Abstract
Reading Keith Griffin is like listening to a Frenchman presenting his ideas in three parts and ten minutes. It is clear, brilliant, and a delight for the ear, but once it is over you scratch your head and wonder what exactly the meaning of it all was. In the recent article by Griffin published in this journal (Griffin, 2003), there were two instances where I scratched my head. The first instance was when he pleaded in favour of mobility of the factor labour, not only of labour in general, but of unskilled labour in particular in order to reduce global income inequalities. The second instance occurred when he argued in favour of a compulsory tax and transfer mechanism in replacement of the old‐style foreign aid that is ‘nearly obsolete’.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
