Monday, June 11, 2012

Optimal tax policy on human versus physical capital


Interesting article on the American Enterprise Institute web site recently - showing that human capital inputs far exceed the physical capital input in creating our economy:
I agree with many of the article’s premises.  In fact, when you think through the course of human history, so much of wealth and power were concentrated in the ownership of land – physical capital – from the time of Christ through Karl Marx.  The past 100 years is really the first time this hasn’t been the case – where wealth could be generated from intangible assets – like education and knowledge.  And even today, this isn’t the case in many countries outside the US – for them, the ownership of land still dominates everything.
This rise of ownership of intangible asset of education has been extraordinary important in the increase in the standards of living in the US over the past century.  When you look back at the early 1900s, nearly all people attending college were from upper class, wealthy families, who could not only “pass-down” wealth in its physical form, but also the ability to generate wealth in its intangible form through increased education.  Entire classes of the US population back then, some absolutely of genius intellectual level and far exceeding the academic abilities of probably most in the “upper class,” were excluded from competing against them. 
Part of tax policy is the US has been to encourage or discourage economic behavior (as opposed to mere raising revenues for the government to spend).   This “encouragement” process began in earnest after World War 2 and remains strong today (despite the appeals of Tea Party and Libertarians). 
One of the encouragements has been to create tax credits and deductions for pursuing higher education.
Looking towards the future, and the economic benefits of continuing to have a populace where the dependence of capital ownership is less and less important, I can see where these types of tax encouragements will continue, if not expanded.
Another question, though, is whether the continuing tax encouragement of capital ownership and investment (i.e., through dividend income and capital gain tax preference rates) should remain in place.

No comments:

Post a Comment