In the wake of Sweden’s Social Democrats floating a trial balloon regarding the possibility of running on a tax-even-more-and-spend platform for the next general elections, Stockholm Metro [PDF] today published the results of an opinion poll they commissioned. As usual, the questions couldn’t be formulated any worse:
57% of 970 respondents answered Yes to the question“Kan du tänka dig att betala mer i skatt om det innebär en förstarkning av skola, vård och omsorg?”, “Would you be willing to pay more in taxes if it meant strengthening schools, health care and social care?”
60% of respondents answered Yes to the question“Bör svenska fackföreningar genom blockader hindra utländska företag från att utföra arbeten i Sverige om de inte skriver på svenska avtal?”, “Should Swedish unions, through blockades, prevent foreign firms from performing work in Sweden if they do not subscribe to Swedish collective bargaining?”
Questions I really wish they had asked:
1) Would you be willing to pay more in taxes if it meant a strengthening of schools, health care and social care?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
2) Then you would definitely be willing to pay less in taxes if it meant a strengthening of schools, health care and social care?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
3) No, it’s not a trick question. Consider this: If somebody could make a better TV more cheaply, would you buy it instead of what’s available now?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
4) Would you be willing to buy a better, cheaper television if it were made abroad?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
5) Would you be willing to pay more for a TV made in Sweden if you could buy the identical TV made abroad for less?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
6) It doesn’t matter to you where this TV comes from?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
6a) You’re sure?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
7) So you don’t think you should be forced to buy more expensive Swedish TVs if you can get the same quality TV more cheaply from abroad? (Sorry to be repetitive, I just want to be clear)
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
8) Not through tariffs, import quotas, punitive duties, or blockades?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
9) You realize that this means Swedish TV factory workers might have to find more productive work elsewhere?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
10) Is the labor that a factory worker puts into making a TV special? I mean, is it any more or less precious than the labor put into catching fish, mining copper, writing an article, programming code, or building a house?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
11) So if Swedish TV manufacturers shouldn’t get any special protection from foreign competition, then fishermen, miners, journalists, programmers and builders shouldn’t either?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
12) So you don’t think you should be forced to buy a more expensive house to help Swedish builders avoid adapting to global norms of competition, if you can get the same quality house more cheaply from abroad?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
13) Should a Swedish union, through a blockade, force you to buy a more expensive house than the one you can buy made by foreign labour?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
13) Should Swedish unions, through blockades, prevent foreign firms from performing work in Sweden if they do not subscribe to Swedish collective bargaining?
Ja [X] Nej [X] Vet ej [X]
It’s Sifo. Again.
I can’t believe you haven’t gotten any comments on this, it’s hilarious (don’t worry, that’s not another damning compliment).
Let me get this right, you’re an extreme socialism proponent but want absolute, free trade? You do see how this doesn’t work, right?
Stefan, can’t you change your template so it’ll ‘remember me’ when I want to post again? Such a pain in the ass.
Good points, loved it.
And most important(seriously this time) HAPPY BIRTHDAY for tomorrow
Why are you so sure that the people would say no to the question “Would you be willing to pay more for a TV made in Sweden if you could buy the identical TV made abroad for less?” It’s a socialist state, after all. Shouldn’t the citizens be concerned with their own industries more than the price? If their industries fail, can socialism survive? I love this blog, by the way. I just found it, and I will be reading it more in the future.
Friedrick von Blowhard: impact of taxes on work
Short summary:
For the developed world the number of taxable hours worked
turns out to be a simple linear function of the tax rate.
Specifically, the higher the tax rate the fewer the hours of
taxable work.
This does not mean though that people in high tax countries
are working less than people in countries with a low tax rate.
What is also happening is that the higher the tax rate the more
hours people will spend doing off-the-book work.
It’s hard to be for sure but it’s possible that people in
high-tax countries actually work more than those in low
tax.
What’s fascinating though is that the off-the-book work, for various
reasons, turns out to be much less productive than on-the-book
work, and thus even though they may be working as much as and
possibly even more, people in high tax countries turn out be
significantly poorer.
–mark
found at http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/001140.html#001140
[quote]
I don?t know about you, but I keep reading articles and op-ed
pieces that earnestly suggest that taxation has no particular
effect on the amount of work or the amount of risk taking in
an economy. (The authors of these articles seem quite happy
about this disconnect. It seems to promise them that we can
raise taxes through the roof without, er, killing the goose
laying the golden eggs.)
As an extremely lazy individual, this notion has always struck
me as dubious. I find my own motivation to work very much
affected by how much I expect to earn and keep. Hence I noted
with interest a research paper published by Edward C. Prescott
of the University of Minnesota and the Federal Reserve Bank of
Minneapolis, “Why Do Americans Work So Much More Than
Europeans?” (You can read Professor Prescott?s paper here.)
Professor Prescott notes that in 1993-1996, Americans aged
15-64 racked up 50% more hours working in the market sector
than did their French counterparts. He also notes that this was
not true in the 1970s, when the French worked more hours than
did Americans. In fact, the number of work hours per individual
in many of the G7 countries changed markedly over that same
stretch. The good professor was puzzled by the size of these
shifts, but noticed that there had also been significant increases
in the tax rates in Germany, France, Italy, Japan and Canada
over those same two decades. To see if the tax increases were
the cause of the labor market fluctuations, Professor Prescott
built what he terms a “standard” macro-economic model to
investigate the impacts of these tax changes on household
decisions to choose work or leisure time.
[/quote]
[quote]
I?m not qualified to sit in judgment on the details of
professor?s model. I will note that it seems to work; he cranks
out estimates of hours spent working per week per person for
the G-7 countries in both the 1993-1996 period and in the
1970-1974 period. These predictions are generally accurate to
within an hour or two of the actual numbers as reported by the
OECD. (He doesn?t do quite so well in the earlier period,
particularly with Italy and Japan, but has some explanations
for what caused the discrepancies.)
But even such an economics-challenged individual as I didn?t
find it too hard to see a relationship between the professor?s
[T] tax rates and hours worked between the various G7 economies
in the 1993-1996 period. The relationship, in fact, appears to
be virtually linear:
[/quote]
[quote]
So much, in short for the op-ed writers? notion that higher
marginal (i.e., “next-dollar”) tax rates have no impact on
the amount of time and energy the population puts into productive
labor…or, as Professor Prescott notes, into labor in the
taxed “white-market.” (He notes that what is termed “leisure”
in the OECD accounts often amounts to untaxed “black market”
or “off-the-books” work.) The impacts are clearly significant.
The professor?s model suggests, by the way, that very high tax
rates (like those observed in Italy, Germany and France) aren?t
even necessary to fund the welfare states of those countries,
and, in fact, by reducing labor market participation, impoverish
their citizens.
[/quote]