Finland for Thought
             Politics, current events, culture - In Finland & United States

Moi! Thanks for visiting!
I have a new blog: BETTER! FUNNER! - come say hi!
Be sure to check out my new book: "How to Marry a Finnish Girl"
And find out more about me: www.philschwarzmann.com

...Enjoy!


3.12.2006

Zero Tuomioja and the Tobin Tax

Tags: Uncategorized — Author:   @ 8:33 am

One of the preoccupations of Finland’s foreign minister, “Zero” (as Chirac allegedly called him) Tuomioja, has been the implementation of the CTT, or Tobin Tax, especially in relations to ATTAC, where he is a member. Though Tuomioja’s rationale sounds benign enough, there are more considerations behind this folly than initially meets the eye.

Consider whom such a Currency Transaction Tax would affect. Far from dissuading currency speculators (as it was initially intended to do), a CTT is designed to collect taxes from two willing international trading partners and forwarding those tax monies to other countries who have no role at all in that particular trade. Thus, for example, if an American company wires money to a factory in China to produce some goods for America, a country like Bolivia, – which has introduced socialist policies designed to dissuade international trade – would benefit from that kind of international transaction taking place. In other words, Bolivia would enjoy a freeride at the expense of the other two countries, without ever needing to revise its own trade-stifling policies.

Obviously, Zero Tuomioja also enjoys the other aspect of such a tax: it would collect the most money from the one nation that thrives on international trade: the United States. As the cost of such a transaction would eventually be transferred to the American consumer, making goods more expensive as a whole, it becomes quite clear that this tax is just another manifestation of European anti-American bigotry. And, when we consider that it is the American consumer that has done the most when it comes to lifting third world nations out of poverty, the CTT can be seen as quite counterproductive to its own poverty-fighting ideals.

In other words, it is folly, though it’ll certainly never be comprehended as such by Zero Tuomioja.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    I could care less about consumer prices in the USA. Instead, I’m more concerned about the effect on prices here in already overpriced Finland.

    Nutcases who support these types of policies are ideologues first, and they rarely have the interests of their constituencies in mind.

    As a currency trader or international purchaser of goods, my first question would be: How do I avoid paying the tax? In other words, how can I operate outside of the taxing body’s jurisdiction?

    Naturally, the taxing body will enact measures to counter such avoidance. As a result, new financial instruments will be created to counter the counter-measures. The big players will find ways to profit, and the consumer gets stuck paying the bill.

    As with most Socialist-oriented protectionist schemes—and I assume we can classify this as protectionism—they rarely achieve their intended goals.

  • iJusten

    Nowhere in that article does Tuomioja say that the money would be given out as foreign aid, he only mentioned it to give “about sum” to show how much money there was to make.

    You have also not researched the Tobin Tax enough, not even Tuomioja’s article. Otherwise you would notice that tax of one promille would do little to slow down transactions needed by industry. After all, one promille from million euros is only 1000 euros… hardly big amount of money when you are wiring money to China to buy 3$ to sell at 299$…

    On the contrary, it might even be that American industry, government and consumer would be much thrilled…Tobin’s tax, after all, discourages swindling with money, which has caused much grief to goverment’s and and consumers alike. America in the 70s (the switch away from gold-based currency), Sweden in the 80s and Finland in early 90s…just to name few extreme cases. Large scale swindling destroys companies that are otherwise perfectly healthy — as such, finding a way to end it should be project worthy of anyone, not just few small European nations.

    The swindlers abuse the system in a way not intended. They cause much damage to surrounding economy and change a tool of business into business itself — I can’t help but think that getting some sort of system into place would help all areas of economy, save few individuals who are peeing in the pool.

  • Thomas

    Phil:

    As to “trade-stifling policies”, what else are copyrigths and trademarks. And where have these legal terms been invented and implemented in the first place?

  • http://fredfryinternational.blogspot.com/ Fred Fry

    I can’t see this working. The markets will find a way to work around the tax. There is no requirement that currency trade be international. They will end up being done in markets like NY, London, Geneva, avoiding the tax.

    Anyway, banks are going to kill wire transfers for small transactions with their own huge fees. $20-$60 to send funds. $5-$40 for the receiving bank to accept the funds. And sometimes an intermediary bank skims (steals) anywhere between $15 and $25 just to pass on the funds despite the sender paying all fees to transfer the money.

    “As to “trade-stifling policies”, what else are copyrigths and trademarks. And where have these legal terms been invented and implemented in the first place?”
    – Do you have any concept of ownership?

  • winter

    Why do these guys always want more taxes. Taxes kill the economy stupid.

    So lets ask them, about return on investment. Say they want these tax’s, whats the return on Investment to the Tax Base. Show some real return, in terms of GDP growing, not some feel good, I just spent it on drunks again story.

    But if you have tax money for drunks, I have 30 sailors and need your tax money for cheep rum. We can party, and will sing “Y M C A” for you..

  • iJusten

    Please read the Wikipedia-link Finnpundit provided. The tax is not meant to affect private persons or corporations, only people who speculate with currency changes.

    It should not even be needed to be international — as European Bank is the only one who can release new money, you should have to move through it to get some (and this is where the tax would be in effect). While other countries have their own euro-collections, they are limited…

  • http://finnsense.blogspot.com finnsense

    1) I don’t think socialist policies are “designed” to reduce trade. They are designed to redistribute wealth in what is considered to be a more just way. This may be wrong and it may have the unwanted effect of reducing trade but it’s hardly the point.

    2) Of course it must be a European plot because of course Europe doesn’t trade at all. Germany isn’t the worlds largest exporter at all (per capita obviously).

    Do you actually know anything about anything? Try explaining why the tax would not reduce currency volatility if you want to be taken seriously. Obviously we know enough about you to know that helping desperately poor people and zero perceptible cost to ourselves is not high on your agenda.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    In other words, it is folly, though it’ll certainly never be comprehended as such by Zero Tuomioja.

    Pundy, your rants against Örkki & Tavja remind me of domestic right-wing fanatics in an endearing way. It is in stark contrast with your stated position of seeing Finland as a parasite and an enemy through and through, regardless of who’s in charge.

    With Phil, it’s more understandable as he’s a resident in Finland (in Espoo, no less), but I’ve understood that you’re a New Yorker who doesn’t visit evil little Finland that often.

    I don’t know how hip you are to Finnish politics, but the there is a strong sentiment of a turning tide. I predict a kokoomus landslide in the 2007 parliamentary election.

  • winter

    “seeing Finland as a parasite”, wow, you sure hit the nail on the head.

    You all in the EU even call in the evil USA to wage you wars, yet when the world needs help, like in Darfur, you instead deploy to save (Human shields deployment) a bunch of murdering thugs who run southern Lebanon.

    In the past, the world, after the fact, even found out why you behave this way, (see food-for-oil), so we now know in time, the world will figure out why you just did the last lame move.

  • Anonymous

    Finland doesn’t need American, erm…………. I mean Iraqi oil. Every litre of petrol that goes In Finnish cars comes from Finland’s own oil fields in Lapland, or somewhere like that.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    In the past, the world, after the fact, even found out why you behave this way, (see food-for-oil), so we now know in time, the world will figure out why you just did the last lame move.

    Winter, you sound so bitter and resentful. Where’s your funny bone? I wayve the French whyte flagg!

    #8: Of course, Finland does need oil, just like any other God-fearing nation of SUVs. Why do you think we’re so cosy with Czar Vladimir I?

  • Pave

    Franklin -

    I, too, am almost sure we’ll have a porvarihallitus next year. But what I’ve noticed in the past couple of years is that the right-wing – or actually quite libertarian – youth is nowadays a lot bigger than its leftist counterpart. Niinistöesque charm and values have a great appeal to this generation, maybe only environmental issues can challenge them. The working class is obviously a dead idea. Still, the big parties will surely become “senior” parties in the future since all the votes will be in that sector. I would see a lot of demand for Libertarianism anyway.

    Sorry for derailing a bit there but this Tuomioja bashing is just getting old.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    winter: You all in the EU even call in the evil USA to wage you wars, yet when the world needs help,[...] In the past, the world, after the fact, even found out why you behave this way, (see food-for-oil), ……..

    Well, we don’t really need your oil here, so the idea of the US waging wars for us, isn’t plausible. We get natural gas from Russia, oil from both Norway and Russia, etc. But, I’ll give you credit for bringing the UN to our attention.

    I suspect that any Tobin Tax proceeds would fund UN endeavors. In fact, I think I read somewhere that Hugo Chavez supports the tax. In principle, I applaud Chavez’ anti-American antics, like providing America’s poor with free heating oil :lol: But in practice, I have to question whether it’s a good idea to funnel money in that political direction. Bolivia, with its Socialist government, also belongs to the same club as Chavez these days.

