Sure, but taxation and governments do not equal capitalism.
To your point, perhaps more than you said, capitalism is exploitation all the way down, not just at the bottom.
- Posts
- 7
- Comments
- 1265
- Joined
- 4 mo. ago
- Posts
- 7
- Comments
- 1265
- Joined
- 4 mo. ago
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
The difference is banks don't control their own currency. That single difference changes everything.
Me again! (Sick of me yet?) This too is at least partly incorrect. Especially in the context of the US. While true the Treasury has ultimate control over the currency, the Federal Reserve has effective control over the important levers like rates and quantitative changes. The Fed is a private banking cartel made up of the big private banks.
Even in most other countries where central banking is government run, it's still an arms length agency.
The other dude is right as per my lrevious post and his. Taxes are neutral. Increase government spending by reducing taxpayer spending.
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
Dilution is fine, but so is export. Your usage of export isn't right. Denmark can export little tins of butter cookies, but still have buttercookies for sale domestically because they didn't export all of them. It's almost never a binary all/nothing act, so not sure why you would object on the implication it did.
Understanding what you are trying to say is a bigger issue.
But it's not difficult to understand.If a government can make money out of nothing to pay for anything it needs to (the definition of fiat currency), then it doesn't need to collect taxes to pay for things. If it doesn't need to taxes to pay for things, then what do taxes do? Taxes remove money from the economy, offsetting the money added by government spending from nothing. This is direct inflation control.
This has a lot partially correct in here too, but you're comitting similar mistakes. The logic is "unconventional". Might be too much for a convo in a shitpost, but fuckit, you're interesting, let's find out. Breaking it down:
If a government can make money out of nothing to pay for anything it needs to (the definition of fiat currency), then it doesn't need to collect taxes to pay for things.
Fiat currency being an infinitely creatable unit of account is, as you say, money out of nothing. Also, as you say, it can be used to pay for anything it needs. The part you're missing is "with consequences." If the number of dollars x velocity of money is roughly equal to the goods and services available in the economy, there is no inflation, even with its fiat nature. If the number of dollars x velocity increases or decreases via fiat mechanics, at the same rate as the total goods and services in the economy, there is no inflation. Econ 101 as you say.
Inflation comes when the number of dollars and/or velocity increase beyond the value of goods and services available in the market. In your statement you said governments don't need taxes because they can manipulate fiat via quantitative easing to create the money they need to buy things. They can, but it will necessarily create undesirable inflation. Think about it, the economy is the same, the people's use of dollars x velocity is the same, but government is adding more dollars. Its the very definition of inflation. When governments collect taxes to pay for things, they aren't creating money, government spending is exactly balanced by reduced taxpayer spending and is not inflationary. Your statement is thus incorrect.
If it doesn't need to taxes to pay for things, then what do taxes do? Taxes remove money from the economy, offsetting the money added by government spending from nothing. This is direct inflation control.
This feels muddy to my previous point. Gov does need taxes to offset public spending to avoid inflation. Its not taxes or public spending that that are used to actually control inflation. That role in normal times is served by government debt sold on world markets and most importantly the rates paid on it. In emergency situations when that is not enough, quantitative tightening or easing are used.
Going back to the previous definition based on a steady state economy, we can now add inflationary pressures from debt markets. In a global economy, debt is not directly inflationary because the debt buyers trade their claims on goods and services with the government who will spend their money, just like taxes. Oversimplifying a bit here, no "new" dollars are effectively being created in the system, just moved around from creditor to debtor. The interest paid on the debt, is potentially highly inflationary/deflationary. It isn't straight forward either so for brevity, low rates make borrowing cheaper and can goose the economy by increasing production of goods and services. High rates can similarly restrict investment, slowing the rate goods and services are consumed and produced, slowing velocity.
Governments get into trouble with this because goosing or choking your economy with rates and deficit spending have consequences. If rates are too low, borrowing increases in non-productive, consumer oriented credit. Now the consumer borrowed from their future, but there is no increase in productivity to offset the payback with interest. Like a sugar rush that follows with a sugar crash, its a big headache.
Government have a similar function with deficit spending, but they can inflate their dollars away if borrow to much. They can always pay back their debt, with the caveat being that it is devalued dollars being paid back. The balance of Creditor sentiment and government power determine where rates land at any given time.
All this to say, your understanding of taxes, money supply and inflation doesn't align enough with how the system really works.
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
You:
Not sure how that's 'exporting' inflation.
Me:
the negative impacts of "relatively more dollars chasing relatively fewer goods" are diluted among all global economies using the USD.
The second cummings of Christ.
Fixed it. Thanks.
Put a case at the UN with allies with actions and consequences or a good speech with hollow words?
Remember when the article was talking about forest fires, like my comment about forest fires?
The second cumming of Christ?
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
That's it! You answered your own question. Because it's the global reserve currency, it can inflate its money supply and gain the domestic benefits of money for nothing, but the negative impacts of "relatively more dollars chasing relatively fewer goods" are diluted among all global economies using the USD.
It's a limited and temporary advantage. As the world is finding out the hard way, any dealing with US assets now poses incalculable geopolitical risks. Not just from losing the defacto reserve status, but both from abandoning the rule of law for autocracy as well as from disruptive warmongering, tarrifs, broken deals, loss of trust and the inability to bargain in good faith.
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
You're onto a piece of something, but it's a partial truth that you've perhaps over generalized.
To your point, America is exporting it's inflation globally so it can buy things with money it doesn't have. I also agree to your point that neoliberal economics, especially how it is discussed in public through western (American) & billionaire owned media and government is a sham. This is some of the kernel of truth you speak of.
You overstate your case when you talk about taxation and economics as a whole. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater just because someone else shit in the tub.
It happened on earth?
This is a magnificent shitpost. Why bury it under a lesser one? Do not be ashamed of your talent.
- JumpDeleted
Permanently Deleted
This entire article reads like fake controvery as marketing. Yawn.
Forget or spontaneous development of agriculture in another species? Any computational xenolinguists know how to ask a squirrel about its intentions?
- JumpLocked
Taxes are cool
Feel free to play with your little strawmen, just don't fall under the delusion that you are having a conversation with anyone but the ghosts in your head.
"it should be the object of every well-governed commonwealth to make the state rich and keep individual citizens poor"
Considering that "state" here means him and his buddies, it translates into modern english as "Fuck you, I've got mine".
Can't get more conservative than that.
By "press" we mean hollow words not backed by any meaningful action or consequence.
Remember when Canada sucked its own dick in the early days of carbon accounting:
"We're fine! We have these big forests that are carbon sinks!"
Yeah...
Like fortune tellers with delusions of grandeur.