Few understand how dumb they sound when they argue that the government should / can’t even “turn a profit” So you’re saying it should bring in more in taxes than it spends? For what purpose?
-
-
W odpowiedzi do @tylertringas
We should absolutely be closer to break even though.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 4 polubione -
W odpowiedzi do @marshal
I think it’s misplaced to even use break-even as a reference point. It’s about (a) do people want to lend to the US (b) do we have productive ways to deploy that capital. If we can borrow $5T at ~0% an invest in needed infrastructure we should.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 6 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do @tylertringas @marshal
Put another way, not running a deficit = there’s no way we could productively invest in our society where benefits would exceed the interest cost. At near 0% interest rates, you gotta be pretty out of ideas to run a break-even government
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 2 polubione -
W odpowiedzi do @tylertringas @marshal
Justin Jackson podał/a dalej Richard Murphy
Also: unlike a business (or a household) the federal government can print money. That lever creates a significantly different dynamic than what businesses have.https://twitter.com/RichardJMurphy/status/1337740576247197698 …
Justin Jackson dodał/a,
Richard Murphy @RichardJMurphyFifth, tax does not fund government spending. Tax is instead used to control inflation, redistribute income and reorganise the economy, but never to fund spending, and that’s true in any country with its own central bank and currency and that never use another country’s currency.Pokaż ten wątek1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 2 polubione -
Yea. I think of the silly takes come from cross-applying “business common sense” that doesn’t actually apply to governments & societies.
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 3 polubione -
W odpowiedzi do @tylertringas @marshal
Whenever I hear a politician saying “we need to run government budgets like a household budget” I
1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 5 polubionych -
W odpowiedzi do @mijustin @tylertringas
Genuinely asking: I haven’t really heard a healthy reason why we shouldn’t strive for closer to break even. Printing money taken to an extreme is dangerous, no?
2 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 1 polubiony -
Tyler Tringas podał/a dalej Tyler Tringas
This is my reason. "Break even" for governments is really the convergence point between interest rates and our ability to deploy capital in a societally useful way (above those interest rates). Almost always somewhere in deficit except w/ high rateshttps://twitter.com/tylertringas/status/1387038754989215754?s=20 …
Tyler Tringas dodał/a,
Tyler Tringas @tylertringasW odpowiedzi do @tylertringas @marshalPut another way, not running a deficit = there’s no way we could productively invest in our society where benefits would exceed the interest cost. At near 0% interest rates, you gotta be pretty out of ideas to run a break-even government1 odpowiedź 0 podanych dalej 0 polubionych -
Except that interest rates wouldn't be near 0% if it weren't for central banks printing money to buy up treasuries. In a free market, the interest rate would be way higher. There's a reason why asset prices are soaring to account for the currency devaluation happening right now.
3 odpowiedzi 0 podanych dalej 3 polubione
Also, could it be that demand for assets (and their increasing value) can also be attributed to more “regular” folks wanting to own stocks and property? (Low interest rates help, for sure, but they’re not the only factor) Also: the pandemic.
Wydaje się, że ładowanie zajmuje dużo czasu.
Twitter jest przeciążony lub wystąpił chwilowy problem. Spróbuj ponownie lub sprawdź status Twittera, aby uzyskać więcej informacji.
building