    I don’t have a problem letting them do what they think is best for themselves, but maybe we shouldn’t be the ones to pay for it. It’s a difficult question and probably needs some more research………..but, that takes lots of work, so I’m going to open a beer now instead :P

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    winter: You all in the EU even call in the evil USA to wage you wars, yet when the world needs help,[…] In the past, the world, after the fact, even found out why you behave this way, (see food-for-oil), ……..

    Well, we don’t really need your oil here, so the idea of the US waging wars for us, isn’t plausible. We get natural gas from Russia, oil from both Norway and Russia, etc. But, I’ll give you credit for bringing the UN to our attention.

    I suspect that any Tobin Tax proceeds would fund UN endeavors. In fact, I think I read somewhere that Hugo Chavez supports the tax. In principle, I applaud Chavez’ anti-American antics, like providing America’s poor with free heating oil :lol: But in practice, I have to question whether it’s a good idea to funnel money in that political direction. Bolivia, with its Socialist government, also belongs to the same club as Chavez these days.

    I don’t have a problem letting them do what they think is best for themselves, but maybe we shouldn’t be the ones to pay for it. It’s a difficult question and probably needs some more research………but, that takes lots of work, so I’m going to open a beer now instead :P

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    The working class is obviously a dead idea.

    It’s more alive than it has been in 50 years, but gravely misunderstood by the left.

    Niinistöesque charm and values have a great appeal to this generation

    I wouldn’t go on about the hipness of the right-wing fart guard. They’re still hung up on the best tail being at the Taistoite parties back in the 70s and them not being invited. Ben Zyskowicz has to be the worst case in this regard.

  • winter

    “Of course, Finland does need oil,” that why you are in South Lebanon, wearing human shield shirts.

    There is no, we want to do good there, or you would actually be well, doing good.

  • Pave

    It’s more alive than it has been in 50 years, but gravely misunderstood by the left.

    Well, you might have a point there if you mean that the concept of the working class has changed from the old union based politics to something different. If not, please elaborate.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    #15 I’m actually interested in Franklin’s ‘elaboration’ too. Just curious, I suppose.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    There is little elaboration needed. Apparently there are people on the left and right who are stuck with the idea that if you own a tie and went to a university, you can’t possibly be working class, while your living standard is nowhere near what is considered middle class in industrialised countries.

    “Union-based politics” is exactly what the white collar proletariat needs, but it needs to be international, as the labour movement originally was.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    Franklin—

    I’m astonished to hear that you’d advocate unionism as a solution for white collar workers. I don’t think I’ve ever heard that before—thought about it myself, but never really heard anyone advocate it. I suppose it’s possible if implemented worldwide, as you mentioned; otherwise it would just drive jobs elsewhere.

    Seems like India would need to be the forerunner in such a movement. I’ve read of discontentment due to long working hours in India, so I guess it’s not impossible to imagine. Of course, I wonder how much of those long hours are worker-induced (e.g. inferiority complex).

    The United States is a good counter-example though. US University graduates have the highest disposable and discretionary incomes for any country in the world. So, there probably wouldn’t be much pro-union activity there…………unless they want to screw things up for themselves. Plus, the US is too decentralized and has many different sized businesses. Unionism would probably force closure of many. Unskilled labor in the US could probably benefit from unionism though.

    In Finland’s case, I suppose it needs to be considered that it’s in competition with many other countries who can provide the same service at lower prices. Sure, Finland can use protectionism to raise salaries……and then other countries will reciprocate. Hence, we’ll have increased consumer prices and reduced product selection, since we can hardly produce anything of our own here.

    Maybe the best solution isn’t to get Finland to unionize, but rather to incite India to move in that direction. I would almost prescribe the same for eastern Europe, but then our children would be stuck with the consequences of an inflexible, unionized Europe. But hell, that’s their problem :lol:

    On the other hand, it *might* close the gap between salaries of lowest and highest paid workers. Maybe that’d be a benefit, depending on perspective.

    Hmmmmmmmm…….. Insofar as U-grad labor goes, I’m pretty sure I’d take the US model for myself—super-high salaries and rock-bottom consumer prices on just about everything. Very flexible too. I don’t find it nice to live there though; urban planning went awry about 60-years-ago.

    But hey, that’s just based on my own experiences. One thing’s for sure though, the high-tax, high-priced Finnish model ranks pretty low on my list. I see few advantages to it, but that’s why I never seek opportunities here nor stay for very long.

  • Jukka Michelsson

    The US Federal income tax began at the level of just 1% in the year 1913. Our tax rate too has been a lot lower some decades ago. Same for every country in the world.

    Taxes start out small then they grow. It’s inevitable.

