←back to thread

100 points robtherobber | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.406s | source
Show context
mc32 ◴[] No.45675831[source]
If Covid conditions had gone on longer, decades, then output would have gone down, the treasury from which subsidies and government checks came from would have dried up. Even bullshit jobs add to GDP. Even socialist and communists had bullshit jobs to keep people busy.

That said, the jobs I’d consider non essential are things like advertising, lifestyle, gambling/gsming and the sort. They add to the economy but I’d rather not have them.

replies(5): >>45676113 #>>45676319 #>>45676539 #>>45679537 #>>45680580 #
jmcmichael ◴[] No.45676539[source]
Federal spending is not funded by taxes, the US Treasury will never 'dry up', and the US will never default on its debts or entitlements. It may fail to pay, however that is not a default, it is a refusal or repudiation of an obligation.
replies(1): >>45676578 #
mc32 ◴[] No.45676578[source]
...so paying taxes is just there to control people and expropriate their money? Please let Newsom in on this discovery. He says he's for the common man and woman. He's gotta do something.

But sure, Weimar had more money than god --it just had no purchasing power.

replies(3): >>45677215 #>>45677327 #>>45679550 #
immibis ◴[] No.45679550[source]
There are (at least) two different ways of viewing this equation.

One view is that the government has a stockpile of money and can give out money as long as it has some and has to get more to refill its stockpile lest it run out. Taxes refill the stockpile. Bonds are borrowing money to keep the pile fuller for a fixed term.

Another view is to notice that the government stockpile is connected to the money printer, so it's not really a stockpile but actually has infinite capacity and can't run out. The cons of spending too much are not running out, but rather they are the cons of overprinting money - inflation. Infinity plus anything is still infinity, so taxes don't refill the stockpile (it's infinite) but they do unprint money to prevent excessive inflation. Bonds are paying people to unprint their money for a fixed term, at the end of which it is reprinted.

These are isomorphic models of the same system, which provide different insights.

replies(1): >>45679722 #
marcus_holmes ◴[] No.45679722[source]
Note that only governments that can print money can use your second model. So in the USA, only the Federal govt. California only has access to the first model, and could go bankrupt and/or default on bonds.
replies(1): >>45681935 #
1. nradov ◴[] No.45681935[source]
US states are sovereigns and so they can't literally go bankrupt. But they can become insolvent and cease paying on their obligations. Based on current credit ratings, if any state is going to become insolvent it's more likely to be Illinois than California.
replies(1): >>45685858 #
2. immibis ◴[] No.45685858[source]
That's a semantic game playing on the exact legal definition of "bankrupt". You know what they meant: a US state can run out of money.