Why I am a Democratic Socialist
I disagree with such neo-liberal claptrap. I will say why below. It is why I am a Democratic Socialist rather than a Clintonian, or worse, a follower of von Mises and the Austrians.
https://t.co/GIbmXvoMx2
I ran the numbers. If the deficit (net of net interest as % of GDP) is higher with tax cuts then there is better growth the next year than with lower deficits. This is s because bond sales eat the tax cut and stop asset inflation. The more you take from rich, the higher government purchases.
The more money households have for consumption (first order gov employees and transfers and second order - multiplier, from private sector households) the more private sector investment funded by primary share sales and debt.
Asset market activity is pure inflation. Rein in such speculation with a VAT on asset sales of at least 25%. That should also be high income & inheritance surtax rate, all of which will fund war (hot & cold), net interest and debt reduction as ideal tax reform. The other components are a goods and services tax to fund domestic military and civil sending on a regional basis (with a balance requirement so more spending automatically means a higher rate) and a subtraction VAT to cover all social and educational spending, including a much higher child tax credit.
Higher income taxes under Democrats makes lower deficits hold at 3% because asset inflation is lower and government purchases keep economy moving at a nature growth rate, at least until the Austrians come back into power and mes the whole thing up with boom and bust cycles which require huge deficits to both recover from and keep in check.
That deficit management helps the economy comes from the view that both sides must have something to say. Supply side has nothing to say. Growth, by definition requires more spending. Higher taxes fund that and pay down debt.
Higher rates prevent CEOs from charging economic rent through lower wages, benefits and union rights, which they then use to pay themselves and their shareholders in the secondary market (who are busy trying to inflate it, as if that were a good thing. It is not. High rates transfer all savings to the government, so no savings are attempted. The only problem is that sometimes wage and price inflation occurs. If this happens, slightly lower tax rates could control but not eliminate such inflation.
https://t.co/GIbmXvoMx2
I ran the numbers. If the deficit (net of net interest as % of GDP) is higher with tax cuts then there is better growth the next year than with lower deficits. This is s because bond sales eat the tax cut and stop asset inflation. The more you take from rich, the higher government purchases.
The more money households have for consumption (first order gov employees and transfers and second order - multiplier, from private sector households) the more private sector investment funded by primary share sales and debt.
Asset market activity is pure inflation. Rein in such speculation with a VAT on asset sales of at least 25%. That should also be high income & inheritance surtax rate, all of which will fund war (hot & cold), net interest and debt reduction as ideal tax reform. The other components are a goods and services tax to fund domestic military and civil sending on a regional basis (with a balance requirement so more spending automatically means a higher rate) and a subtraction VAT to cover all social and educational spending, including a much higher child tax credit.
Higher income taxes under Democrats makes lower deficits hold at 3% because asset inflation is lower and government purchases keep economy moving at a nature growth rate, at least until the Austrians come back into power and mes the whole thing up with boom and bust cycles which require huge deficits to both recover from and keep in check.
That deficit management helps the economy comes from the view that both sides must have something to say. Supply side has nothing to say. Growth, by definition requires more spending. Higher taxes fund that and pay down debt.
Higher rates prevent CEOs from charging economic rent through lower wages, benefits and union rights, which they then use to pay themselves and their shareholders in the secondary market (who are busy trying to inflate it, as if that were a good thing. It is not. High rates transfer all savings to the government, so no savings are attempted. The only problem is that sometimes wage and price inflation occurs. If this happens, slightly lower tax rates could control but not eliminate such inflation.
posted by Michael Bindner at 7:24 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home