    Who gets to control the money gathered with the Tobin tax? What is to keep politicians from raising the tax bit by bit using similar arguments they use now, like “what’s one promille compared to a thousand…”

    Why does everyone hate speculators? They are just as necessary as every other actor on financial markets, if not more so. The idea that speculators contribute nothing to the economy is based on lack of understanding of stock markets (and other securities markets).

    See “The Social Function of Stock Speculators” by Robert Murphy at http://mises.org/story/2381

    Sure, I’d support a new tax too if it had a nice name and it’d be directed to some libertarian organization claiming to use the money for “good purposes” (such as propaganda against taxes)… and me or my friends would be sitting in the board of directors of that organization.

  • iJusten

    J. Michelsson; we were not talking about stock, but money. Stock is designed to be traded; money is just a tool of trade, and not designed as such. Too high tax would grip the whole economy, and no one want’s that.

    However, those people who are nearly infinitely rich can reap huge profits with see-saw techniques. Dollar weakens ,01 against pound? MUST BUY POUNDS FAST! Euro strenghtens? BUY BUY BUY! It is one thing to buy money for needs of trade; in such cases a promille doesn’t hinder your business at all. But if you are just moving your cash from dollars to pounds to euros to yenis six to ten times a day, the tax would make it no longer profitable.

    The “buying and selling money” trend is pretty new. It did not exist before eighties, but has since growed explonentially. Apparently 90% of all money traded is done for speculative purposes (eg. you aren’t going to use the money you buy). Unlike stock, whose price is determinated partly by how well the company does, money flows are for the most part determinated by who buys and how many. The national banks have to release new money so that it’s always available; they usually try to keep the value pretty solid to make life easier for companies. When they do this, however, there are born some areas that don’t quite match; pound and dollar may be of the same value, as is euro and dollar — but euro and pound may be of different value. The difference dosen’t have to be very big to be exploited. In worst case scenarios the whole economy of the country may collapse.

    This is no way “harmless” or needed for capitalistic systems to work.

  • Jukka Michelsson

    Stock market speculation is quite similar to money market speculation. No difference.

    And seriously, you don’t really believe making money is so simple as to just buy everything that has appreciated in value no matter how little? You only profit if you can sell it for a higher price than what you paid for it. (Does this point really need clarification?)

    Anyway, the analogy for stock market is exactly the same. Money too has it’s correct value which fluctuates and which the speculators help the markets achieve.

    If there is a difference between the market price and the “correct” price for a currency it is only good that speculators can fix it quickly before it becomes a burden on the economy and comes down collapsing (remember for example the “solid Markka” or the Asian crisis in the 90′s).

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    If there is a difference between the market price and the “correct” price for a currency

    Could you explain to me, in very simple terms, the difference between the “correct price” and the market price? Is this part of some esoteric libertarian economics that the unwashed masses are not familiar with?

  • iJusten

    The speculator’s are playing with something that should be part of the game. Examble. On this it is not a question of bank doing something that should need to be “corrected”. Speculators saw an opening and used loaned money to leech money from Central Bank. There was no positive result to this attack, it was malicious, and the only results were the leeching of taxpayers money and few speculators getting filthy rich.

    What it mostly makes me think of is Scrooge McDuck trying to protect his money bin while Beagle Boys try to get in and out with sacks of money. Unlike in the story, in reality BB won.

  • Jukka Michelsson

    A stock or currency is undervalued if you can buy it and make a profit without it appreciating in value (dividends or purchase power for example). The opposite goes for overvaluation. The “correct price” is between them. Of course the word “correct” in this case should not be taken in the sense of it carrying any moral connotations or such.

    The example given by iJusten is a very good example of government trying to control the price of a commodity, in this case currency.

    When the central bank decides to keep the currency value (measured in other currency) in certain limits it has to constantly buy and sell against the markets. After some time the fundamentals of the economy will have changed (the world changes all the time) thus affecting the real value of the currency.

    Since the central bank tries to stop the change from affecting the price, the currency becomes overvalued or undervalued and international pressure for its correction begin mounting.

    The correction will usually come when the burden of fallacious monetary policy is impossible to bear even given the might of the central bank’s money printing capability, bringing with it the painfully quick readjustement to the whole economy, namely, depression.

    Allowing the currency markets to work freely and efficiently prevents such shock-therapy treatments.

  • http://fredfryinternational.blogspot.com Fred Fry

    Profits on currency trading are already taxed and that is if you can make a profit doing it.

