We're seeing the unravelling of Western society, democracy, political and other checks and balances and the complete fall into the immoral abyss, and once morality itself becomes optional everything quickly becomes tainted and corrupt. We're seeing this everywhere, we had a taste of it with Johnson and Cummings. Money is shifted upwards and our media deals in division, distraction and deception as a matter of course. Money is their god, that's all any of them care about. Cuts everywhere, broken infrastructure, rising prices, crocked privatised utilities, low wages for the majority, slashing welfare to pay for the kleptocracy of those in power.
It's good to see you state that "National economies do not function like households or businesses". This is a common myth that you rightly debunk. However, in that link you then perpetuate another damaging myth when you state "A national economy relies upon taxes imposed upon its citizens for income". This is simply not true. When the government spends on anything it creates new money. It is not reliant on taxes to fund public spending. Taxes are required for a number of other important reasons (eg to remove money from the economy to prevent inflation) but funding of our public services is not one of them. It's really important that this is understood as it moves the terms of the debate about public expenditure from "can we afford it" to "will spending the money cause other issues eg inflation". A government that issues it own currency does not have any financial constraints. Does this mean that they can spend like a drunken sailor? Of course not. Real resources (labour, skills, expertise, land, machinery etc) need to be available or you face the prospect of inflation. It exposes that austerity, and the pain and suffering it inflics on large parts of the population, was and is a political choice. The government is able to invest in the NHS, education, welfare etc if they have the political desire, improving the lives and standard of living of millions of people.
Yet they choose not to. The desires of the majority are drowned out for the desires of an increasingly powerful and wealthy elite who are protected from the social, political and economic policies that adversely affect most of us whilst further enriching them. The moral imperative however, remains.
"especially if that currency happens to be the reserve currency of the entire global economy!".
This is now a false statement. Many nations are now turning their back on the dollar and many are considering selling their US bonds. The petro-dollar has already died. The economic disaster facing the Empire is far worse than many will admit. China has won.
This is not good for Americans, this two men showed be discussing their difference in private not on Social Media.
More like two narcissists who couldn't deserve each other more.
We're seeing the unravelling of Western society, democracy, political and other checks and balances and the complete fall into the immoral abyss, and once morality itself becomes optional everything quickly becomes tainted and corrupt. We're seeing this everywhere, we had a taste of it with Johnson and Cummings. Money is shifted upwards and our media deals in division, distraction and deception as a matter of course. Money is their god, that's all any of them care about. Cuts everywhere, broken infrastructure, rising prices, crocked privatised utilities, low wages for the majority, slashing welfare to pay for the kleptocracy of those in power.
Hypocrisy and corruption on an industrial scale.
It's good to see you state that "National economies do not function like households or businesses". This is a common myth that you rightly debunk. However, in that link you then perpetuate another damaging myth when you state "A national economy relies upon taxes imposed upon its citizens for income". This is simply not true. When the government spends on anything it creates new money. It is not reliant on taxes to fund public spending. Taxes are required for a number of other important reasons (eg to remove money from the economy to prevent inflation) but funding of our public services is not one of them. It's really important that this is understood as it moves the terms of the debate about public expenditure from "can we afford it" to "will spending the money cause other issues eg inflation". A government that issues it own currency does not have any financial constraints. Does this mean that they can spend like a drunken sailor? Of course not. Real resources (labour, skills, expertise, land, machinery etc) need to be available or you face the prospect of inflation. It exposes that austerity, and the pain and suffering it inflics on large parts of the population, was and is a political choice. The government is able to invest in the NHS, education, welfare etc if they have the political desire, improving the lives and standard of living of millions of people.
Yet they choose not to. The desires of the majority are drowned out for the desires of an increasingly powerful and wealthy elite who are protected from the social, political and economic policies that adversely affect most of us whilst further enriching them. The moral imperative however, remains.
"especially if that currency happens to be the reserve currency of the entire global economy!".
This is now a false statement. Many nations are now turning their back on the dollar and many are considering selling their US bonds. The petro-dollar has already died. The economic disaster facing the Empire is far worse than many will admit. China has won.