I guess that is what (.)bama was doing during his visit to Ireland, getting ideas he could import back here and recast them as his own.
One thing that has bothered me about his recent shift in rhetoric is his noting that business must begin partnering with government to promote employment, that is, hire people they don’t need as they see no growth in the US. I recall a tax that was enacted in the 30’s which Roosevelt put on businesses with “undistributed profits” which meant they were not distributed to stockholders so they stockholders could pay taxes at the higher surcharge levels in effect on the “fortunate” at that time. It is not a long reach to see him proposing a tax on the cash held by businesses above some preconceived idea of how much money they need to operate. At last estimate there was 2T in cash and securities on the books of US businesses, in the eyes of the socialist (.)bama, a fair tax would be 75% of that cash to go the G to create goverment jobs IMO. Watch for this coming to one of his proposals soon.
Will Big Business owners and corporate CEO’s grow a spine and stand up to Barky’s “invitations” to be govt-controlled?
http://www.taxhistory.org/thp/readings.nsf/ArtWeb/13F0B2FC36593DC28525751A004A3EDC?OpenDocument
“...New Deal tax officials used the Keynesian insight on progressive taxation to help sell a sweeping overhaul of corporate income taxation. Corporate managers, they argued, were shielding rich shareholders from their legitimate tax burden by retaining profits rather than paying dividends. A new tax on undistributed profits would force companies to disgorge this money by imposing a graduated penalty on retained earnings, with the penalty calibrated to the percentage of profits retained. Such a tax would strike a blow for tax fairness and close a loophole exploited by the lucky few.
At the same time, the UPT would free money trapped in corporate coffers and move it to the pockets of people who might actually spend it. If corporations obstinately refused to pay larger dividends, then the government could use the resulting increase in tax revenue for the same stimulatory effect. Treasury experts made this Keynesian case in 1937:
There are good grounds for believing that there exists in this country a considerable stream of uninvested savings which prevent a full absorption of the potential products of industry. Aside from its equitable advantages, therefore, the tendency of the undistributed profits tax to prevent over-saving by the higher income groups may be considered to be a desirable contribution.”
You don’t have to be crazy to be a Keynesian, but...