Tobin Tax

[margrace]

Do you believe this would be a good idea?

http://www.ceedweb.org/iirp/

[jbg]

Do you believe this would be a good idea?

http://www.ceedweb.org/iirp/

This looks a bit dicey and without standards:

They can be enacted by national legislatures, followed by multilateral cooperation for effective enforcement. The revenue should go to global priorities: basic environmental and human needs.

[Toro]

No.

All it will do is migrate currency trading to jusidictions that will not institute the tax.

[August1991]

I expressed my opinion of the Tobin tax here.

Any time a government imposes a tax, it creates a dam in a river. The success of a tax depends on how much water the dam can stop. The failure of a tax is how far the river has to go to get around the dam.

If the Tobin tax were a river, it would stop no water but the river would meander in various ways to get around the dam. But even if you could get the cooperation of all governments to impose a Tobin tax so that all currency transactions were taxed, the Tobin tax would still be a bad idea. Why would anyone want to dam such an important river as currency trading? It would just slow the entire world down.

If the intention is to help poor people in poor countries, or protect the environment, there are much better ways.

Incidentally, Tobin first suggested the tax in the 1970s not as a way to raise revenue but as a way to stabilize foreign currency markets. At the time, currency markets were newly liberalized and people were afraid of rate swings. Tobin's idea was that a tax would reduce the number of transactions - a bit like a dam reduces the flow of a river.

[margrace]

So it comes down to the same old story, big business must control the world and they evidently cannot be trusted.

I know they can't. My son was fired from a big company he had worked for for 12 years. He was consistently given great reports and told what a good worker he was. However he had the misfortune to get sick so he was fired. With nothing.

He had no attachments family or debts to worry about so he sued them and won. But others have been fired from this wonderful Ontario business and because they cannot afford to fight they walk way. He also had to sign papers saying he would not disclose what he got. This was to protect the company from information getting to others who were sueing them.

[geoffrey]

If you dislike the capitalism system so much, and all this anti-big business movement is your thing, perhaps you should move to somewhere that doesn't have business like Canada does.

Like Congo, that'd be a nice place, not a lot of big business. Maybe Cuba, though their government is like a big business... how about Zimbabwe?

What you need to realise is that these businesses found the basis of our 'low' 6% unemployment rate and fund most of our social services. No big-business, no welfare, no healthcare, nothing.

The disinguishment between 3rd and 1st world is the businesses that choose to operate from them. Any 3rd world country should satisfy your hate for big business just fine.

[August1991]

So it comes down to the same old story, big business must control the world and they evidently cannot be trusted.

Big Business? Many ordinary people participate in the foreign currency markets every day. Any time you buy an imported good (and this can be sizeable in the case of an imported car), you participate (indirectly) in foreign currency markets.

My son was fired from a big company he had worked for for 12 years. He was consistently given great reports and told what a good worker he was. However he had the misfortune to get sick so he was fired. With nothing.

He had no attachments family or debts to worry about so he sued them and won. But others have been fired from this wonderful Ontario business and because they cannot afford to fight they walk way. He also had to sign papers saying he would not disclose what he got. This was to protect the company from information getting to others who were sueing them.

It appears there was a breach of the labour contract between your son and his employer. Contract breach occurs often and then a court determines compensation, if justified.

One has only to spend a few minutes with people who have gone through divorce to understand that breach of contract is often an emotional experience and one often has a sense of mistrust. If you think only "big business" deserves to be mistrusted, I know a small company selling condos in Florida...

It is unfortunate for your son but it appears he was fairly compensated. I hope the experience doesn't make the big company wary about hiring a new employee, or difficult for your son to find a new job.

[Tsi Nikayen' Enonhne']

She:kon!

Canada is NOT a big-business capitalist country. It is a big corporatist country whose methods destroy capitalism and put any competition out of business for their own profits. Corporations do not believe in healthy competition but seek out monopolies in which to hold the average consumer hostage to their whims.

Every Bank

Any Oil Company

Bell

Rogers

and many more.....

O:nen

[geoffrey]

None of those companies hold consumers hostage... well an argument can be made for the banks, but the rest... I don't think so.

Saying oil companies have monopolies is major misunderstanding of how the oil industry works. There are likely more small businesses in that industry than any other sector. The concept that there is just one big cartel that does everything is simply wrong.

That being said, the objective of most corporations is to gain as large a market share as possible, in Canada, many companies have been quite succesful in doing so... most of those under government order such as regulated utilities companies, banks and the such.

Those are the companies that distort the market, not those that operate on a free market basis like big oil.

[August1991]

Canada is NOT a big-business capitalist country. It is a big corporatist country whose methods destroy capitalism and put any competition out of business for their own profits. Corporations do not believe in healthy competition but seek out monopolies in which to hold the average consumer hostage to their whims.

Yes, and that's why Eaton's went bankrupt and why General Motors is on the verge of bankruptcy.

It also explains why Microsoft was a large monopoly in 1972 and why IBM is still a large monopoly.

To describe Canada as corporatist is something of a stretch (although Quebec might fit better the definition). In this case, it's not just big business that benefits from governments but also many small businesses too.

In any case, I'm happy that FedEx (and e-mail) can now offer an alternative to the Post Office. And that answers your point about banks. Having any choice is better than having no choice at all. Imagine if the Post Office ran Canada's banking industry.

[August1991]

That being said, the objective of most corporations is to gain as large a market share as possible, in Canada, many companies have been quite succesful in doing so...

That's wrong. The objective of a successful company is to increase shareholder's value.

[geoffrey]

That being said, the objective of most corporations is to gain as large a market share as possible, in Canada, many companies have been quite succesful in doing so...

That's wrong. The objective of a successful company is to increase shareholder's value.

Mainly through gaining a larger market share at reasonable cost... though there are millions of ways to increase shareholder value. Most companies have growth as an objective.

[jbg]

Like Congo, that'd be a nice place, not a lot of big business. Maybe Cuba, though their government is like a big business... how about Zimbabwe?

I'm quite sure Mugabe feels and suffers his peoples' pain.

[Wilber]

Of course it's a good idea. We need more taxes. There is nothing that can't be solved with a tax.

[margrace]

That being said, the objective of most corporations is to gain as large a market share as possible, in Canada, many companies have been quite succesful in doing so...

That's wrong. The objective of a successful company is to increase shareholder's value.

Exactly that is the objective and none other. In reference to your statement about breach of labour laws being common, isn't that the point. Lawyers cost money and to have to hire one to protect yourself is beyond the means of a lot of people. Laws are made to be obeyed, the labour laws in particular, so shouldn't these companies to fined for what they do instead of being allowed to force people who win their rights to sign papers to keep them quiet.

What kind of a country is this?

The second statement about getting a job after standing up for yourself seems, in my sons case, to be considered a good trait. He has had no problems telling what happened and getting the job.

What about the forced closure of AVRO, do you know how many people suffered from that, Thousands.

What about the adds that GM ran just recently in Vancouver to stop the extension of the Sky Train, claiming that they were not safe to ride. The BC gov't at least had the guts to demand the withdrawal of the adds.

GM

[geoffrey]

Then don't buy those companies products, don't support unethical business and they won't exist anymore. Be the change you wish to seek.

Do you ever shop at Walmart, drive a car, or use a bank? I suggest you stop doing any of those three if you wish to see the end of big business and it's power.