5 ms·

> Fiat money can be printed. And inflation is a tax.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> And inflation is a tax Metaphorically. In the way time spent commuting is a tax. Or taking your kid to a doctor is a tax.
- dekken_ 2y ago
  No, it's not metaphorical. If in January, you can buy something for $1, then in February because of inflation it becomes $1.10, that's a 10% tax increase. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgSqZKx0mNI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgSqZKx0mNI
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > No, it's not metaphorical It is, though largely due to confusion rather than intentional metaphor. (Exception: when described as a “shadow tax,” though that is still a close metaphor and only applies to debt-monetising monetary inflation.) > If in January, you can buy something for $1, then in February because of inflation it becomes $1.10, that's a 10% tax increase You’re confusing taxes and costs. When Russia invaded Ukraine, they didn’t levy a tax on poor Egyptians even though Moscow’s actions raised their food costs. Cost increases are taxing [1]. Confusing something taxing with a tax [2] is a common mistake but still wrong. (And valiantly wrong in a policy context.) [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/taxing#h1 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/taxing#h1 [2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tax https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tax
    - dekken_ 2y ago
      Tax is a cost. If a government spends more than it takes in, in taxation, the difference has to come from somewhere, and invariably, it comes via inflation. The choice to spend more than the governemnt has, is a choice, and is imposed, so is a tax.
      - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > Tax is a cost Not all costs are taxes… > If a government spends more than it takes in, in taxation, the difference has to come from somewhere, and invariably, it comes via inflation Governments spent more than they earned before fiat currencies. They made up the difference by borrowing. Borrowing isn’t fundamentally inflationary; this is trivial to show with commodity money. > choice to spend more than the governemnt has, is a choice, and is imposed, so is a tax Every commemorative bill is a government choice. That doesn’t make National Talk Like a Pirate Day a tax proposal [1]. Consider the implications of your definition. Every cost and every government choice is a tax. At this point, taxes are so naturally occurring as to make the word meaningless. You get a pay raise? A tax on your employer! Tesla stock goes up? Musk is taxing you! Governor went on a walk instead of driving? Taxation! Cat got sick? Mittens is taxing me with vet bills! [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Talk_Like_a_Pirate_Day https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Talk_Like_a_Pi...
        dekken_ 2y ago
        > every government choice is a tax I realize you have interpreted my comment as suggesting this, but that really wasn't my intent. It was really just about tax vs spend, and if they differ.
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > It was really just about tax vs spend, and if they differ Consider a kingdom on the gold standard that borrows the gold it spends. Their actions do not change the monetary base. They do increase the velocity of money, but by no more than had they taxed it (minus wealth effects).
        dekken_ 2y ago
        > that borrows the gold it spends. I must be retarded because I don't see how this makes a difference. Even if you're getting 0% interest loan (unlikely) you still have to pay it back, which will eat into future taxation? And if you don't pay it back they would be justified adding duties to all exports, recouping that way, by inflated prices... > Their actions do not change the monetary base. Assuming they don't find more gold...
selectodude 2y ago
It’s not a tax, it’s a time decay in the value of labor. Work done today is worth more than work done in the past.
- mr_toad 2y ago
  It’s a tax on anyone who has cash or the equivalent.
- dekken_ 2y ago
  > Work done today is worth more than work done in the past. This is not provable.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - vel0city 2y ago
    I mowed my lawn six weeks ago. Is that labor worth the same, more, or less than the labor of me mowing it today?
    - dekken_ 2y ago
      Is labor worth anything? How do you find out? How do you define "value"? We can continue this if you like, but I would be lying if I said I wasn't leading you somewhere...
      - vel0city 2y ago
        > I would be lying if I said I wasn't leading you somewhere You're leading me nowhere because you aren't actually saying anything at all. Try actually answering questions if you want to lead someone somewhere. > How do you define "value"? At a basic level, usefulness. > Is labor worth anything? Yes, I value (it is useful to me) being able to leave my house without everything being overgrown. I value (it is useful to me) having the yard not overgrown to the point wildlife take over my yard and invade my home. I value (it is useful to me) to not have the trees overgrow above my roof and eventually lose limbs on to my roof. The way I achieve these useful things is by labor. So the labor is useful, it has value. > How do you find out? I look at the usefulness of that labor. What would it cost for me to hire exterminators once rats and snakes and bugs take over the yard and then my house? What would I have to trade for a doctor to heal me once I get sick from the rodent infestation? How would I repair my home after the damage from the infestations? What does a new roof cost if I don't maintain my trees? How much do I have to work to ensure these things don't happen? Then finally, given the fact I only have 24 hours in a day and I have other wants, is it useful to me to exchange something with someone else (something they find use of) to do it for me. But going back to "is past labor less valuable than current labor", well, today do I care more about the lawn being mowed and the trees trimmed properly or do I just value that I did it six weeks ago and that's good enough for me now? In the end, today the trees are overgrown. The lawn is getting tall. Rats are starting to live in the bushes. I need to get out there now, despite the fact I did it six weeks ago. The value of that work I did then is now less, because the realities of the world continued changing. A baker baked a loaf of bread a month ago. Is that labor still worth something today? Is that labor worth the same, more, or less than if he baked a loaf of bread today? Try answering any of these questions next.
mistrial9 2y ago
this is flatly false equivalence.. it is a political statement because it is widely understood on a political topic. Any analysis beyond the most superficial and dramatic shows that this is not at all equivalent.
- dekken_ 2y ago
  This isn't an argument.

