450
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social 8 points 3 days ago

I do sometimes wonder if you could technically still run a working government off printing money, just recognizing that doing so didnt create more value, but instead acted as a form of taxation. Imagine a government that currently holds no significant fraction of its currency. It then prints an amount equal to what is currently in circulation, doubling the money supply and in doing so presumably halving the value of a given unit of that currency. Once it has done so, no new value is created, but that government has gone from having no significant fraction of the money in circulation, to having half of it, which it can now spend.

Suppose you did this predictably, you let everyone know that you will be increasing the money supply by x percent every year, and will be re-denominating it to avoid difficult to work with numbers at set intervals. Wouldnt you technically have a functioning system for extracting value from the economy to pay for government functions?

It might not be a very good system, since all it would effectively tax is people's savings of currency and not stuff like property, and you would have to set up things like employment contracts or debts to compensate for constant high inflation rates, but Im not sure I see a reason why it technically couldn't be done.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 3 points 3 days ago

You kinda just explained modern monetary theory. The US, UK, Canada, and a few other countries don't get money from taxes, they owe debt to themselves and earn it back through the next printing. There is a budgetary limit though, which is the amount of labor and resources available to the government

[-] daw@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago

Taxation is necessary to counter overaccumulation

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Randomgal@lemmy.ca 6 points 3 days ago

This is literally how monet works though. It's made up.

load more comments (1 replies)

are we still in the "the state should just go further into debt to pay for infrastructure" or already in the "fuck, that was a big mistake, what do we do with all that debt now?" stage? i can't tell anymore.

[-] daw@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago

Riddle me this: where does money come from?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] JargonWagon@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Why not both?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SabinStargem@lemmings.world 2 points 2 days ago

I started turning my American Dollars into Euros. Here's hoping that mitigates the economic damage that will come from Elon's stupidity.

Honestly, I don't like messing around with money since I don't really understand it...but if I don't, I fear that I won't be able to get onto a lifeboat. It also makes me feel silly being proactive. Here's hoping my Blue State would either vindicate or placate my fears.

[-] Pacrat173@lemmy.ml 6 points 3 days ago
[-] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 days ago

these don't prove that printing money always leads to currency devaluation. that's a post hoc ergo propter hoc explanation.

[-] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 4 points 3 days ago

Given we have multiple examples of printing money leading to inflation and eventually hyperinflation, and we have 0 examples of printing money not leading to that, it's reasonable to conclude there is a causative link.

[-] nsrxn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 3 days ago

we print money all the time. we are basically swimming in examples of hyperinflation not happening.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] liyunxiao@sh.itjust.works 3 points 3 days ago

MMT is the counter example to that, and it's how all sovereign currency issues work right now.

In the US, taxes do not fund the government. They haven't since at least the death of the gold standard. They act as a way to remove currency from circulation. The US just prints money and allows individual banks to print nearly unlimited money. It taxes in order to remove money from circulation and keep inflation at the target, but even then inflation isn't necessarily connected to the amount of money available, just the perception of money available.

There's plenty of ways to use MMT in other ways though, to print more money. If we create a function to invalidate 'dead' or noncirculated money, then we can print triple thr amount of money we do without raising the rate of inflation... But that would hurt rich people.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] cobysev@lemmy.world 4 points 3 days ago

Imagine there's a new issue of a famous comic book being printed (the series doesn't matter; take your pick). But the caveat is that there's only going to be ONE copy printed. Only one in existence. That single issue could potentially be worth millions, because it's so desirable for comic book nerds and they all want to get their hands on it. Only the wealthiest of collectors will be able to throw enough money at it to win an auction, which raises its value significantly.

Now imagine the publisher decides to make 100 copies instead. The value of that issue is now much cheaper; maybe worth several thousand dollars per comic, because there are a handful of them floating around now. Still, only wealthy collectors will be able to afford bidding on a copy, but at least the top 100 bids will win a copy. Raising the value, but not as much as if they are all bidding on a single product.

Now imagine 100,000 copies are made. Now it's mostly a standard printing, and it's only worth the cover price for a comic nowadays (what, like $3.99 or so?)

The more copies that are out there, the easier it is to find and acquire, and thus the cheaper its value is. Same goes for money; the more printed bills that are out there, the less value each bill has, and you'll need more of them to afford basic products. Which is why inflation is a thing, because we're constantly printing more money each year.

In reference to my point about comic book values, there are only about 100 copies left in existence of the first Superman comic (Action Comic #1). A single copy sold last year for $6 million, and its condition was only rated 8.5/10, which means it's a little rough around the edges from wear and tear. Not even a pristine comic book, and it still cost millions to buy!

That same issue sold for 10 cents when it was first made in 1938, but the fact that comics were made to be read and then discarded back then means most people never held on to their comic books and their numbers have dwindled over the years. Now Superman is a huge deal - one of the best-selling comics of all time - and his first appearance in a comic book is so rare, people will spend millions just to have an original copy.

[-] konki@lemmy.one 4 points 3 days ago

Then, imagine if the comic printing company had a guy with a gun going around demanding everyone give him an amount of comic books each year. Now suddenly everyone is looking to get the comic books, driving their values up.

This is how taxes are driving the value of modern money.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2025
450 points (100.0% liked)

Curated Tumblr

4269 readers
8 users here now

For preserving the least toxic and most culturally relevant Tumblr heritage posts.

The best transcribed post each week will be pinned and receive a random bitmap of a trophy superimposed with the author's username and a personalized message. Here are some OCR tools to assist you in your endeavors:

Don't be mean. I promise to do my best to judge that fairly.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS