3 ms·
You are not addressing the fact that their lever deincentivize investment and therefore production, an argument worsening inflation and you are not addressing m
by SemanticStrengh 4y ago
You are not addressing the fact that their lever deincentivize investment and therefore production, an argument worsening inflation and you are not addressing my point saying that VAT is obviously a direct measure to reduce demand, without impacting investment as directly, finally my VAT locality on the most critically underproducing sector yet non affecting the unaffected companies that produce just fine, is a third argument.
This is pretty basic.
The answer is more likely to be that the U.S never had a VAT and creating one has tragic political inertia and hence the FED use the wrong tool but the one it dispose.
- junofan 4y agoWe have that. They’re called automatic stabilizers. There are a ton of them. For example, when people make more money, they pay a higher tax rate.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- boringg 4y agoI didn't respond to you argument because it was incoherent and unrelated: Why are you even discussing VATs? Politically infeasible and not a tool at the disposal of the Fed - its at the disposal of the legislature. Also it doesn't solve the problem that the Fed has - which is reducing money supply / offloading its balance sheet and reducing inflation without tanking the labor market.
- Apocryphon 4y agoIs this the sort of analysis that led to the invention of social credit by C.H. Douglas?