    A country can somewhat regulate the value of it’s currency by releasing more to keep the value from rising (collecting foreign reserves on the process) and using those foreign reserves to prop up the price by buying back excess currency offered for trade below a certain price. (amount other things)

    Take a look at the US trade deficit with China. It partly exists because the Chinese are artificially depressing their currency and buying up US debt to prevent the $ from falling. It might be a vicious cycle the Chinese are in, but they sustain the un-natural imbalance as aid to their national industries.

    You can bet that Tobin people have calculated the revenue stream from that trade alone.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    Allowing the currency markets to work freely and efficiently prevents such shock-therapy treatments.

    Oh yes, the market never fails. The invisible hand takes care of everything and everybody. Just like in 1929.

  • Jukka Michelsson

    That’s a good point you brought up. The stock market crash was the result of an artificial asset price bubble created by the Federal Reserves inflationary monetary policies.

    Here’s a part of the speech Ben Bernanke (now chairman of FED) gave four years ago:

    “Let me end my talk by abusing slightly my status as an official representative of the Federal Reserve. I would like to say to Milton and Anna: Regarding the Great Depression. You’re right, we did it. We’re very sorry. But thanks to you, we won’t do it again.”

    http://www.federalreserve.gov/BOARDDOCS/SPEECHES/2002/20021108/default.htm

  • Thomas

    Jukka Michelsson:

    While I agree, that stock markets and currency markets are quite similar in a purely “technical sense”, I do not think you can treat them EQUALLY.

    Stock markets exist, simply to simplify trading stock, without which any single country can live fairly well. Likewise for all the different derivatives. But currencies are somewhat different. A modern society simply cannot exist without “money”. If speculators can basically boss small countries around via the currency market, then a “speculation tax” might well be in place in my opinion. That wouldn’t have to include e.g. trade using credit cards in foreign countries, or cash currency exchange at FOREX. Oh, you can say, why don’t use e.g. dollars. But that is giving away the ability to decide over important things, that you would perhaps like to be able to decide about.

    And concerning the Bernanke speech. What about the IT-bubble. What about the housing bubble (e.g. in the U.S.), about which tere is lots of talk. Even the markets (e.g. stock and derivative markets), that are closest to being perfect, are far from being perfect. Therefore, the “invisible hand” does not do the job it is supposed to do. And therefore there will be bubbles, even without the intervention of any governmental institutions.

    And I don not believe that the great depression was ONLY “the result of an artificial asset price bubble created by the Federal Reserves inflationary monetary policies”.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    Kristian:
    Hmmmmmmmm…….. Insofar as U-grad labor goes, I’m pretty sure I’d take the US model for myself—super-high salaries and rock-bottom consumer prices on just about everything.

    Yes, once you’ve paid for your million-dollar trailer, you can really go crazy al Wal-Mart!

    I’m astonished to hear that you’d advocate unionism as a solution for white collar workers. I don’t think I’ve ever heard that before

    Well, we’ve waited for the free market fairy to wave her magic wand and do her miracles. Turned out that the free market fairy fucked us in the ass.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    Yeah, those flimsy, plastic-clad houses in America are indeed like trailers, only without the wheels. I guess it’s best to hide in the basement on windy days.

    The strange thing is, that it wouldn’t cost that much more to do it right; that is, with pre-fabricated masonry walls, etc. Americans can’t seem to plan those types of things right.

  • http://fredfryinternational.blogspot.com Fred Fry

    All of those ugly clorox-bottle houses are sitting on the market either unsold or sold to some flipper who is now desperately looking for a greater fool. Too bad the housing market has run out of fools to sell to.

  • Anonymous

    Curious, what’s a clorox-bottle house?

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    Yeah, those flimsy, plastic-clad houses in America are indeed like trailers, only without the wheels. I guess it’s best to hide in the basement on windy days.

    Kristian, when I say “million-dollar trailer”, I mean what I say.

    I googled clorox bottles and discovered yet another important piece of 20th century cultural lore. Do they really make houses like that?

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    Too bad the housing market has run out of fools to sell to.

    Or could it just be that the prices are just right, but you’re a loser for not being able to buy? That’s what the bullists are saying here, anyway.

  • http://fredfryinternational.blogspot.com Fred Fry

    “Curious, what’s a clorox-bottle house?”
    – it’s a fiberglass/plastic house. Think of boats. A ‘clorox bottle’ boat is one of those new white power boats. (Clorox is a US brand of bleach.)

