Unemployed need not apply

The government collects taxes and puts the monies back to be spent which stimulates the economy.

Yes, the government destimulates the economy and then stimulates the economy.
With the usual government losses due to overhead and inefficiency.

If you can make an argument that taxes destimulate an economy.

If you tax my activity at a high enough rate, I'll reduce that activity.
Liberals do that all the time when they want to reduce smoking by taxing it.

If you tax my activity at a high enough rate, I'll reduce that activity.

Wouldn't that depend if the activity was already on-going? Any smart business person that increases or starts an activity (financial) already has tax savings or reduction in place.

Liberals do that all the time when they want to reduce smoking by taxing it

Originally it was liberals, today it's bi-partisan.

If you tax my activity at a high enough rate, I'll reduce that activity.

Wouldn't that depend if the activity was already on-going? Any smart business person that increases or starts an activity (financial) already has tax savings or reduction in place.


A high enough tax will reduce on-going activity and discourage new activity from taking place.
 
A high enough tax will reduce on-going activity and discourage new activity from taking place.

Again, depends on the activity.

For instance, I purchased a note package on one of my suppliers, a MESBIC invested business. My plan was for the supplier to default. They did, and I took over their operation. Because of the form of company I received a huge tax break, not only on the original transfer, but on future profits.

Again, depends on the activity.
 
A high enough tax will reduce on-going activity and discourage new activity from taking place.

Again, depends on the activity.

For instance, I purchased a note package on one of my suppliers, a MESBIC invested business. My plan was for the supplier to default. They did, and I took over their operation. Because of the form of company I received a huge tax break, not only on the original transfer, but on future profits.

Again, depends on the activity.

Again, depends on the activity.


Which activity does not respond to higher tax rates?
 
A high enough tax will reduce on-going activity and discourage new activity from taking place.

Again, depends on the activity.

For instance, I purchased a note package on one of my suppliers, a MESBIC invested business. My plan was for the supplier to default. They did, and I took over their operation. Because of the form of company I received a huge tax break, not only on the original transfer, but on future profits.

Again, depends on the activity.

Again, depends on the activity.


Which activity does not respond to higher tax rates?

My buying an existing MESBIC and eliminating a default.
 
A high enough tax will reduce on-going activity and discourage new activity from taking place.

Again, depends on the activity.

For instance, I purchased a note package on one of my suppliers, a MESBIC invested business. My plan was for the supplier to default. They did, and I took over their operation. Because of the form of company I received a huge tax break, not only on the original transfer, but on future profits.

Again, depends on the activity.

Again, depends on the activity.


Which activity does not respond to higher tax rates?

My buying an existing MESBIC and eliminating a default.

Why not?
 
no it doesn't. a bank does not burn its money when it fails

Yes it does.

how??? If a bank loans me $one million for a business venture, the business fails, I don't pay back the money, the bank fails, but money supply stays the same and prices to not fall 34%.

If a bank loans me $one million for a business venture, the business fails, I don't pay back the money,

Correct, so what happens when the depositor comes looking for his $1 million?

What if the original bank sells the note?

What if the original bank sells the defaulted note?
Why don't you explain what happens?
it goes to a third party collection agency?
 
Which again would not need as much stimulating had not the money been taken out of it.

The government collects taxes and puts the monies back to be spent which stimulates the economy.
The economy wouldn't need as much stimulating if we didn't take as much money out of it every year.
i agree to disagree; capitalism thy name is boom and bust (cycles).

Economies all have boom or bust cycles and they become worse when government tries to alter them. If the cycles are run without government intervention they tend to be smaller and not as lengthy.
 
Which again would not need as much stimulating had not the money been taken out of it.

The government collects taxes and puts the monies back to be spent which stimulates the economy.
The economy wouldn't need as much stimulating if we didn't take as much money out of it every year.
i agree to disagree; capitalism thy name is boom and bust (cycles).

Economies all have boom or bust cycles and they become worse when government tries to alter them. If the cycles are run without government intervention they tend to be smaller and not as lengthy.
that was true in the past; we may have learned from our historical mistakes.

with the "social" programs we have in place since the boom and bust of 1929, there is no possibility of a repeat of the Great Depression, ceteris paribus.
 
What if the original bank sells the defaulted note?
Why don't you explain what happens?

It depends on what kind of note.

Why?

A mortgage note isn't handled the same way as an equipment note. Regulations.

A mortgage note isn't handled the same way as an equipment note. Regulations.

Does this have anything to do with the original money supply discussion?
Or are you just Googling something to try to sound knowledgeable?
 
If you don't know how loans increase the money supply, just say so.

banks make loans all the time every day and it does not increase the money supply unless the Fed lets them make enough loans to increase the money supply. If loans always increased the money supply inflation would be 10,000% not 1.78%
 
Economies all have boom or bust cycles and they become worse when government tries to alter them. If the cycles are run without government intervention they tend to be smaller and not as lengthy.

except that most cycles like the Great Depression and recent housing collapse are caused by liberal govt intervention.
You say economies have boom and bust cycles when really you mean liberal govt causes boom and bust cycles.
 
What if the original bank sells the defaulted note?
Why don't you explain what happens?

It depends on what kind of note.

Why?

A mortgage note isn't handled the same way as an equipment note. Regulations.

A mortgage note isn't handled the same way as an equipment note. Regulations.

Does this have anything to do with the original money supply discussion?
Or are you just Googling something to try to sound knowledgeable?

Bloviating. Read the quoted thread.
 
What if the original bank sells the defaulted note?
Why don't you explain what happens?

It depends on what kind of note.

Why?

A mortgage note isn't handled the same way as an equipment note. Regulations.

A mortgage note isn't handled the same way as an equipment note. Regulations.

Does this have anything to do with the original money supply discussion?
Or are you just Googling something to try to sound knowledgeable?

Bloviating. Read the quoted thread.

no, 1% understands nothing about monetary policy as a slow slow liberal. Why is he here?
 
If you don't know how loans increase the money supply, just say so.

banks make loans all the time every day and it does not increase the money supply unless the Fed lets them make enough loans to increase the money supply. If loans always increased the money supply inflation would be 10,000% not 1.78%

banks make loans all the time every day and it does not increase the money supply

Of course a bank loan increases the money supply.
Look up the components of money supply and get back to me.
 

Forum List

Back
Top