3 ms·

I would say that there are moral positions where you should vote for more taxes on yourself (and others like you), not less. Because always voting for less taxe

I would say that there are moral positions where you should vote for more taxes on yourself (and others like you), not less. Because always voting for less taxes for yourself is a zero sum game where everybody loses, since the government has to be funded somehow (and I prefer it to be done via taxes versus inflation, which is much more regressive).

jl2718 5y ago
1. Price inflation is almost unrelated to monetary inflation. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=O2ZH https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=O2ZH 2. Tax collection does not change a governments ability or willingness to incur debt. 3. Government spending may not be related to ‘needs’ of the citizens. It’s just a collection of organizations and employees. They get promoted based on spending. Effectiveness is impossible to measure.
- medvezhenok 5y ago
  1. Sort of - the connector between the two is fiscal policy. We had tight fiscal policy in 2008 - that's why we saw no/muted general inflation after the crisis. We had comparatively loose fiscal in 2020 - hence the inflation now - it's not explained solely by supply chain problems and demand shifts from services to goods (though that's also a significant part of it). Monetary inflation builds the potential for price/goods/CPI inflation - whether than potential is realized depends on fiscal policy and the supply response (more redistribution => more inflation - if productive capacity can't catch up, or if we limit supply - for example ESG / anti-oil stance). 2. Governments employ debt because of the political price of raising taxes. Issuing debt is basically taxing savers via inflation over the medium term - it's more "invisible", since the government will eventually have to devalue or default on its debt in real terms (the U.S. has done it twice in the last century - in 1934 and 1971, and it's possible that a third one is coming in the next decade. It's a little trickier since the currency is no longer gold backed, but it's de-facto oil-backed. If oil goes to $10K / barrel (hypothetically), that's as good as US defaulting on its debt as far as foreign creditors are concerned). 3. True, though there are transparency measures that monitor government spending and we have rough measures of effectiveness. Government is to people what the FED is to banks - the provider of needs of last resort. It might not give you the best service or work efficiently, but it will be there when everything else goes bankrupt or refuses to work. There are things that are unprofitable and unenviable to do in a capitalist system - and we rely on the government to do them.
  - jl2718 5y ago
    1. Yes, broad redistribution of money (demand) and poor productivity growth (supply) creates price inflation. ‘Fiscal Policy’ seems like a meaningless term, so I can’t comment. But you know what is both designed to redistribute money and massively hampers productivity? Taxes. 2. You’re assuming that the budget is constant. It is not. Governments employ debt because they can. Governments tax because they can. If anything, the relationship is the opposite of the way you state it. Taxation allows them to take on more debt. Debt forces them to increase taxation. 3. Good theory. It is what I would have believed before spending over a decade in the bureaucracy. It’s neither right nor wrong, but irrelevant to the actual functioning of the system.

jl2718 5y ago

1. Price inflation is almost unrelated to monetary inflation. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=O2ZH https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=O2ZH 2. Tax collection does not change a governments ability or willingness to incur debt. 3. Government spending may not be related to ‘needs’ of the citizens. It’s just a collection of organizations and employees. They get promoted based on spending. Effectiveness is impossible to measure.

medvezhenok 5y ago
1. Sort of - the connector between the two is fiscal policy. We had tight fiscal policy in 2008 - that's why we saw no/muted general inflation after the crisis. We had comparatively loose fiscal in 2020 - hence the inflation now - it's not explained solely by supply chain problems and demand shifts from services to goods (though that's also a significant part of it). Monetary inflation builds the potential for price/goods/CPI inflation - whether than potential is realized depends on fiscal policy and the supply response (more redistribution => more inflation - if productive capacity can't catch up, or if we limit supply - for example ESG / anti-oil stance). 2. Governments employ debt because of the political price of raising taxes. Issuing debt is basically taxing savers via inflation over the medium term - it's more "invisible", since the government will eventually have to devalue or default on its debt in real terms (the U.S. has done it twice in the last century - in 1934 and 1971, and it's possible that a third one is coming in the next decade. It's a little trickier since the currency is no longer gold backed, but it's de-facto oil-backed. If oil goes to $10K / barrel (hypothetically), that's as good as US defaulting on its debt as far as foreign creditors are concerned). 3. True, though there are transparency measures that monitor government spending and we have rough measures of effectiveness. Government is to people what the FED is to banks - the provider of needs of last resort. It might not give you the best service or work efficiently, but it will be there when everything else goes bankrupt or refuses to work. There are things that are unprofitable and unenviable to do in a capitalist system - and we rely on the government to do them.
- jl2718 5y ago
  1. Yes, broad redistribution of money (demand) and poor productivity growth (supply) creates price inflation. ‘Fiscal Policy’ seems like a meaningless term, so I can’t comment. But you know what is both designed to redistribute money and massively hampers productivity? Taxes. 2. You’re assuming that the budget is constant. It is not. Governments employ debt because they can. Governments tax because they can. If anything, the relationship is the opposite of the way you state it. Taxation allows them to take on more debt. Debt forces them to increase taxation. 3. Good theory. It is what I would have believed before spending over a decade in the bureaucracy. It’s neither right nor wrong, but irrelevant to the actual functioning of the system.