    “Or could it just be that the prices are just right, but you’re a loser for not being able to buy? That’s what the bullists are saying here, anyway.”
    – I heard is any number of ways and times. “What are you doing renting? My friend has two houses he is trying to unload.” A little simple math is all that is needed to figure out (at least in the DC area) that renting was much cheaper than paying just the interest on a mortgage. And to top it off, if something breaks, I only need to call someone in. Condos across the street just went on the market, starting at $800,000. Will cost you at least one million if you want a balcony.

    Take a look at this 24 year old genius who currently has 5 houses and over $2 million in debt:

    http://iamfacingforeclosure.com/

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    Condos across the street just went on the market, starting at $800,000. Will cost you at least one million if you want a balcony.

    So? Isn’t every American able to buy five of those with pocket money after Bush’s tax cuts?

    Take a look at this 24 year old genius who currently has 5 houses and over $2 million in debt:

    Well, we don’t know that. We only know that he has a blog.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    Franklin—Wow! That’s pretty cool! I know someone in Florida who has one, but I haven’t actually seen it. And those trailers actually appreciate in value. And why shouldn’t they, if they’re built to standards comparable with houses? In fact, they might even be better; houses can have problems, such as cracked foundations, undesirable neighbors, etc. My next house will be a sailboat (seriously), so I suppose that’s along the same principle. I can’t stay in one place for very long anyway.

    I’ve done my share of real estate speculation over the years. Bought properties and renovated them. It’s a good way to go, if you don’t mind living in dust for a while. Makes lots of sense financially, provided you understand the market.

    In any case, I agree with you; house prices are too high for first-time buyers. And you’re right, about how the invisible hand created the condition. Over the past two-decades, everyone migrated to the Helsinki area for jobs, because all the big corps moved here. That’s the problem.

    We need a reverse-migration—back to Nowheremäki. I’ve read some political ideas about it; one is a telecommuting initiative suggested by the Finnish government. I don’t remember how it’s supposed to be implemented or incentiviszed. It’s a good idea for sure, but I’m sure it would only have a limited effect. Instead, it needs to be more large-scale.

    There’s really no reason for all these companies to keep their ‘knowledge workers’ here in Helsinki and Espoo. They could just as easily create clusters in Nowheremäki. And they’d probably save operating expenses out there anyway.

    American companies have had success moving their operations away from major cities, to places within the ‘heartland.’ Workers benefit because they can suddenly afford homes with ample land. It’s a perfect solution for many people, especially those who don’t like big cities and their crowded suburbs.

    I don’t think there’d be much resistance to moving away from Helsinki/Espoo/Vantaa, especially if the Nowheremäkis were to become populated again—and perhaps more ‘lively.’ I know people who’ve grown-up here in H/E/V, but have chosen to live in places like Kuopio instead. In fact, most people out there wouldn’t live near Helsinki no matter how much you paid them :lol:

    So, whereas the invisible hand created the problem, I don’t see why it can’t fix the problem in a very positive way……..but, maybe with a little cajoling from the state. In my opinion, it would be much more natural than trying to impose artificial measures that might not help us in the long run, due to foreign competition. It’s just a matter of political initiative. I think the idea already exists, but maybe it just needs a little push?

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    I don’t think there’d be much resistance to moving away from Helsinki/Espoo/Vantaa,

    The bosses with 8 or 9 figure annual incomes don’t mind living in Helsinki or Espoo. What makes you think they give a fuck about the common worker? There’s a very fitting Dilbert strip about choosing the location for the company office.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    The bosses with 8 or 9 figure annual incomes don’t mind living in Helsinki or Espoo. What makes you think they give a fuck about the common worker?

    Cost savings and the bottom line. As I mentioned, it’s something that can be incentivized by the state and municipalities—it’s already being thought about. Insofar as company bosses, who’s to say they wouldn’t want to build a huge house somewhere in the country—much bigger than they could afford here, around H. It’s all relative. For that matter, the biggest bosses would probably stay here anyway; it’s not like the whole company would need to move away.

    It was poor planning to cause everyone to flock down here, and I’m pretty sure it’s the root of the housing problem. The same entity that caused it, could just as easily fix it. Plus, we might get lower-priced train tickets out of the deal, since increased commuting would inevitably result.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    Cost savings and the bottom line.

    Who says you have to pay the plebs anything? They can choose between living under a bridge or in the forest.

    Insofar as company bosses, who’s to say they wouldn’t want to build a huge house somewhere in the country—much bigger than they could afford here, around H.

    They can afford anything they want. Fuck the rest. Welcome to the new world order, brought to you by the invisible hand.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    Who says you have to pay the plebs anything? They can choose between living under a bridge or in the forest.

