Sfdebris.net

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/irs-h ... s-b70fe240
Remember this when people ask what Biden has accomplished.

Nice chunk of change.

That will get us 2 extra fighter jets.

Half way to a stealth bomber!

I mean, technically taxes don't fund federal spending, so it's a moot point.

Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2024 4:38 pm I mean, technically taxes don't fund federal spending, so it's a moot point.

That’s the only thing government can spend with aside from bonds/loans.

Federal income tax is taken out of most everybody’s civil society paycheck. I’m just not sure what you’re referring to, sorry.

No, you've got it backwards. Federal spending is how the government *creates* wealth; taxes are how the government deletes wealth and creates demand for currency.

Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 2:52 am No, you've got it backwards. Federal spending is how the government *creates* wealth; taxes are how the government deletes wealth and creates demand for currency.

Yeah the government can only "spend" what it "taxes." Thus creating wealth depends on deleting wealth. Taxes are done by rates though, not livelihood, so that theory you're referring to comes off a bit post modern.

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 3:26 am

Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 2:52 am No, you've got it backwards. Federal spending is how the government *creates* wealth; taxes are how the government deletes wealth and creates demand for currency.

Yeah the government can only "spend" what it "taxes." Thus creating wealth depends on deleting wealth. Taxes are done by rates though, not livelihood, so that theory you're referring to comes off a bit post modern.

As long as they print their own money they can and do spend way more than they tax if they don't mind causing inflation. Money on that scale is a game of make-believe.

hammerofglass wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 8:48 am

BridgeConsoleMasher wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 3:26 am

Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Fri Apr 19, 2024 2:52 am No, you've got it backwards. Federal spending is how the government *creates* wealth; taxes are how the government deletes wealth and creates demand for currency.

Yeah the government can only "spend" what it "taxes." Thus creating wealth depends on deleting wealth. Taxes are done by rates though, not livelihood, so that theory you're referring to comes off a bit post modern.

As long as they print their own money they can and do spend way more than they tax if they don't mind causing inflation. Money on that scale is a game of make-believe.

Indeed. And the smaller the group proportionate to the entire population, the less costly in inflation. In fact, I've always been of the notion that discretionary one time disbursements done straight by the Treasury Department of the Executive Branch would probably not even be noticeable to the national commerce indices used to measure the value of money.

Like: "Oh the government gave a million dollars to this progressive startup across the country, I guess that means I have to raise the price of my apples because it'll make oil more expensive and demand is getting too high due to the increase in the supply of money."