Workshop on Public Economics
and Economic Freedom
Program
Summary of Lectures by Dr Marian L. Tupy
1. Economic freedom: what is it and why is it important?
The foundations of economic freedom are personal choice, voluntary exchange, and open markets. Without those foundations, sustained wealth creation would be impossible. Potentially advantageous exchanges do not always occur, however. Their realization is dependent on the presence of sound money, rule of law, security of property rights, etc. The Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. and the Fraser Institute in Canada co-operate on publishing of the annual Economic Freedom of the World index that seeks to measure economic freedom around the world. The index shows strong correlation between high degrees of economic freedom on the one hand, and high rates of growth, higher life expectancy, better environment, etc., on the other hand.
2. Economic transformation in Central Europe: accomplishments and future challenges.
The end of communism in Central Europe brought economic reforms that included the elimination of thousands of restrictions, the liberalization of prices and foreign trade, and the privatization of most state enterprises. It also brought increased freedom for domestic and foreign businesses to enter the market. As a consequence of increased economic freedom, incomes and longevity have increased, while child mortality and environmental degradation have decreased. Compared to many other ex-communist countries, which did not undertake similar reforms, CE has done very well. The reform process is far from finished. Will the current economic downturn lead to less or more government intervention in CE economies?
3. Corruption and size of government in Central Europe
While Central Europe has made great progress on the road to prosperity, politics in Central Europe continue to be mired by corruption scandals. The pervasiveness of corruption in the region is partly attributable to the underdevelopment of civil society and the concomitant paucity of effective restraints on the conduct of the political class. Moreover, despite the tremendous progress toward economic freedom that Central European countries have made since the fall of communism, the role of the state in the economy remains large. The private sector is burdened with too many regulations, and governments continue to spend some 40 percent of the region’s gross domestic product. To lessen the problem of corruption, the size and the scope of the state must be reduced.
Summary of Lectures Dr. Dan Mitchell
1. Principles of good tax policy, which would include discussions of tax reform and Laffer Curve.
A good tax system should collect revenue while imposing the least amount of damage on an economy's performance and vitality. This means tax rates should be low, that there should be no tax bias against income that is saved and invested, and that the law should be administered in a fair and neutral fashion rather than providing favors for particular groups. It is easier to achieve these goals if government is not too big, and the ideal system that satisfies these criteria is a single-rate consumption-base system such as a flat tax. There will be discussion about the global flat tax revolution. The lecture also will discuss the Laffer Curve, which is the notion that tax rates affect the level of taxable income and that changes in tax policy thus lead to revenue feedback. Another topic will be the difference between pro-growth tax cuts and tax cuts that don't stimulate the economy.
2. The size of government, which would focus on what government should do and the "Rahn Curve."
Government spending exceeds 30 percent of GDP is almost every industrialized jurisdictions. This lecture will review the debate over the appropriate size and scope of government. Specific attention will be given to academic research on the "growth-maximizing" level of government, which is sometimes characterized by the "Rahn Curve." The lecture will explain several ways in which government spending hinders growth. There will also be considerable discussion of the "Keynesian" theory that government spending stimulates economic growth. Lastly, the lecture will discuss the bleak fiscal future facing many industrialized nations.
3. Tax competition, which would include discussions of tax harmonization and tax havens.
Globalization has substantially increased the mobility of labor and capital. This, in turn, has led to a shift of jobs and investment from high-tax jurisdictions to low-tax jurisdictions, which has helped trigger a globl shift to lower tax rates. Income tax rates, corporate tax rates. and tax rates on capital income have declined substantially - not because politicians wanted better tax policy, but rather because they felt competition pressure from nations with better tax law. The tax-competition-induced shift to better tax policy has triggered a backlash, however, as international bureaucracies representing the interests of high-tax nations are pursuing various schemes to hinder tax competition. The lecture will discuss why tax competition is desirable, review the attacks by those seeking to create an "OPEC for politicians," and then explain why tax competition is the most effective tool for those seeking to control the size of the public sector.
The Economic Case for Tax Havens
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yi0lkJBTi58
The Moral Case for Tax Havens
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf14lkyH2dM
Tax Havens: Myths vs. Facts
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTfZADGK6TY
Tax Competition: A Liberalizing Force:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJWLemN29Wc
Laffer Curve Part I (theory)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIqyCpCPrvU
Laffer Curve Part II (evidence)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsB_rnzBA08
The Global Flat Tax Revolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBAr0MzRFU0
Why Keynesian Economics is Wrong
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VoxDyC7y7PM
Obama's So-Called Stimulus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mKE16Exh9k
Policies that Produce Real Growth
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jCaUA5l_bYc
Summary of Lectures John O’Sullivan
1.A Market of States or a Cartel of Governments?
This lecture will discuss the choice that has been before European governments and electorates since the foundation of the Treaty of Rome. Europe can moved in one of two directions and has in vacillated between them since the late fifties and, in particular, since the enlargements of the 1970s. It can either opt for regulatory harmonization in order to construct a "level playing field" for the single market. Or it can adopt mutual recognition of standards in order to foster jurisdictional competition between different systems of tax and regulation. This sounds like a purely economic choice. In fact it has profound implications for Europe's political structure and relations with other powers. It is also a choice between liberal and socialist principles. Most parties of the Right are entirely unaware of this choice or make the wrong choice.
2.A Europe of Elites or a Europe of Peoples?
Europe has suffered from a "democratic deficit" since its foundation. This has frequently been acknowledged, but little has been done about it. Proposals for remedying it in the Lisbon treaty and elsewhere are flawed at every level. This lecture will examine what at the "metapolitics" of democracy and why the EU currently lacks them. It will also examine why Europe's governing powers in Brussels and national governments, though acknowledging the democratic deficit, fail to do anything about it. And it will examine the emerging post-democratic ideas that justify this democratic deficit.
3.Europe as a World Player an Atlantic Partner to America or an Ideological Rival?
One of the strongest forces for European unity and integration has been the support of the United States. Why did it consistently take this position? And has the end of the Cold War removed some of the justifications for it? Simultaneously, has the end of the Cold War altered European attitudes to America? Different ideas of Europe's putative political evolution suggest different forms of transatlantic politics in the future? What kind of Europe will determine what kind of Atlanticism, if any. What should President Obama be thinking about this?
