My tweets on what the coronavirus should inspire in the USA

Coronavirus inspires:

Immediate elimination of all US health sector discrimination in price, access or quality, between insured and uninsured

As is all get the short end of the stick of non-transparent deals between insurance companies and health sectors

https://teawithft.blogspot.com/2009/06/but-there-is-minimum-minimorum-reform.html

The elimination of risk weighted bank capital requirements that so dangerously distort allocation of credit in favor of sovereign and “the safer”, thereby disfavoring “the risky”, the always so much needed, and so much credit needing, SMEs / entrepreneurs

http://subprimeregulations.blogspot.com/2019/07/risk-weights-are-to-access-to-credit.html

It marks a beautiful opportunity to introduce an unconditional universal basic income UBI, a citizens’ dividend, that could be funded with high carbon taxes and a tax on the advertising revenues derived from exploiting the citizens’ personal data.

http://myubi.blogspot.com/2017/01/my-universal-basic-income.html

The keeping the big lean tax

No matter how optimistic we can be about that all the assets the US government acquires during the current financial crisis will be fairly priced, there is no doubt that the whole crisis is going to be extremely expensive for the public sector. The costs will have to be paid by taxes or, in its absence, by inflation.

In this respect society has a vested interest in finding new equitable ways of how to pay for it, and that these are aligned with the new global realities and interfere as little as possible with the recovery of the economy. The following is a second proposal that follows up on “An income tax on profits from intellectual-property monopolies.”

The keeping the big lean tax: Tax progressiveness based on market share.

There is nothing wrong with a corporation striving to obtain a large market share. Indeed since it is the result of having a better motivated and better organized commitment to exploit comparative advantages in order to satisfy the market with better products or services at better prices, the fight for more market share benefits us all.

That said, while the market share grows, for all the good reasons, growing market powers might tempt the corporation to use competitive tools of dubious nature which could diminish the marginal returns for the society, to such an extent that they could perhaps even turning into costs that erode all previously obtained benefits.

I therefore propose we introduce tax progressiveness based on market shares. For instance if a corporation has below 10 percent of market share a 30% income tax rate applies but, if it has a 100 percent market share then it should be taxed at for instance a 50% rate, with a linear function for the in-betweens. Alternatively, if we want to avoid making the “after-tax” subsidies of inefficiencies higher it could be a progressive sales tax.

Of course the market share tax is not be applied to those corporations who have the financial returns on their activities otherwise regulated, such as the electricity distribution companies.

Of course in banking where the bigger-you-are-the-more- it-hurts-when-you-fall-on-us, a tax on size should be immediately applied, before we run out of the small local banks that do not need the credit rating agencies to know us.

PS. In the case of some behemoths, like Facebook, I prefer they help fund an unconditional Universal Basic Income with 40-50% of the ad revenues they obtain exploiting our own personal data.

It’s electricity Margarita needs

I haven't even moved to Margarita (about 15 years to go) and already I must ask my readers to bear with me because, once again, I just have to write about something related to the Island. I believe my reasons will be understood.  

This week we witnessed in the press the first skirmish resulting from the privatization of the electricity sector of Margarita, a process I have always, publicly, held as fundamentally flawed. Of course, the system broke down and the submarine cable, 22 years old and never really maintained, refused to cooperate with the new owners.

By sheer coincidence, this week I saw the publication of a series of impressive photos showing the advance of the construction of the power lines to Brazil and read about the new government's commitment to reinitiate in 10 to 14 weeks, the privatization of other electricity companies, hoping that way to raise more funds.

I will not only repeat myself I will also do it shamelessly by quoting from my own articles. There is no "I told you so" intentions but just the need to show that all the current issues were well known, at that time. In February 98, in an article named electricity to Brazil I wrote: 

"I am convinced that if we are to invest in transmission lines, Margarita for one, is probably much more deserving than Brazil. I simply don’t understand how and why an important pole of development for the country such as Margarita is being forced into more expensive generation systems such as, for example, the time-worn idea of a gas pipeline from the mainline to the island, while we are simultaneously developing mega-projects in order to export power to Brazil.

You don’t have to be an expert in environmental affairs to suspect that a 217 Km. suspended power line which must be supported by 512 towers, each of them 36 meters high, spread out through environmentally sensitive areas such as the Canaima National Park, the Imataca Forest Reserve and the Southern Protection Zone of the State of Bolívar, must have serious implications. It is not enough to assert that there will be special care taken to camouflage the towers in order to reduce contrast with the horizon.

I propose that we study the possibility of a swap. A new power distribution system for Margarita, via suspended lines and or submarine cables, in exchange for a gas pipeline (underground) to Brazil. The latter can then build it’s own power plants wherever and whenever it sees fit."

This line of reasoning had its origin in an article published June 1997 and where I, with some vehemence expressed:  "I would consider it unjust if the Island of Margarita ended up paying the highest tariffs in the world for its energy just to satisfy the need to offer an acceptable return to an investor who would not only be required to invest serious amounts of resources in an expansion and investment plan, but also to maximize the income for CADAFE, FIV or any other state entity."

Then I wrote about 4 articles more up until September 1998 when SENE was finally privatized and the results were (for me) much worse than expected. Again I quote myself "If Cadafe and FIV say they would have been happy with the base price of US$ 35 million, why then, will they take the US$ 55 million premium away from the island? We must remember that the entire US$ 90 million, and specially the premium of US$ 55 million, will be ultimately footed by Margarita’s population" 

Although I had wanted that the concession had been sold for 1 US$ so as to obtain more reasonable rates, as a remedy I suggested in that article that at least the US$ 55 million premium be retained by the island" for the submarine cable, a new pipeline of potable water, or any other need. But, that was not to be.

In response to the government's euphoria I also wrote " We obviously understand the laughter and back slapping by State officials. We can almost hear them say “Marvelous. We have gotten rid of the responsibility of the supply of power to the island. On top of this, we have received a front-end tax payment of US$ 90 million on top of all the other taxes we will be able to charge in the future! Nobody was the wiser for it! What a deal! Let’s do the next one!” - And that is, to the tune of a minimum US$ 700 Million, what they are announcing now.

Today we can still try to mend it or at least, not make it worse. First of all, reading that the current owner of SENE is interested in the gas pipe to Margarita, let's make it perfectly clear to him that the island, as the rest of the country, is not interested in gas per se but inexpensive electricity and that in Venezuela, until now, this has meant hydro electricity. If gas is finally imposed Margarita should at least request a supply contract of gas, valid for 50 years, and at a price equal to marginal cost.

An alternative is for Margarita to have first recourse over the new funds the government will receive from the new privatization in order to recover the full US$ 90 million that was diverted from the island, and to help pay for the submarine cable that should have been put in place before privatizing in Margarita. And of course, renegotiate the whole tariff structure.

Daily Journal, Caracas, July 6, 1999

http://suombudsmanelectrico.blogspot.com/1999/07/its-electricity-margarita-needs.html