<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://truth-out.org/news/item/13082-the-trans-pacific-partnership-what-free-trade-actually-means">http://truth-out.org/news/item/13082-the-trans-pacific-partnership-what-free-trade-actually-means</a><br>
<br>
<div class="moz-signature">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<title></title>
<br>
</div>
On 12/04/2012 02:38 AM, Riaz K Tayob wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:50BD14BD.4010703@gmail.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
It is one thing to claim this in fact and then generalise the
principle that markets "do best". The same cannot be said for eg
on the railroad revolution in the US - which enjoyed massive
subsidies. In many developing countries, regulation that fixed the
number of operators ensured a mix of competition and oligopoly to
fund the high infrastructure entry costs by limiting the number of
entrants. In other areas, other publicly established
infrastructure was utilised as well (in some countries to improve
coverage, UCTAD recommends intervention - sharing of
infrastructure costs like cell masts). <br>
<br>
In the US railroad revolution the sharing of these fixed
infrastructure costs (from taxes) in this way improved American
economic performance. If one used neoclassical economics to judge
the impact of the transformational railroad, the result is that it
"only" improved US economic performance by 3 to 4%. This was such
a major change in the US economy (it integrated the US as a single
market - a huge increase in scale). Contrary to the ahistorical
writing of history by neoclassicals , the American economic system
in its formative years was radically different from neoclassicals-
rather following Alex Hamilton, Richard Ely, Daniel Raymond,
Frederich List... Then, the understanding was that low cost
infrastructure enhanced economic performance/production. Nowadays,
the neoclassicals believe that "free" infrastructure is bad, and
to improve competitiveness things must be privatised or private -
the tollbooth economy.<br>
<br>
Arguments against regulation, as the neoclassicals do, actually
reduce democractic choices about how markets can be shaped and
structured - and how plastic they are - which is no wonder that
oligopolists/monopolists love the arguments on "free markets"
because what while what may be "true" in theory is very beneficial
to them in fact. In some of these markets the market is too
violent and perhaps the possibility of looking at the functioning
of the extant reality - oligopolistic market structures: which are
not going to disappear with neoclassical utopia of perfect
competition just around the corner if we only would liberalise and
deregulate more and faster.<br>
<br>
While perhaps not directed at Mueller per se, but it would take
much more to deal credibly with an economic theory (or its
prescriptions - neoclassical) after a financial crisis which for
it is a theoretical impossibility: i.e. it cannot happen. But it
did. <br>
<br>
So the neoclassical jingle of leaving it to markets is
controversial. Markets do work, and when they do they should be
left well alone. But do markets always work? Well that simply
depends...<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 2012/12/03 08:29 PM, Milton L
Mueller wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:855077AC3D7A7147A7570370CA01ECD228A519@SUEX10-mbx-10.ad.syr.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
color:black;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle20
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle21
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Just
so you know: competition and liberalization have done more
to extend telecom infrastructure to the largest number of
people than any social equity program. Taxes and subsidies
(at best) pick up the margins/ high cost areas, the really
poor, but the real work is always done by the market. At
worst, taxes and subsidies keep monopoly incumbents in
place, prevent new technologies from emerging, and raise
costs.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
michael gurstein [<a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">mailto:gurstein@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<br>
</span><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">I
would be the first one to argue for a transparent, net
neutral, open access, free speech Internet but I'm also
for an inclusive Internet in a decent socially equitable
environment with proper schools, and healthcare, and an
adequate physical and social infrastructure for all, not
just for the rich (or those in rich countries) and that
means that companies, like everyone else has to pay
their fair share.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Greed
is greed and the best way to keep from paying taxes as
you have pointed out, is to make sure that there are no
laws/regulations in place to require you to pay taxes.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">M<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
[<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org">mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Milton L Mueller<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, December 03, 2012 6:36 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>;
'Dominique Lacroix'<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [governance] Hmmmm... Google:
"Internet Freedom!"... (from taxes?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Suresh,
I think the debates are related. Now it is not just ETNO
and the old telecom incumbents who want to grab a share
of the new wealth being generated by over the top
internet services, it's national governments as well.
So what is new here? Governments want to tax whatever
they can for their own (political) self-interest, while
businesses (and most citizens) want to reduce their
taxes as much as possible. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">What's
interesting is how un-selfconsciously the Dominiques
and Gursteins of the world assume that more taxation =
always better for society. Not a shred of critical
perspective on the governments' demands for more
revenue. And as usual, Gurstein approaches the debate by
attaching labels ("Reaganomics") rather than mounting a
serious argument. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Do
governments have some kind of right to these revenues?
If so, what is the basis? If so, what is a reasonable
rate of taxation? How are these revenues used? How do
they benefit the internet users who generated them?
Might be good for you all to contemplate the answers to
some of those questions. The implication of your
statement is that more taxation is always better. You
don’t have to be a supply-side economist to understand
that taxation can reach a point of diminishing returns
and that it can destroy economic activity as well as
help sustain social services. Please, a more intelligent
perspective on this… <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue
1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">Some
Internet companies can escape taxes because their
activities aren't linked to territories. Others are
linked to countries and pay full taxes.<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>