4 ms·
It seems that you're largely restating what the comment you replied to was saying. If not, please correct me because I may be missing some nuance that I shouldn
by BuckRogers 4y ago
It seems that you're largely restating what the comment you replied to was saying. If not, please correct me because I may be missing some nuance that I shouldn't have. In that line of thought though, cutting taxes without cutting spending increases inflation. Because the borrowing of newly printed money doesn't stop. Without 1:1 cuts in spending it's problematic. That's what happened in 2017[0], a ~2.3 trillion dollar "charge" without increasing wages or jobs. As we see today. We were already at historically low tax rates while deficit spending, and then taxes were cut. I'm not a "supply side" guy so I'm not surprised that things didn't work out. Maybe someone will try to link growth in 10 years back to it. :)
I'm for low taxes of course. I don't know too many that aren't. But they have to make sense as well.
[0]https://www.thebalance.com/cost-of-trump-tax-cuts-4586645 https://www.thebalance.com/cost-of-trump-tax-cuts-4586645
- dragonwriter 4y ago> It seems that you're largely restating what the comment you replied to was saying The comment I responded to said government can cause inflation by destroying money by increasing taxes. That's backwards, destroying money is deflationary.
- BuckRogers 4y agoOh my bad, I must’ve read the parent incorrectly. Rereading it now, I see my error. Yes I agree with you. It is a pretty simple concept. Any mechanism that reduces the amount of money in circulation has a deflationary effect.