Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Residential Real Estate Crash Index -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gpowell who wrote (13834)	9/22/2003 8:37:32 PM
From: Elroy Jetson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

You are perplexed as to how deficit spending destroys national wealth. Like many national socialists you will need many years of education in economics to fully understand this concept, but here are some hints. A.) If our government eliminated all taxes and used newly created money from the Federal Reserve to fund their operations, our national capital would be devalued and thus it would be partially destroyed. From your myopic point of view you might argue that the very same dollar amount of savings would still exist so no wealth was destroyed - but the wealth would buy less so it was destroyed all the same. B.) If our government borrows a large amount of money from China to pay for "tax cuts" or other subsidies, (the George W Bush solution) the national wealth has been transferred to China. You may argue the wealth still exists, it's merely owned by someone else - but once again you have missed the point. C.) If the US cut back on spending we could actually increase national wealth. 1.) Let's say Bush surrendered to Iraq - we could immediately save at least $87 billion and add that to our national wealth. 2.) Let's say Bush cut back on his newly enacted farm subsidies - we could immediately save even more and add it to our national wealth. An education in economics will help clarify these matters for you further. But suffice it to say, you cannot both invest national wealth and spend the same wealth elsewhere. Spending cuts increase national wealth - tax cuts do not.

To: gpowell who wrote (13834)	9/23/2003 1:25:34 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 306849

"How does a dollar kept by you rather than transferred to the federal government constitute a destruction in wealth?" Sorry to butt in, but it is very simple: a dollar kept by you will be likely spent on a tip in a junk restaurant, or for an extra bag of donuts you do not need anyway. Many dollars collected together in government programs allow the country to run advanced research and develop new technologies, and fund academic research which generates new ideas and helps to better educate our children. "Generally, and for reasons for more complex than I will present here, far more wealth is created in the long run when individuals are free to pursue their own interests as opposed to any form of centralized economic decision making. This is a fact conceded by every economist in the world." I think you omit al least half of the equation here. To "pursue heir own interests", "free individuals" must operate in certain "free" environment. What do you think creates this environment and maintains its relative stability? The social "deadweight" you are referring to is an inseparable part of any society, and the society has to deal with it, which comes at some cost. "So when someone utters something like “We could give your money back to you, but you might not spend it right”, realize you are talking to either an ignoramus or someone who takes you for an ignoramus." It sounds like it's only you who know exactly where to spend your money most effectively ;-) I bet, a statistical taxpayer would rather vote for a sixpack and a bag of popcorn rather than voluntarily give away his extra dollar for a bioengineering or space research he has no clue about and never heard of. Like the DARPA project. Sorry to be such an ignoramus. - Ali