    The important consideration is the ratio between salaries and living costs. Generally, that ratio should be much more favorable out there—in fact, it is already better. Depends on whether your particular job exists there, of course.

    The other consideration, from the company’s pov, is how much a municipality is willing to ‘provide’ as incentive. It’s not necessarily about saving on workers’ salaries. Hell, they can do that here too.

    This is hardly a new idea. New to Finland maybe, but it’s nothing groundbreaking.

    They can afford anything they want. Fuck the rest. Welcome to the new world order, brought to you by the invisible hand.

    Fine. I won’t argue with you there. I’m not in favor of the US formula where CEO makes 35-times the worker’s salary.

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    Another thing….. At this point, lots of people in Nowheremäki probably assume they need to move to H for a job—unless they work in timber or something similar. But, most probably need to come here. It only compounds the problem.

  • http://finnpundit.blogspot.com Finnpundit

    I’m not in favor of the US formula where CEO makes 35-times the worker’s salary.

    I’m not either, but I do trust those CEOs who take 0 in salary, and all of their compensation in options and shares in the company they manage. That is a very un-Finnish idea.

    There’s nothing like giving a CEO a very powerful motivation for maximizing stockholder returns.

    On earlier comments, I think Jukka Michelsson’s were the most informed. The people who criticized him were totally under the presumption that a state that seeks to protect its currency has a right to do that, – not seeing that currency speculators act as an informal free market vanguard against ill-informed and ideologically-based state economic planning.

    All states that choose to trade with the rest of the world must submit to outside evaluation of their economic planning. That’s the price they pay to participate. Of course, you can opt to stay outside of world trade, as Cuba and North Korea have done, but then you’d have to suffer the consequences.

    As to the CCT tax being insignificant, as iJusten claimed, we have to remember that corporate profits tend to amount to just about 5% or less of total revenues. In that context, a .1% to .25% tax on revenues that might be completely based on international transactions becomes very significant indeed, especially as this tax is not even based on corporate earnings, but each and every single transaction.

    Most of the other arguments tend to skirt the issue, so they’re not worth commenting on. Suffice it to say that there are really not very worthwhile reasons for the institution of this tax.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    There’s nothing like giving a CEO a very powerful motivation for maximizing stockholder returns.

    Or, as is more often the case, for manipulating the share price for their personal gain.

    There is nothing un-Finnish about stock options. Finnish CEOs are all too happy to have them.

  • http://finnpundit.blogspot.com Finnpundit

    Or, as is more often the case, for manipulating the share price for their personal gain.

    That’s exactly to be hoped for, when they’re compensation is 0 in terms of salary, since shareholders will only benefit as a result.

    There is nothing un-Finnish about stock options. Finnish CEOs are all too happy to have them.

    Yes, but how many of them will work for no salary?

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    #47
    Stock purchase options can be negotiated in many ways; not necessarily to correlate with positive company performance—in real terms. The consequence is that retained earnings are depleted by an amount that’s 35-, 40-, 50-times the salary of an ordinary worker.

    And whether 0 compensation is an incentive to increase company performance vs. simply to manipulate share value, is another question altogether.

    I’m starting to like Frankin’s white collar unionization idea more. Just wish there was another way…….

  • http://fredfryinternational.blogspot.com Fred Fry

    “I’m starting to like Frankin’s white collar unionization idea more.”

    That would of course take away most of your right to negotiate for your salary and leave it for yearly union talks. Then again, that might be a benefit if the company reps that the union is negotiating with are also members of the same union. However, the more generous they are to themselves need to paid with cuts elsewhere.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    That’s exactly to be hoped for, when they’re compensation is 0 in terms of salary, since shareholders will only benefit as a result.

    I wouldn’t expect anything less moronic from you. Needless to say, artificially pumping the stock price to a peak with stupid risktaking, followed by a crash and a fiscal crisis, at worst bankruptcy, will not benefit shareholders who expect longterm appreciation. Finland’s Sonera is a perfect example of this.

    Yes, but how many of them will work for no salary?

    Could you cite some examples of American CEOs with a zero base salary?

  • Kristian (in Espoo)

    Yeah, unions are like a double-edged sword. They can raise overall salaries—hopefully at the expense of robber-baron CEO’s—but they can also reduce flexibility for workers.

    Here in Europe, I don’t think it’s a good condition for huge pay differences to evolve. Management ‘teams’ don’t undertake any significant personal risk—aside from legal responsibility—so it makes little sense for them to get millions in compensation. I think they can be motivated with much less—hundreds-of-thousands at most.

