I don’t know anything about junkies. But you’re missing the point, taxed money doesn’t come from creation rather than from someone else directly. Assume an eco

I don’t know anything about junkies. But you’re missing the point, taxed money doesn’t come from creation rather than from someone else directly. Assume an economy valued at $100. If you taxed it and passed that money to another party, it’s not going to grow the $100 at all. Because all you’re doing is shifting that ownership of that money around and in between steps losing some to intermediaries. So taxing $10 and passing it around is really some value less than $100. Meanwhile that $100 could be used to grow to $300 and everyone is vastly better off. Now these are extremes, if you took some extreme tax like 90% then the whole thing falls apart and you have the state running things and we know how that goes. Same for the opposite side, at 0% tax then things like national defense and the like wouldn’t be supported and we’d have things like other nations/parties trying to invade etc. Clearly there’s a middle ground but I’d say it’s definitely not at the current ratio of tax burden which is what 30% roughly of GDP? Might be more with future liabilities