 | |
| I'm doing the same … finding the books riveting (I'm on Feast for Crows atm). Understand your puzzlement at “confusion” … :) |
| |
| |
| Oooh - that's cruel. Do it, :) |
| |
| |
| But as taxation isn't for revenue purposes, no need to increase the rate :) |
| |
| |
| Agree on broadening at least - zero exceptions with one-off increase for welfare recipients as compensation; reduces friction |
| |
| |
| Those constructs are an accounting “rule” that insists on DR = CR. Any Fed debt denominated in $AUD has no default risk. |
| |
| |
| Yes, our monetary system may fail - but while it lives, Aust Govt isn't revenue-constrained. Fed debt/surplus/deficit mean zero |
| |
| |
| Not revolutionary enough - US, UK and Aust do NOT have an economic problem, they have a political one. |
| |
| |
| Absolutely - but both sides of politics consistently misrepresent our CURRENT monetary system. |
| |
| |
| “Government” is a construct of a sufficiently large group of people |
| |
| |
| In theory, yes. But that's not the monetary system we have now (and besides - how that would be different than now? :) ) |
| |
| |
| Yes, never. And ANY spending (not just Gov) is inflationary ONLY when it exceeds productive capacity of the economy |
| |
| |
| “wealth” can be measured in many ways, but ONLY the Govt can create money |
| |
| |
| Surplus/deficit is more the result of private sector spend/save preferences than Govt policy; and is a flow, not a stock |
| |
| |
| In a fiat currency system, with monopoly supply of currency and floating exch rate, Govt is NEVER revenue-constrained |
| |
| |
| wrong - money STARTS with Govt, not us. Taxation is to create demand for currency; and is a policy instrument; NOT revenue |
| |
| |
| don't think that was me … :) |
| |
| |
| Smithton rules tonight, hey? |
| |
| |
| both the current and the prospective Federal treasurers need a lesson in the Australian monetary system |
| |
| |
| Private sector saving preferences have more impact on surplus/deficit than Gov. In Aust system, Fed Govt not revenue-constrained |
| |
| |
| Are we really ready to give up national sovereignty to US commercial interests? |
| |
