Economics Thread

mqt said:
I suspect where we disagree is the proportion of inflation caused by government spending compared to the other causes. Not all taxes and dollars spent are created equally, and as such I don’t think the deficit is quite as be-all, end-all as Elon Musk or Thomas Massie might. Instead, I think you need to balance strategic deficit spending against the societal benefits of the spending.

It’s one of the reasons I struggle so much with the enormity of the defense and law enforcement budgets. I’m not some idealist loon who thinks we shouldn’t have a military or police force. But I think the culture around spending in these areas is that more deterrence will equal more safety, and I think the reality is it just lead to the absolute worst examples of government bloat you could ever dream up while doing little to make any of us any safer and doing little to improve the lives of the people out there actually doing the work.
Click to expand...

The only thing that create inflation (i.e. the devaluation of our currency) is the creation of additional currency. The only reason we need to do that is by passing deficit spending that we can't afford.

Whether the cuts come from defense or social security, the inflation persists. And inflation crushes the young people today who can't buy a home that cost 25% of what it did for our parents.

I'm just saying the two perspectives are incapatible. If you care about helping the poor and middle class, you cannot continue the spending we have seen. But any calls to meaningful cut that spending are met with cries of armageddon from the same people.
 
mqt said:
https://twitter.com/x/status/1945155190832701604

I always enjoy how for some we can’t afford any sort of social safety net unless it involves allowing the elderly to retire in comfort. Should a 64-year-old’s property taxes be higher because his 65-year-old neighbor can’t afford to stay in his family’s home? If so, why shouldn’t those property taxes be higher so that another family could buy their first home?

It’s the same shit as tariffs. If it’s good for Walmart to pay an extra 20% on imports via tariff, why is it bad for Walmart to pay an extra 20% on some line items during tax season? Why should I pay more for American farmers to maybe face less barriers in selling beef to Australia but not for food assistance for the poor?
Click to expand...
The entire premise of property taxes are absurd

So my house has a pool and is worth more than my neighbors, despite being on the same sized lot? So I have to pay more? The entire premise dictates that the government owns the land and they are the landlord. People who outright own their house should not have to pay an annual fee to not get kicked to the streets.
 
sturg33 said:
The only thing that create inflation (i.e. the devaluation of our currency) is the creation of additional currency. The only reason we need to do that is by passing deficit spending that we can't afford.

Whether the cuts come from defense or social security, the inflation persists. And inflation crushes the young people today who can't buy a home that cost 25% of what it did for our parents.

I'm just saying the two perspectives are incapatible. If you care about helping the poor and middle class, you cannot continue the spending we have seen. But any calls to meaningful cut that spending are met with cries of armageddon from the same people.
Click to expand...
I’m happy you’ve found enlightenment in the teachings of Friedman, but this isn’t some objective and undebatable truth, and I’m increasingly skeptical of a primarily monetarist approach in an increasingly international market. My claim of course is not that printing new money isn’t itself an inflationary act. But it’s far more nuanced than you’re making it out to be here, and there are other inflationary pressures I think can be more impactful as a whole.
 
sturg33 said:
The entire premise of property taxes are absurd

So my house has a pool and is worth more than my neighbors, despite being on the same sized lot? So I have to pay more? The entire premise dictates that the government owns the land and they are the landlord. People who outright own their house should not have to pay an annual fee to not get kicked to the streets.
Click to expand...
Sure, that’s fair! But it ceases to be about property rights when you exempt people based on age, as the burden of those absurd property taxes will then fall on the rest of society, no?

I do think there should be broad exemptions for primary residences and I’m not shilling for property taxes, but the “protect the elderly from taxation” argument is a leftist one in disguise.
 
mqt said:
I’m happy you’ve found enlightenment in the teachings of Friedman, but this isn’t some objective and undebatable truth, and I’m increasingly skeptical of a primarily monetarist approach in an increasingly international market. My claim of course is not that printing new money isn’t itself an inflationary act. But it’s far more nuanced than you’re making it out to be here, and there are other inflationary pressures I think can be more impactful as a whole.
Click to expand...
I mean, it's just math. Does our military and reserve currency status have some impact? probably, but as long as we need to create more currency, our currency will lose purchasing power. This completely impacts the lower class. The rich disproportionately benefit from new dollars because there are the ones who invest it.

What about from a morality standpoint? Do you think it is moral or ethical to vote for debt that will impact children and future generations who aren't even born yet, and these people have no vote on this matter?
 
mqt said:
Sure, that’s fair! But it ceases to be about property rights when you exempt people based on age, as the burden of those absurd property taxes will then fall on the rest of society, no?

I do think there should be broad exemptions for primary residences and I’m not shilling for property taxes, but the “protect the elderly from taxation” argument is a leftist one in disguise.
Click to expand...
I'm generally not in favor of carving out exceptions for certain groups... but property taxes are so absurd I'm willing to. The simplest exception and the fairest exception would be to that people who own property with no children attending public schools should be exempt from

Secondly, there should of course be no federal deduction that blue states fight tooth and nail for

Which of the above would you take issue with?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top