人気ブログランキング |

can tax help the world?

今日は、曇り。Howlin' Wolf の曲をCaptain Beefheart, Pig Pen が続けて歌っています。

NYTimesの大統領インタヴューです。
The President Is on the Line to Follow Up on Socialism

By JEFF ZELENY
Published: March 7, 2009

WASHINGTON — Less than 90 minutes after Air Force One landed, the telephone rang. President Obama was on the line, wanting to add one more point to a response he gave during an interview with The New York Times.

“It was hard for me to believe that you were entirely serious about that socialist question,” Mr. Obama said from the Oval Office.

He then dismissed the criticism, saying the large-scale government intervention in the markets and the expansion of social welfare programs had begun under his Republican predecessor, George W. Bush.

“It wasn’t under me that we started buying a bunch of shares of banks,” Mr. Obama said. “And it wasn’t on my watch that we passed a massive new entitlement, the prescription drug plan, without a source of funding.”

“By the time we got here, there already had been an enormous infusion of taxpayer money into the financial system,” he said, adding, “The fact that we’ve had to take these extraordinary measures and intervene is not an indication of my ideological preference, but an indication of the degree to which lax regulation and extravagant risk taking has precipitated a crisis.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/politics/08callback.html
クルーグマンなら、もどかしいと感じるコメントかな。
March 8, 2009, 10:06 am
Anti-nationalization arguments

OK, I disagree totally with that premise. The benefits from nationalization come from (a) giving taxpayers a share of the upside rather than just a share of the downside, which is where we are now (b) ending the gaming of the system, even looting, that is encouraged by the current system of implicit guarantees (Simon Johnson has been very good on that) (c) making it politically and fiscally feasible to put in enough capital to revitalize the system. These advantages are there whatever you decide to do with junior bank debt.

That said, some decision must be reached on bank liabilities. Sweden guaranteed all of them. If forced to say, I would go the Swedish route; but of course we can’t do that unless we’re prepared to put all troubled banks in receivership. And I’m ready to be persuaded that some debts should not be honored — this is a deeply technical question.

What’s clear, however, is that the current system, of implicit maybe-kinda guarantees on bank liabilities — call it wink-wink-nudge-nudge-say-no-more banking policy — is failing badly.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/anti-nationalization-arguments/
日本の失敗にアメリカは学んでいないですね。それと日本の失敗は単に政府の現状把握能力だけに起因するわけではないのだと思いますね。
太平洋の向こう側の政府の意向もあったでしょうし。
いずれにしろ、日銀の超緩和的な金融政策と緊縮気味の政府の財政政策の組合せは、結果的にアメリカ他のバブルを大きくする効果があったように感じられます。主因だとはいいませんが。

タックス・ヘイブンのうま味もなくなるのか。
Tax havens fear ‘indiscriminate’ crackdown

By Vanessa Houlder

Published: March 8 2009 23:22 | Last updated: March 8 2009 23:22

A rearguard action to fend off the “action against tax and regulatory havens” threatened by Gordon Brown and other world leaders is being launched by some of Britain’s Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories.

They are among 35 small states and territories braced for possible sanctions after the US administration last week endorsed anti-tax haven legislation and political leaders in France, Germany and the UK stepped up their anti-haven rhetoric ahead of next month’s G20 meeting.

Most offshore centres have been taken aback by the sudden intensification of pressure, after skilfully adapting to international demands for more transparency during the past decade. The latest crackdown has been fuelled by big evasion scandals in Liechtenstein and Switzerland last year, the election of an avowed enemy of tax havens as US president and the near-collapse of the banking system, a heavy user of offshore jurisdictions.

The centres are scrambling to press their case with unfamiliar contacts. Jersey Finance is sending a delegation to meet newly installed officials in Washington on March 23. Dependencies and territories that normally deal with the British ministry of justice and foreign office are also less confident about their relationship with the Treasury.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e1f27b8e-0bfe-11de-b87d-0000779fd2ac.html
確かに、突然の風向きの変化ではあります。

納税者が消えるとThe Economistが書いていたのは90年代初頭でした。

飯の種が消えたら国家存亡の危機だと。
Swiss, Luxembourg, Austria defend bank secrecy
Sun Mar 8, 2009 4:11pm EDT

By Michele Sinner

LUXEMBOURG, March 8 (Reuters) - Luxembourg, Austria and Switzerland vowed on Sunday to protect their banking secrecy and speak with one voice to influence how the G20 group of nations crack down on tax havens.

The G20 holds a summit in April and tackling tax havens is on its agenda but the three small countries with their long-cherished bank secrecy rules are not members of the group.

"The discussions that are taking place right now, unfortunately take place in organizations where our countries are not members, in particular the G20," Luxembourg's Treasury and Budget Minister, Luc Frieden, told a joint news conference with his Swiss and Austrian counterparts.

"We think it is unacceptable that among our European and American friends, we have not had the possibility to have a debate together," Frieden said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssInvestmentServices/idUSL865351220090308
しかし、この国の統治能力の欠如を日経が嘆くようでは。

官僚システムの利害と政界、財界の利害が一致しなくなってきているのでしょうね。

一般大衆は、いつまで飼いならされた羊のままなのでしょうか。

単調な作業にほとほと飽き飽きしてきました。強力な紙の無駄遣い。電子何とかでも同じこと。
老眼にはきついですね。

Chris Spedding に始まり、ブリティッシュ・ジャズ・ブーム再訪という感じで聞いてます。
しかし、例のストーンズのハイド・パーク・コンサート前座でKing Crimson が出たのは知っていましたが、クリムゾンの次に、ストーンズがやったのだとばかり思っていましたが違いました。

Pete Brown & The Battered Ornament が出ているのですね。ピート・ブラウンはJack Bruce と一緒にSunshine of Your Love などを書いた、「ジャズ詩人!!!」です。
このバンドは、ちゃんと歌える人がいないというバンドで、みんながカッテに無茶苦茶やっているのが前衛だという気楽な連中でした。

彼らの後なら誰でもうまく聞こえるはずです。
by nk24mdwst | 2009-03-09 10:17 | 租税法(アメリカ)


<< who needs the b... no magical taxa... >>