• MooseBoys@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

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

    • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      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?amp%3Bt=1628

      • affiliate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          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.

        • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • lud@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            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.

            • Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

              • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

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

            • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              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.

              • lud@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                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.

                • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  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.

      • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        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.

        • Ottomateeverything@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          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.

          • stevehobbes@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            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.

  • downpunxx@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    poor poor “palestinian” cinnamon rolls, never did nothin to nobody

    awww cry me a fucking river, guess instead of having all those islamofascist muslim nations vote against israel time and time again, they should have gotten egypt to invade gaza sooner, through it’s land crossing in raffah, to root out hamas, pij, and all the other terrorists who attack israel. what is that you say, the united nations islamofascists don’t mind when muslim terrorists attack israel and kill jews, only when jews respond with force in their defense?

    you don’t say

    Gaza was given to Arabs for self rule and determination in 2005, all Jews left Gaza, even Jewish graveyards were dug up and moved, it was theirs to do with as they liked.

    They’ve spent the last 18 years making into a terrorist Disneyland with a dozen Islamofascist terrorist organizations with the stated goal of killing Jews and destroying the state of Israel, they’ve fired hundreds of thousands of missiles into Israel indiscriminately targeting civilians, and launched countless cross borders attacks against Jewish civilians, including one that caused the largest loss of Jewish life in any single day, anywhere, since the Holocaust on October 7th.

    They were given Gaza to live in freedom and self determination, they used it to kill Jews. They were warned. They chose to ignore the warnings.

    These acts of terrorism were perpetrated by the entire Gazan community, they voted for Hamas, and allowed Hamas to rule their government for the last 17 years, Hamas and all the other Islamic terrorists in Gaza are not outsiders, they were born in Gaza of Gazans, they were raised in Gaza, they were educated in Gaza, they married and had children of their own in Gaza, their Parents, teachers, mosques, hospitals, are all in Gaza, from which they use to hid and store weapons to attack Jews, Hamas, PIJ and all the other Islamic terrorist in Gaza ARE Gaza, there has been no uprising in Gaza, there have only been attacks on Israel. This is what Gazans have supported and sacrificed for in every way they possibly could.

    And now it’s here. I do hope they enjoy what they’ve worked generationaly to achieve.

    There will be no ceasefire this time.

    • SoleInvictus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Look everyone, a pro-Israel propagandist with a bunch of easily refuted ‘talking points’ (lies). I’m always surprised they bother with places like Lemmy.

      Colonizers and apartheidists really are the scum of the earth.