> And inflation is a tax Metaphorically. In the way time spent commuting is a tax. Or taking your kid to a doctor is a tax.

dekken_ 2y ago
No, it's not metaphorical. If in January, you can buy something for $1, then in February because of inflation it becomes $1.10, that's a 10% tax increase. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgSqZKx0mNI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgSqZKx0mNI
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > No, it's not metaphorical It is, though largely due to confusion rather than intentional metaphor. (Exception: when described as a “shadow tax,” though that is still a close metaphor and only applies to debt-monetising monetary inflation.) > If in January, you can buy something for $1, then in February because of inflation it becomes $1.10, that's a 10% tax increase You’re confusing taxes and costs. When Russia invaded Ukraine, they didn’t levy a tax on poor Egyptians even though Moscow’s actions raised their food costs. Cost increases are taxing [1]. Confusing something taxing with a tax [2] is a common mistake but still wrong. (And valiantly wrong in a policy context.) [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/taxing#h1 https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/taxing#h1 [2] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tax https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tax
  - dekken_ 2y ago
    Tax is a cost. If a government spends more than it takes in, in taxation, the difference has to come from somewhere, and invariably, it comes via inflation. The choice to spend more than the governemnt has, is a choice, and is imposed, so is a tax.
    - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
      > Tax is a cost Not all costs are taxes… > If a government spends more than it takes in, in taxation, the difference has to come from somewhere, and invariably, it comes via inflation Governments spent more than they earned before fiat currencies. They made up the difference by borrowing. Borrowing isn’t fundamentally inflationary; this is trivial to show with commodity money. > choice to spend more than the governemnt has, is a choice, and is imposed, so is a tax Every commemorative bill is a government choice. That doesn’t make National Talk Like a Pirate Day a tax proposal [1]. Consider the implications of your definition. Every cost and every government choice is a tax. At this point, taxes are so naturally occurring as to make the word meaningless. You get a pay raise? A tax on your employer! Tesla stock goes up? Musk is taxing you! Governor went on a walk instead of driving? Taxation! Cat got sick? Mittens is taxing me with vet bills! [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Talk_Like_a_Pirate_Day https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Talk_Like_a_Pi...
      - dekken_ 2y ago
        > every government choice is a tax I realize you have interpreted my comment as suggesting this, but that really wasn't my intent. It was really just about tax vs spend, and if they differ.
        JumpCrisscross 2y ago
        > It was really just about tax vs spend, and if they differ Consider a kingdom on the gold standard that borrows the gold it spends. Their actions do not change the monetary base. They do increase the velocity of money, but by no more than had they taxed it (minus wealth effects).
        dekken_ 2y ago
        > that borrows the gold it spends. I must be retarded because I don't see how this makes a difference. Even if you're getting 0% interest loan (unlikely) you still have to pay it back, which will eat into future taxation? And if you don't pay it back they would be justified adding duties to all exports, recouping that way, by inflated prices... > Their actions do not change the monetary base. Assuming they don't find more gold...

selectodude 2y ago

It’s not a tax, it’s a time decay in the value of labor. Work done today is worth more than work done in the past.

mr_toad 2y ago
It’s a tax on anyone who has cash or the equivalent.
dekken_ 2y ago
> Work done today is worth more than work done in the past. This is not provable.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- vel0city 2y ago
  I mowed my lawn six weeks ago. Is that labor worth the same, more, or less than the labor of me mowing it today?
  - dekken_ 2y ago
    Is labor worth anything? How do you find out? How do you define "value"? We can continue this if you like, but I would be lying if I said I wasn't leading you somewhere...
    - vel0city 2y ago
      > I would be lying if I said I wasn't leading you somewhere You're leading me nowhere because you aren't actually saying anything at all. Try actually answering questions if you want to lead someone somewhere. > How do you define "value"? At a basic level, usefulness. > Is labor worth anything? Yes, I value (it is useful to me) being able to leave my house without everything being overgrown. I value (it is useful to me) having the yard not overgrown to the point wildlife take over my yard and invade my home. I value (it is useful to me) to not have the trees overgrow above my roof and eventually lose limbs on to my roof. The way I achieve these useful things is by labor. So the labor is useful, it has value. > How do you find out? I look at the usefulness of that labor. What would it cost for me to hire exterminators once rats and snakes and bugs take over the yard and then my house? What would I have to trade for a doctor to heal me once I get sick from the rodent infestation? How would I repair my home after the damage from the infestations? What does a new roof cost if I don't maintain my trees? How much do I have to work to ensure these things don't happen? Then finally, given the fact I only have 24 hours in a day and I have other wants, is it useful to me to exchange something with someone else (something they find use of) to do it for me. But going back to "is past labor less valuable than current labor", well, today do I care more about the lawn being mowed and the trees trimmed properly or do I just value that I did it six weeks ago and that's good enough for me now? In the end, today the trees are overgrown. The lawn is getting tall. Rats are starting to live in the bushes. I need to get out there now, despite the fact I did it six weeks ago. The value of that work I did then is now less, because the realities of the world continued changing. A baker baked a loaf of bread a month ago. Is that labor still worth something today? Is that labor worth the same, more, or less than if he baked a loaf of bread today? Try answering any of these questions next.

mistrial9 2y ago

this is flatly false equivalence.. it is a political statement because it is widely understood on a political topic. Any analysis beyond the most superficial and dramatic shows that this is not at all equivalent.

dekken_ 2y ago
This isn't an argument.