My point is a simple one. There is a mass of money seeking purposeful use in developed country economies. That does, of course, imply that there must be under-taxation in these same economies: the money that the government has created is not being returned to it by way of taxation.
If anyone has any money that means taxes aren’t high enough.
In Argentina there are two currencies. The Peso and the US dollar. The Peso is used for your basic everyday stuff: coffee and cake in a cafe, etc. The US Dollar is used for anything important. Most people do not have access to Dollar bank accounts so save in personal safes, safety deposit boxes and the like. I heard a story of a guy who wanted to buy an upmarket apartment in Buenos Aires. Price $400K. The bloke turned up with the cash, a lawyer and some private security to the apartment. The sellers were there with their lawyers, private security and a set of cash counting machines. It took a few hours to complete the transaction.
What a miserable way to spend Christmas. Maybe he should go and see his friends or have a quiet afternoon in the pub? Oh, never mind.
If the government’s money has ended up in the hands of people who don’t need it, then they didn’t spend it well and perhaps shouldn’t be encouraged to do it again.
MMT also in the mud, because with record taxation then inflation is getting taxed back at record rates, and we’ve still got inflation. Taxing back only works to curb inflation if you restrain government spending.
Er, I thought banks created money?
The clown is obsessed with money, perhaps because this is the only way he can think of gaining decision-making power over other people’s goods and services.
There is a mass of
moneygoods & services seeking purposeful use in developed country economies.Seem likely to you? Nor to me.
BiS
Beat me to it. A very important distinction that Murph is incapable of making.
OT but worthy of Spud and made me chuckle but it sums up why we’re well and truly fvcked
BBC Headline: Starmer asks UK regulators for ideas to boost growth
Alternative BBC headline: Starmer asks turkeys to vote for Christmas.
Oh, we did.
….the money that the government has created is not being returned to it by way of taxation.
Why should all money created by government be returned to it by taxation or any other means? Creating a means of exchange may require regulation of the means of exchange but it doesn’t entail ownership of all tokens of the means of exchange – unless you are a demented communist, like Murphy – because the ownership of the tokens is transferred in use.
As V_P frequently reminds us, Spud has evil thoughts.
There are still a few people working in the UK with the intention (well, hope) of saving for their retirement. This means that their savings are seeking purposeful uses (pendantically someone is seeking purposeful uses for their savings) and the tax that Murphy so covets will be paid from the retirement income (“pension”) yielded by said purposeful uses.
What Murphy has failed to notice is that the government has approved of pension schemes and is willing to defer the receipt of the tax until the worker has turned into a pensioner on retirement. Even Labour governments do so because the benefits to the economy and the Labour Party are so obvious. This not under-taxation but deferred taxation. [Any savings left behind on death will be subject to IHT at 40%, twice the basic rate of income tax.] Can it be that Murphy has so atrociously failed to observe the benefits of non-state pensions that he has reached his sixties without one? Or is he being an utter hypocrite wanting the benefit of deferral of taxation for himself but not the middle-aged younger?
BinD @ 6.15, when I saw that headline yesterday my first thought was “Why didn’t he ask the water companies, energy suppliers et al how to boost growth”.
My second thought was because one of the suggestions would be to “do away with lots of regulations”.