this post was submitted on 04 Nov 2023
67 points (87.6% liked)

A Boring Dystopia

11315 readers
926 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

--If a picture is just a screenshot of an article, link the article

--If a video's content isn't clear from title, write a short summary so people know what it's about.

--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 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Accurate except for the “instead” part. Road maintenance comes from local taxes, whereas military aid comes from federal taxes.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Sorry about all the broken veterans with TBIs. We could have invested in better healthcare infrastructure, TBI treatment research even better armor and helmets for our troopers dealing routinely with IEDs. But instead we got experimental tanks with active camo, a shitty plane which we're phasing out and aid to Israel to perpetuate their ancient religious genocide program.

It's just that US soldiers are poor and expendible and people with money tell us who and what is important.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

Well if you really want to get technical about it.... No programs or spending are really funded by taxes anyway, the government just says "OK" and the numbers in the bank accounts of the companies implementing said program go up. Taxes funding things is just a myth. Taxes just delete money. So technically, nothing is funded by taxes and taxes are just a money void.

Edit: People seem to be down voting because they think this is tinfoil hat BS or something. It's not. Look up modern monetary theory. Governments with fiat currency don't need to collect money to pay for things. They just invent and issue more currency. See this video: https://youtu.be/75udjh6hkOs?si=dVpp9V5f96kLDV4-&t=1628

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

I mean this is a cute clever thing that sounds smart that isn’t.

The government pays for things. The government funds that through monetary policy that includes printing money, as well as raising money via taxes. Whether the government deletes a dollar you give them and prints another dollar vs transferring the dollar you gave them into their spending budget is super irrelevant.

It’s functionally the same and either way, your tax dollar, whether “deleted” and replaced or transferred is still your proportional allocation of funding.

This is real “I am very smart” vibes.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Same could be said about your post. It's very "haha I have a gotcha" vibes.

Yes the government deletes money. And they also create money. That doesn't mean they do or have to do the same amount of each. They can and do create more than they delete. They're not funding programs and then making sure they delete the same amount in your taxes. That's not how modern economics work.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Of course not. But none of that changes the fact that your taxes, in part, pay for what the government spends money on.

For state taxes, where the states don’t control monetary policy, it’s even less true. But it’s not really true for the federal government either.

Everyone who is paid in USD or pays in USD, in addition to people who pay taxes, pay for whatever we spend money on in one way or another.

It’s not a gotcha. Nothing was got. It’s just an absurd thing on the face of it. That while technically correct (in the sense that dollars are fungible) your dollars given in taxes will make up a percentage of total dollars spent this year by the federal government, and thus, you are paying for whatever they are doing. Along with other people.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

the wikipedia page says:

MMT is controversial, and is actively debated with dialogues about its theoretical integrity, the implications of the policy recommendations of its proponents, and the extent to which it is actually divergent from orthodox macroeconomics. MMT is opposed to the mainstream understanding of macroeconomic theory and has been criticized heavily by many mainstream economists.

i don’t think your comment properly highlights how controversial MMT is. i’m not an economist, but i don’t think it’s fair to use language like “taxes funding things is a myth” and “technically nothing is funded by taxes and taxes are just a money void”, when those claims rely on such a controversial theory.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

It's not worth your time to refute one giving youtube link as a backing reference.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes this is all true, MMT is a theory. It's in the name. Yes, it's controversial.

But those points have nothing to do with the validity of the statements I made, including the ones you quote. It's a very broad economic theory covering how things should be done etc etc.

My point is not founded on MMT, I referred to it as a "look this stuff up by starting here". That's why it's only mentioned in the edit. The mere fact that this is an even remotely acceptable implies the statements I made is valid - otherwise MMT would fall apart at its seams.

Taxes funding things is indeed a myth, and they're essentially a money void. Go read up on those specifics if you want to get into it. The video I linked has a literal explanation of this like 30 seconds later. When congress approves programs, they just allocate new funds to it, and move on. There's no digging up taxes to point towards it.

You could begin making an argument it has implications for the validity and reliability of the sovereign currency, but it has no real relationship to taxes. That's just not how modern economics work anymore.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And there are literal laws of nature that would prevent that from ever changing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I mean, potholes in my area get fixed pretty quickly, because the local government takes its job relatively seriously.