1704
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] dynamojoe@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago
[-] Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

Not at all. Look up MMT. Modern monetary theory and economics are well beyond "spend taxes to fund programs". Governments that issue debts in their own made up currency don't need to "spend" money, they just give money to the programs they support.

[-] lud@lemm.ee 10 points 1 year ago

So money goes in and gets deleted, and then they create money and they give it away?

When I think of it, I do the same thing every time I buy something.

The money in my bank account doesn't get transferred, the bank just deletes it on their servers and then they create money and give it to the store.

[-] Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

As far as I understand that's the definition of fungibility, right? Every dollar is interchangeable and identical?

So there's no functional difference between deleting $1 and creating $1 except semantics, compared to moving $1, as long as the total value doesn't change.

The government just deleting money and printing money to pay for whatever it wants suggests that those things aren't equal, which would be the problem if it were true.

[-] stevehobbes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

That’s what causes inflation. When you print more than you delete, at a rate faster than total economic growth.

[-] Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Yes, they both create and delete money. That doesn't mean that the two processes need to be equal or balanced.

Your purchases do, or someone is owed their portion of the transaction. That's not the case when the government is writing bonds or appropriating funding to programs. They can create money freely, regardless of the tax they collect. Taxes serve a different purpose.

[-] lud@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That would increase inflation drastically, which is something governments absolutely don't want.

They want inflation to be around 1-2%. Less is no good, because rich idiots would just hoard money instead of investing it. More is also no good because saved money would just disappear quickly.

[-] Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Tell that to Japan. One of the highest spenders. Still stuck in perpetual de flation for over 20 years at this point.

It's not that simple.

[-] tryptaminev@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

You are aware of the fact that central banks are usually independant institutions and whenever the government meddles with them, that countries currency gets fucked by the market?

Also in todays interconnected financial and real economy there is only so much control any government canexert iver its currency, because the currencies values is significantly determined by the exchange from imported and exported goods.

[-] Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

While both points are true, that still doesn't change whether taxes fund these programs.

Sure there are other complexities like "how much is too much? Can we just keep doing it forever?" but those questions have more to do with the labor force of said country and their exports, and almost nothing to do with their tax rates.

[-] tryptaminev@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

The central banks control the amount of money based on the tasks they were given for their operation. That does not relate directly to the way the government is spending or taking money.

It is simply not the governments taxes and spending that is making or deleting money. It is the system of how the private banks can borrow or deposit money at the central bank with a certain interest rate,that is making or deleting money.

And youll have noticed that it is not the central bank granting loans to the government but bonds being sold on the market for the government to take debt.

[-] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

MMT is techbros just trying to say, "don't look behind the microvaluation curtain, it doesn't matter." But in the amounts that they're trading on, it absolutely does matter.

[-] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It's actually anarchocommunists mostly.

this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
1704 points (87.4% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

9773 readers
173 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS