Ülo Ennuste majandusartiklid

Kui ilus oleks igaveste teaduspõhiselt disainitet rahvusõilmitsev Maarjamaa :==)

Kui ilus oleks igaveste teaduspõhiselt disainitet rahvusõilmitsev Maarjamaa :==)

Tõepoolest – kus mitte partokraatide laagrite kambad teadustühiselt ja eetikavabalt ei vassiks populistiliselt nukataduste asendusteemade kallal ja teaduministriks ei oleks õpipoisist sellid:

  1. Nt et laagrite kaupa jahutakse teadustühiselt et kõige väetimate tulumaksu pole võimalik 67 euro võrra vähendada sest see vähendaks aastaseid eelarvetulusid oma 120-240 eurot – mis lausa köömes – kui samas ilmselt iga kuu (sic!) sahkerdatakse petunimede all 0-kasumimaksuga (muideks: administratiivselt tabuteema) paradiislikke finantse palju suuremas mahus Maarjamaa piiritaha eriti hargmaiste pankade poolt – vist kah Kremliga lähedaste poolt.  Samas kui Nobelistide laagrites on lumpenite ja keskklassi optimum maksustamine ammu paika pandud (vt nt* ) ja praegu tegeletakse eeskätt nt plutokraatide/kröösuste/börsikulide  kasumite 100% lähedase maksustamisega (vt nt**)
  2. Või et muudkui vaimuvaeselt nüris õlletoanurgases kompetensivaeguses diskussitakse/vassitakse et kas ikka ainult idioodid ei saa aru (RM Ligi ilmselt moraaliriskiliselt nt) et SKT/SKP on ainuõige riikliku rikkuse kriteerium ning -üldse  – ei juhtkonnas märgata et barbaarne majandusliku ebavõrdsuse süvenemine eeskätt pressib tööjõudu välja rändama koos sellega kaasneva Maarjamaa GDP potentsiaali kõdumisega ning divergentsiga/kolgastumisega Euroliidu kontekstis. Samas kui tsiviliseeritud Maailmas Nobelistid juba tosinaid aastad süüvivad rahvaste õilmitsemise disaini teooriatesse ja seda kah intellektuaalselt õitsengult ehk rahvuslike teadmusruumide kvaliteedilt ning eetikariskitult akadeemiliste teadusministritega jne ***. Ja et just Narva “Teaduspargis” äkitse putjaanlaste koolkonna rohelistest teadusmehikest laagrid liialt ei õilmitseks :==).

 

*) http://uloennuste.wordpress.com/2014/03/29/nbnbnb/

**) James A. Mirrlees  Lindenis

Some Interesting Taxes and Subsidies

Session: Friday, 2014 22 August, 10.00 hrs

There are situations where marginal tax rates of 100% or nearly 100% may

be justified. Three models will be sketched, using indifference curves. One,

which makes unusual assumptions about preferences for labour, can justify

income subsidies of low incomes with implicit marginal tax rate of

100%. The second, assuming high substitutability between consumption

and work, might justify marginal tax rates approaching 100% on the highest

incomes. The last, with competition between skilled workers (such as

sportsmen or inventors) for market share, might justify marginal rates of

100% on high incomes of a particular type. The assumptions under which

these conclusions follow may not hold in actual economies, but they might

sometimes. In any case, extreme results, and the reasons for them, can help

us understand how incentives work and their implications for taxation.

***) Edmund S. Phelps Lindenis

Bringing Dynamism, Homegrown Innovation and Human Flourishing

into Economics

Session: Wednesday, 20 August, 09.30 hrs

The economics practiced today is basically neoclassical with an overlay of

Keynesian theory from which the unknowable, animal spirits and longterm

expectations have been removed. Abstraction is always fruitful. But

this standard amalgamated economics, which met many earlier problems,

seems not to meet the syndrome of problems faced by the West in our time;

nor some old problems faced by historians. That is because the standard

economics excludes the heart of these problems – the sources are hidden in

some variables interpreted as “shocks” or some time trend. As a result, this

economics offers us the policy tools of the standard models with which we

can hope to obtain symptomatic relief from our illness, but cannot expect

a cure.

In my theory, prevailing values, or felt needs, are basic to an economy. In

any nation there are people who feel the need for individual expression – to

exercise their curiosity, ingenuity or creativity; whose vitalism stirs them

to “act on the world” and make a difference; and who need careers that are

a journey into the unknown – a voyage in which, as they form ideas, create

and discover outcomes, they test, discover and create themselves. Such

needs fuel a desire to innovate: The extent and intensity of this desire, together

with the capacity and talent of people to hit upon new products that

would be adopted, and the latitude society is willing to give to innovations,

constitute a nation’s dynamism – its ability, or propensity, to innovate. This

dynamism largely determines the nation’s homegrown innovation – the

supply of it, to be precise, while various market forces impact on the actual

innovation achieved. And the nation’s rate of innovation is the main source

of the prosperity there – in all its dimensions, including what is called

flourishing. By the 1800s, the accretion of modern values gave birth to the

dynamism sparking the epoch of innovation in Britain and America, later

Germany and France. Now, losses of dynamism have cost us much of our

prosperity.

 

 

 

august 26, 2014 - Posted by | Uncategorized

Kommentaare veel pole.

Lisa kommentaar

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Muuda )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Muuda )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Muuda )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Muuda )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: