Author is implicitly agreeing with this democrat tripe: "...deficit-financed 2017 tax cuts." It's not the government's money, it's the taxpayers'. If a tax cut actually resulting in less government revenue, then the government spending should be decreased, to balance the congressional budget. But tax cuts increase government revenue! Wasn't the latest report that 2018 was a record US government tax collection year? I'm sure the congressional budget will reflect that in decreased spending and taxes, right???? Hah! Let alone is there no balanced budget, there is no budget period. And this government partial shut-down is over a continuing resolution to increase the US borrowing limit, so that the deficit spending can continue. Right?
I know that all governments fear being controlled by others, so none wants to have its currency printed by someone else. But being able simply to print more money, when more spending is wanted, is just taking on more government debt, and deflating the value of the money already in circulation. So easy to understand. And I'm not even an economist. Don't even play one on TV. And didn't stay in a Holiday Inn last night.
The author is acknowledging what... there is somelogic or truth to unlimited spending and printing money to pay the bills? Or is he suggesting he understands why nincompoops like it (or even understand it's ramifications)?
Then there is some veiled and complicated explanation about the downside of this monetary policy.... Really?
Good Lord. The monetary policy espoused by these folks where spending is funded through printed money has been tried. But the article never mentions the root cause and effect of it. It adds currency into the economy without any production. It devalues the money. It creates inflation and makes saved dollars worth less.
Magabee? Zimbabwe? The article missed the basics.
Hey, it worked so well in Venezuela!!!
At least until somebody decides they have no confidence in your currency . . . spent any Confederate currency lately, anyone??
So, a national economic policy premised on the notion of the Free Lunch. They really think we can continue to spend a trillion dollars a year (and rising) of imaginary money indefinitely with no adverse consequences. As we look through the history of civilization can we find a single instance where that’s worked? “Money for nothing and your chicks for free”
Time and time again it is shown that lowering tax rates increases tax revenue when the tax rates are too high. The problem isn't the income side of the equation - it's the outgo. Until the orgy of spending in congress (BOTH parties) ends, the deficit will continue to soar.
You mean like continentals during the Revolutionary war and greenbacks during the civil war? They either ended up nearly worthless or had to be redeemed by gold.The Constitution prohibited the Federal government from issuing paper currency.
Judging from how they behave at budget time most Republicans apparently believe in MMT too.
MMT = UNICORNS
Sadly Keynsian theory is still all the rage today. We have this obsession with consumption over production. Sadly even a GOP Congress, as we have seen, has no desire to cut spending.
Hi.
I gotta an idea. Make spending equal revenue for a few years. Like maybe a hundred years.
5.56mm
Sometimes it sort of works in some extremely stable nations, for a short time, so therefore we should make it long term policy! Brilliant!