    Just because stock compensation doesn’t appear on the income statement, doesn’t mean it’s not an expense in real terms. These robber-barons dilute both worker salaries AND shareholder value. I’d much rather see a larger dividend payment, than to watch some CEO cruise-by in the 70-footer he purchased with my money.

    Is there another option besides ‘white collar’ unionism?

  • http://finnpundityahoo.com Finnpundit

    50. Your off-the-cuff dismissal of the concept of CEO stock option compensations only reveal a profound ignorance on how the markets work in general.

    However, as to zero salaried examples, I did err in one respect: most such CEOs take $1 in salary, instead of zero, as it satisfies some statutory regulations.

    The CEOs of Yahoo, Google, and Apple have all taken $1 a year in salaries at various times. I don’t know what they are making now.

  • Thomas

    F***pundit:

    “50. Your off-the-cuff dismissal of the concept of CEO stock option compensations only reveal a profound ignorance on how the markets work in general.”

    In what sense?

    The way stock-options are defined im most cases I think they ONLY promote exactly what Franklin suggested. Namely “for manipulating the share price for their personal gain.” Look at Fortum. A semi-MONOPOLY offering options. And that is definatley the only example.

    The more – theoretically – rational schemes (if they even are more rational – I didn’t give that much thought yet) proposed – ore described – here COULD perhaps(?) offer something. But why are options offered ONLY to management. Couldn’t they – if they motivate management to such great efforts – also motivate the rest of the work-force? Or is it only management that needs to be financially motivated?

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    50. Your off-the-cuff dismissal of the concept of CEO stock option compensations only reveal a profound ignorance on how the markets work in general.

    I wish I was ignorant. Unfortunately, I have participated heavily in transfer payments to robber baron CEOs. I know how the markets work all right. Let’s just say that my returns as a stockholder were less than maximised.

    The CEOs of Yahoo, Google, and Apple have all taken $1 a year in salaries at various times. I don’t know what they are making now.

    Yahoo’s CEO makes as much as 7,075 average American workers. While Steven Jobs apparently still takes in a $1 salary, I wouldn’t mind a $90 million jet on top of that. Google’s bosses mostly get their earning from selling Google stock. Now, concentrating on entrepreneur-CEOs of young companies who essentially built their business from scratch doesn’t really give the big picture. Since we’re always fighting about healthcare, we might look at America’s insurer CEO compensations. No wonder public healthcare is so efficient compared to an evil, wasterful welfare-statist model. I mean, what’s $1bn?

  • taxman

    Who the hell is Zero Tuomioja? I know Finnish politicians are worth zero but TOBIN TAX is one of the smartest form of tax. It is easy to implement and perhapst the most cost effective way to tax on you!!! No one likes taxes but those Robinson Crusoes who are thinking of a society without taxes can still find some isolated “paradise” islands where to live adventurous life without taxes and any infrastructure.

    It is not a coincidence that in the most developed countries the taxes are amongh highest as well. Finland and Sweden have created enormous amount of high skilled jobs in the sector of Telecommunication. (Nokia + Ericsson)

    Perhaps it is possible to predict the development grade of a country by it’s overall tax rate. Finland and Sweden are lowering their taxes
    as suggested by some idiots. This should correlate well with the above. In other words Finland and Sweden should loose white collar jobs and getting more blue collar jobs instead in the near Future.
    (of course, if it is only a one guy, a dictator who gets all the tax money..)

    I believe we can not avoid paying taxes or avoid living in societies with some kind of tax systems. There is only one question left for those who accept the taxes of some kind: What kind of tax system is best and what is the right level of tax? The old Greeks had a good answer to the question: It does not matter as far it is just!

    In Rome they failed to levy taxes fairly and Rome went down while a small elite ate up the poors.

    From one’s birth to death the f* goverment collects it’s share and the smartest and the most corrupted officers will recycle the tax money into their own pockets in all societies now and in the future.
    If you do not accept this then it is better to find an isolated paradise island without lights, phones, televisions etc.

  • http://finnpundit.blogspot.com Finnpundit

    taxman: nobody’s arguing the necessity of some forms of taxation. The argument here is completely centered on the notion of financing “development aid” to third world kleptocracies through a tax which penalizes the kind of trade which actually aids third world economies the most.

  • Freeridin’ Franklin

    through a tax which penalizes the kind of trade which actually aids third world economies the most.

    Could you elaborate on how currency speculation aids third world economies?

  • http://finnpundit.blogspot.com Finnpundit

    57. It’s already been stated in 26.

blog comments powered by Disqus

Invalid XHTML | CSS | Powered by WordPress

1