing the capitalist system under some degree of democratic control. They appear to be presented as suggestions for a radical government of a state. I accept that all capitalist markets are in fact regulated but I wonder a) how easy they would be to enforce b) whether they would go with or buck against the dynamics of the capitalist economic cycle. I hope a Keynsian of post-K may come in. The measure I find most attractive from your list for campaigning now at a *global* level would be the tax on all foreign exchange transactions. The political opening is now there to get a foot in the door. All class forces are now alarmed at the potential turbulence of the markets and might consider very favourably a damping down mechanism. Mitterand has brought it into the political realm at Copenhagen. But instead of starting at 2%, in order to get the principle established I propose it should be 0.01%. What transnational could reasonably object to that? On 3 trillion dollars a day of global financial transactions it would bring in $6 billion a day, and could go into a fund for worthy causes. (Rwanda, Chernobyl?) Perhaps the UN General Assembly could be given the interesting political task of advising where it went. Who knows where this process may develop. How could a feasability study be started? Chris Burford ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > From owner-marxism-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu Thu Apr 27 11:04:22 1995 > To: marxism-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu > Cc: wpc-AT-cs.strath.ac.uk > Subject: Re: globalizatio of capital > Date: Thu, 27 Apr 95 10:13:03 +0100 > From: wpc-AT-cs.strath.ac.uk > Sender: owner-marxism-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu > Reply-To: marxism-AT-jefferson.village.virginia.edu > > Chris: > What reforms would be consistent with marxism? And which might make > common cause with say, post Keynsians? I wonder if anyone can come in? > > Paul: > I would suggest that reforms that restrict the free > movement of capital and which increase the propensisty > to invest in physical capital would be advantageous. > > As examples of the first > 1) A 2% tax on all foreign exchange transactions > this would greatly diminish the speculative > flows of money capital > 2) A punitive rate of taxation on earnings from > overseas assets > > Reforms which increase propensity to invest > 1) Holding the real rate of interest to no more > than 2.5% above the rate of inflation > > 2) Changes in company law prohibiting distribution > of dividends unless a firms non-financial assets > have grown by some given percentage after allowing > for stock appreciation > > The objectives of these are to allow the recreation of > full employment with the consequential strengthening of > the social position of labour. > > > --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --- from list marxism-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- ------------------
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005