Skip to main content

The Cost of Government is What It Spends, Not What It Taxes

The cost of government is the quantity it spends, not the quantity it taxes; that cost representing the financial burden imposed upon those who pay the taxes and all who transact within that economy or through its common currency. 

Therefore, the argument against tax cuts requires further context to appreciate why tax cuts have failed and will continue to fail to deliver economic growth, especially where those tax cuts promote or serve excess indulgence and cheap speculation. In short, it’s not that tax cuts are inherently destructive, or that reducing the tax liability of the wealthiest in society “doesn’t work”; rather, the fact is that the public debt is so high that the country simply cannot afford those tax cuts without defaulting on its debts or — which is the same — covering them through inflation.


It’s not that tax cuts are inherently destructive to economic growth, but that the deficits run higher by profligate government spending, the protracted low interest rate policy, and the onerous obstacles to real business investment have coalesced to favor stock buybacks and stock market speculation, which disproportionately advantages the wealthy without the kind of capital formation which otherwise benefits the lower classes; combined with an inflationary monetary policy undermining the real incomes and paltry savings of the lower classes, imposing artificial risks upon laymen ill-equipped to manage them and ill-suited for activities as unnatural and unintuitive as stock market speculation, these are some of the primary drivers of decadence and economic inequality. Note that this is not a symptom of capitalism but the consequences of a controlled economy. 


Free enterprise, on the other hand, actually offers the greater benefit to the laborer, whereby capital formation increases both his absolute and proportional share of the total production. The reverse of this happens where capital is decreased, where capital is syphoned from business investment toward ends unaccountable to the payers. 


The truth is that it is only through savings and scaled production, accomplished through economic efficiencies and labor-saving devices, and thereby the business investment of those managing a surplus of wealth, that capital increases and new enterprises are possible; a process specifically promoted by reducing the tax burden on those who invest in capital formation. Contrary to the socialist myths, insofar as the capitalist increases his absolute share of the total production, the absolute and proportional share of the total production going to the laborer will also increase. It turns out that the socialist is so confused that he has it entirely backwards. Indeed, it is the capitalist, not the laborer, who stands to benefit least in proportion to the increase in total production; ironically, it is in the opposite case, where capital is decreased, that the laborer stands to suffer most.


It was the French economist Frédéric Bastiat who so neatly summarized this phenomenon: “In proportion as capital is accumulated, the absolute shares of the total production going to the capitalist increases, and the proportional share going to the capitalist decreases; both the absolute and proportional share of the total production going to the laborer increases. The reverse of this happens when capital is decreased.”


This matter involves a multitude of issues, and it is essential to account for the complete context and overall conditions in the market before rushing to judgment. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Trump Victorious in 2024 Presidential Election

As of this hour, former President and now President-elect Donald Trump has secured his second term as the forty-seventh President of the United States. Trump’s victory comes after winning key battleground states Wisconsin, Michigan, Nevada, Arizona, Pennsylvania, and Georgia.  As for the popular vote, Trump was victorious there as well, winning by a one-and-a-half-percent margin. Despite these results, it’s evident that there remains a significant social and political problem in the United States, where politically-motivated violence, social unrest, crime and general instability have become rampant over the years since the death of George Floyd.  However, I’d say the fact that it was even this close is ominous for the years ahead. This was as clear as it gets for an election, that the incumbents (both Biden and Harris) are wholly unfit for any office, that they present a real and present danger where they’re allowed within twelve thousand miles of a school zone, let alone any...
Post a Comment
Read more

Failure by Design

In the case for liberty, there is certainly some tolerance for error or failure, as it is generally suffered by the individual and not brought upon anyone by design . Wherever anyone seeks to empower government, however, one must be reasonably certain of the designs, the logic and the costs, and he must be equally honest about the unknowns as with the foreseeable consequences; after all, there is no margin for error where those designs are administered by the barrel of a gun.  One must necessarily remember that government is a monopoly on force and coercion, that force and coercion serve together as the modifying distinction between government and enterprise. It is a kind of force and coercion not by spirit or intention of written law but in accordance with the letter and understanding of the enforcers in their own time, in their own limited judgment and impaired conscience. As opposed to a state of liberty, where mistakes, failures and crimes are unavoidable in the face of human f...
Post a Comment
Read more

Artificial Intelligence

There will inevitably come a time, in the not-too-distant future, when the majority of people are likely to embrace artificial technology like ChatGPT as the gospel. They will be either unwilling or incapable as far as scrutinizing its responses Just as ChatGPT doesn’t know who specifically provides its inputs, just as it doesn’t know the extent of the credibility of those inputs, and just as it will never possess the skills of nuanced thinking, people will be hampered by the same limitations while being encouraged or predisposed to relying on its judgments. It’s unavoidable.   Authority figures have predisposed artificial technology like ChatGPT and will continue to predispose it through those inputs. They will continue to leverage it as a means to persuade and predispose people, as it is itself completely incapable of discretion and original thought.  People will rely on it to inform them of not only the laws of physics but the laws and measures written and enforced. Its fal...
Post a Comment
Read more