---------------- forwarded message ------------------- From: Tom Walker I agree with Gavin Cameron's point that the nominal incidence of a tax is not the same as its economic incidence. That is the argument underlying my proposal to arbitrage free time. http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/arbitrag.htm However, Cameron's next comment that labour bears all the tax burden because capital is mobile and labour is not is a non-sequitur. Capital is not 100% mobile, labour is not 0% mobile. Furthermore, labour can withdraw from the market for many 'non-economic' reasons: death, illnesses, child bearing, spiritual quest, madness. That is to say, labour can disappear into thin air. The economic incidence of a tax has to be seen as an empirical question, not a theoretical presupposition. Secondly, again on the 'lump of labour fallacy' -- may we at last lay this lumpy red herring to rest? Economic analysis is built entirely on ceteris paribus exercises. The assumption that a given number of hours could be differently distributed among workers is nothing more or less than a ceteris paribus assumption. As with any economic analysis, the job isn't done until the abstractions are brought back to concrete earth. Why should the distribution of work hours be held to a different standard of concreteness than any other economic question? I dare say that the great neo-liberal/monetarist edifice is built entirely on counter-factuals that have been conveniently forgotten about in the rush to affirm the infallibility of markets. The 'lump of labour fallacy' charge is less a critque than it is a charm to ward off non-conforming ideas. There are, Gavin Cameron concludes, "very few free lunches in economic policy." The great American economist, John Maurice Clark, would have been more precise: unemployment is not a free lunch. "If all industry were integrated and owned by workers, what would be the relation of constant to variable expense?" Clark asked in his 1923 treatise on overhead costs. His answer was that, "it would be clear to worker-owners that the real cost of labor could not be materially reduced by unemployment." Regards, Tom Walker ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ #408 1035 Pacific St. Vancouver, B.C. V6E 4G7 [EMAIL PROTECTED] (604) 669-3286 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The TimeWork Web: http://www.vcn.bc.ca/timework/
