pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 6 replies \ @denlillaapan 14h \ parent \ on: Which is Worse: Taxes or Fiat Money? econ
I feel exactly the same way from the other side. oooobviously taxes are a much worse problem than fiat
You can probably teach me something then. I'd love to chat 1-on-1 for a friendly debate.
However, if you haven't read the following books, then I may not be able to get my point of view across very well, and it could be an unproductive debate.
- The Creature from Jekyll Island
- They Own It All (Including You)!: By Means of Toxic Currency
- Both of Alex Gladstein's books
- Confessions of an Economic Hit Man (which I haven't finished yet)
- War is a Racket
Those are the books explaining how evil and nefarious fiat is. Then there are the books explaining how bad fiat is for society, even if you don't believe the "evil" of it. Books like:
- The Price of Tomorrow
- Broken Money
- The Sovereign Individual
And many more.
Taxes can be nefarious, but also make sense if done correctly. They aren't inherently evil, like fiat is. They are a tool which CAN be evil, but aren't on their own. Fiat is evil right out of the gate. Taxes typically provide citizens with goods/services... fiat provides Cantillionaires with extraordinary luxury while decreasing the wealth of the middle class.
I'm sure there are parts I'm missing, and books I haven't read. Maybe you can name some for me to read to learn about the other side of this.
reply
Taxes can be nefarious, but also make sense if done correctly. They aren't inherently evil, like fiat is. They are a tool which CAN be evil, but aren't on their own. Fiat is evil right out of the gate. Taxes typically provide citizens with goods/services... fiat provides Cantillionaires with extraordinary luxury while decreasing the wealth of the middle class.
also: I was Lyn's editor for Broken Money, so it's HILARIOUS for you to throw that in my face.
reply
:(
I thought I made it clear that I want to learn your perspective. There are probably parts of this that I don't understand. I'm going to offer my perspective, for the sake of conversation. But I was clear that I'm trying to be humble in my position, because there's a lot I don't know.
I know there are a lot of classically trained economists in this territory who can teach me.
So, I wasn't "throwing anything in your face", or trying to be condescending. I'm genuinely trying to learn, and explaining where my current understanding lies, and the books that have taught me.
It's possible I've spent too long reading about how fiat works, and I have a blindspot on the taxes side. That was the point of wanting to debate. I asked you for book recommendations. I want to learn, not be rude, or have others be rude at me.
reply
I thought your comment was totally reasonable and humble. too bad you didn't get a polite or constructive response.
reply
yahyah, w/e. This is SN, we're snarky here
reply
straight up, your initial comment can just replace "tax" and "fiat" and still work, which would indicate that there's something off.
More importantly, taxes are MAGNITUDES larger in contemporary Western soc than the extractive benefit from fiat currencies. E.g., my Twitter interaction w Larry Lepard:
I also don't know what part of the world you live where taxes neatly/accurately/appropriately "provide citizens with goods and services." And to the extent they do, your entire thesis is based on a disingenuous comparison... what, fiat money doesn't provide the services of a monetary system (acceptably well)?
reply