5 ms·

Can someone explain how this doesn't create an obvious inflation issue?

by timwis 8y ago

mac01021 8y ago
The state doesn't need to grow the money supply if it takes from the people the same amount that it distributes to the people. Even then the prices of various products will likely be affected, but the nature and extent of those effects are not obvious.
- AnthonyMouse 8y ago
  > Even then the prices of various products will likely be affected, but the nature and extent of those effects are not obvious. They're also likely to be beneficial, because the existing programs that would be replaced are the ones causing exactly the sort of price inflation we don't want by inflating the prices of necessities like food, housing and medicine. When the government is paying for your healthcare, you get all the unnecessary tests. When the government is giving you the cash equivalent and whatever you don't spend on medicine you get to keep, you only get the necessary tests and then have money left over to take a vacation. So the price of healthcare goes down and the price of cruise tickets goes up, which seems like a pretty good trade off.
  - kwhitefoot 8y ago
    > When the government is paying for your healthcare, you get all the unnecessary tests. Where does this happen?
    - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
      > Where does this happen? What do you mean? The entire US healthcare system operates this way. Either the government is your insurance (medicare, medicaid and similar state programs, federal employees etc.), or they subsidize private insurance through tax incentives and direct subsidies for low income people that encourage/require comprehensive insurance rather than catastrophic coverage. Then none of those people have the incentive to compare prices or decline unnecessary procedures because the insurance is paying for most or all of it.
- scotty79 8y ago
  Also I think FED constantly creates money by lending to commercial banks. It could lend less to reduce money supply when government issues money to fund basic income. This way same amount of money would get injected into the economy. Just not into the pockets of borrowers, but directly into consumers.

Can someone explain how this doesn't create an obvious inflation issue?

by timwis 8y ago

Can someone explain how this doesn't create an obvious inflation issue?

The state doesn't need to grow the money supply if it takes from the people the same amount that it distributes to the people. Even then the prices of various products will likely be affected, but the nature and extent of those effects are not obvious.

AnthonyMouse 8y ago
> Even then the prices of various products will likely be affected, but the nature and extent of those effects are not obvious. They're also likely to be beneficial, because the existing programs that would be replaced are the ones causing exactly the sort of price inflation we don't want by inflating the prices of necessities like food, housing and medicine. When the government is paying for your healthcare, you get all the unnecessary tests. When the government is giving you the cash equivalent and whatever you don't spend on medicine you get to keep, you only get the necessary tests and then have money left over to take a vacation. So the price of healthcare goes down and the price of cruise tickets goes up, which seems like a pretty good trade off.
- kwhitefoot 8y ago
  > When the government is paying for your healthcare, you get all the unnecessary tests. Where does this happen?
  - AnthonyMouse 8y ago
    > Where does this happen? What do you mean? The entire US healthcare system operates this way. Either the government is your insurance (medicare, medicaid and similar state programs, federal employees etc.), or they subsidize private insurance through tax incentives and direct subsidies for low income people that encourage/require comprehensive insurance rather than catastrophic coverage. Then none of those people have the incentive to compare prices or decline unnecessary procedures because the insurance is paying for most or all of it.
scotty79 8y ago
Also I think FED constantly creates money by lending to commercial banks. It could lend less to reduce money supply when government issues money to fund basic income. This way same amount of money would get injected into the economy. Just not into the pockets of borrowers, but directly into consumers.