3 ms·

> And those that keep consuming more than they produce will continue to lose, just as individuals do that behave unwisely. The comparision between private hous

by holri 16y ago

> And those that keep consuming more than they produce will continue to lose, just as individuals do that behave unwisely. The comparision between private households and state households is invalid. That's on of the main errors of Neo capitalism. What is wise for individuals is dumb for states. Because states households are circuits. They press and rotate money. The money they spend comes back partially. Private individuals households are linear they receive and spend money. The money they spend is lost forever for them. Money spent by government comes back as tax income by stimulated economic growth.

anamax 16y ago
> Money spent by government comes back as tax income by stimulated economic growth. You're ignoring the fact that said money was stimulating economic growth before govt took it. Govt spending is not stimulating. Stimulating spending is stimulating, regardless of who does it. Unstimulating spending is unstimulation, regardless of who does it. The difference between private spending and public spending is that private spending is usually an attempt to make money while public spending is a combination of keeping govt employees happy and buying votes. (Yes, the two are related.)
- stretchwithme 16y ago
  Taking money from individuals and using it for politically popular "investments" usually winds up destroying the capital. Politicians don't usually care if its paid back, as long they can claim credit for giving it away. Private investors are much more likely to earn a return on an investment. Which means they can keep re-investing it. Yes, you get all the "stimulating" effect without destroying wealth. Of course, its been that way wherever societies become wealthy. And government handles all of the "investments" wherever societies become poor.
stretchwithme 16y ago
I wonder at what point does a household magically transform into a state that suddenly lives by different rules. When you add the tenth individual? The hundredth? Of course, the answer is whenever the group becomes large enough so that people lose track of who's taking what. Government likes to make waves on the pond, point out the highs and distract you from the lows and how much disruption is created. When the group is small, its a lot easier to identify someone that's just splashing around and claiming to create value.

by holri 16y ago

anamax 16y ago

> Money spent by government comes back as tax income by stimulated economic growth. You're ignoring the fact that said money was stimulating economic growth before govt took it. Govt spending is not stimulating. Stimulating spending is stimulating, regardless of who does it. Unstimulating spending is unstimulation, regardless of who does it. The difference between private spending and public spending is that private spending is usually an attempt to make money while public spending is a combination of keeping govt employees happy and buying votes. (Yes, the two are related.)

stretchwithme 16y ago
Taking money from individuals and using it for politically popular "investments" usually winds up destroying the capital. Politicians don't usually care if its paid back, as long they can claim credit for giving it away. Private investors are much more likely to earn a return on an investment. Which means they can keep re-investing it. Yes, you get all the "stimulating" effect without destroying wealth. Of course, its been that way wherever societies become wealthy. And government handles all of the "investments" wherever societies become poor.

stretchwithme 16y ago

I wonder at what point does a household magically transform into a state that suddenly lives by different rules. When you add the tenth individual? The hundredth? Of course, the answer is whenever the group becomes large enough so that people lose track of who's taking what. Government likes to make waves on the pond, point out the highs and distract you from the lows and how much disruption is created. When the group is small, its a lot easier to identify someone that's just splashing around and claiming to create value.