Armchair Philosophy, May 25, 2020
Topic: Are taxes necessary anymore?
In lieu of the Covid-19 stimulus bill, I have begun to question the necessity of taxes for government operations. I would like to preface this in saying that I am greatly opposed to inflationary currencies and believe that fiat currency is one of the greatest scams in societal history. I do not trust it. That all said, our society is utilizing a fiat currency backed purely on the endorsement of the US government. Almost all nations in the world use this type of currency structure at this point. So my intent here is to consider how necessary taxes are under this modern structure.
The US budget in 2019 was roughly $4.5 trillion, with about $1 trillion in deficit. This year we have already conducted a $3 trillion stimulus package, which, combined with the previous deficit expectations, places this year's debt at roughly $4 trillion, and will likely be increasing in the coming year due to lower income tax revenues in the next year due to the economic shutdown. Many political leaders are also already promoting the execution of a second stimulus package, which would roughly double this absurd deficit yet again.
However, despite all this, prices are still holding steady. If the consumer price index does not increase from a deficit that matches our typical annual expenditures, I have to ask, should we eliminate all taxes and move to a purely debt driven society. I have zero confidence in the perpetuity of such a system, but if the US government eliminated their relationship with the Federal Reserve, could a zero interest currency function on being debt driven?
For those who do not know, the Federal Reserve is a private bank, not a government bank. All of the currency traded in the US are Federal Reserve Notes, meaning that they are being printed on debt to the Federal Reserve Bank. This means that the US government has to eventually pay the bank back in full for the currency, plus interest. But since all currency is printed on debt, the US can only pay off its debt by taking on more debt. To put it in more fun terms, the US was given a cake by the Federal Reserve, but has to pay the Federal Reserve back with that whole cake, plus an extra slice. The Federal Reserve is the only one allowed to make cake, so the US has to borrow a second cake in order to pay back the extra slice that the US owed after borrowing the first cake, but now the US has to pay back a full cake and a slice, while they only have a cake that's already missing a slice. So you should already be able to tell, you will never be able to pay off the whole cake, because you can't make any yourself.
Here's the idea, if the US eliminated the relationship with the Federal Reserve and printed all of their money themselves, then they would no longer owe any interest on that money. This would slow down the rate of interest growth. Additionally, people would be able to keep all of their income. This would enable low income individuals to save more money, to possibly start their own businesses one day, and would allow for wealthier individuals to invest into more businesses and help businesses grow. This could perpetuate accelerated income growth for employees, as businesses would now have the funds to hire more employees and/or pay their employees more.
Now, I totally believe that this would inevitably cause hyperinflation. Without strict limits on how much the government could print in relation to the wealth of the nation, all government officials would end up requesting to fund their own projects that could inflate the budget infinitely. However, in this perfect world, where the annual debt of the US government was restricted to, say, 10% of the GDP of the nation, I am curious how a fully debt driven society would function.
I look forward to hearing more people's thoughts on this matter and the question of "Does debt matter?" When our country is, at least temporarily functioning off of a 60-70% deficit to revenue ratio, what would happen if we went 100%, and would we simply be too big to fail, or would we totally collapse and take all of our trading partners with us?
Just thought I'd share this comment I was trying to comment on a Lotus Eaters video. Btw, ya'll should follow the Podcast of the Lotus Eaters if you aren't already. Great analysis and discussion
It's been a while since I've made a video, and this time with a locals exclusive. A cherry on top that I managed to fit within the size requirements. I like making shorter form content like this, considering my tendencies to ramble. Having content exclusive for my followers here is something I'll be working on doing more and more. I'll be creating more value here for my subscribers as well, with some subscriber exclusive content in the future. No timeline promises, cause I think we know how I get when I make a ton of promises (go hardcore for a week and then fall flat on my face unable to keep up with the sprint, lol).
Anyhow, let me know your thoughts and questions below. Have a great day everyone!
A direct upload! It turns out I recorded a video just short enough to meet the minimum upload offerings that locals offers to small communities like mine. That means you guys get this exclusively on locals!
I didn't sleep much last night, so I decided this was the perfect time to mull over my confused thoughts on how businesses are viewed from a legal perspective. Businesses are somewhat legal enigmas to me. Corporations are kinda treated as persons so that they can be double taxed, but have other protections, other types of businesses aren't treated the same way. They're able to consolidate power like governments, yet aren't subject to any form of limitations in regards to violating natural rights the same way the government is, despite being treated somewhat like persons they can still buy each other. It's just very odd to me from a principled, legal, and philosophical position.
Anyhow, my ramblings here are just that, ramblings. Still, I am curious what you all think of this topic. ...
The 2020 election is over, and the battle has just begun. What do I expect to come from the end of the election? Will the legal suits turn over anything for this election, or will they mean something for later down the line? I reflect on these questions and more in this discussion, and I also reflect on some final thoughts relevant to the Rise and Fall of Empire Series, that, thus far, being episodes 8 through 10 of the Construct Cast. Let me know your thoughts, and if you have any reflections of your own from this year's political cycle or other developments that you can't seem to get off your mind in the comments below.
In this episode of the Construct Cast, I discuss my analysis of Sir John Glubb's The Fate of Empires and Search for Survival, with an emphasis on my own consideration for what it would take to help an empire survive, or reboot. If immortality for an Empire is impossible, is rebirth impossible in the same way? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below.
Editor's Note: Returning to the podcast versions of the Construct Cast, I want to catch our content up to the videos we have had released over the past month. I apologize for this getting away from me for a bit. With the rise in content production, I had allowed this to get away from me. We will be returning to audio podcast uploads of the Construct Cast as per our original regular schedule, at 12PM EST on the day of the original upload, going forward.
In this second Crossover podcast, we are once again recording with Kevin @Eng_Politics. His channel is a bastion of political thought and analysis from the perspective of a conservative engineer. Interested in diving deeper into my concept of Progressive Traditionalism and combating the concept with his own beliefs of what it means to be Conservative, we decided to put our definitions and beliefs to task in this crossover episode!
Be sure to check out Kevin's locals community here:
And if you're more interested in the video version, here is a direct link:
As someone who works with daily reporting to the Fed, big companies dealing with regulation are basically a clusterfuck and the requirements basically leave the companies in a position where they can never really update their systems because they need their systems literally every day. They can make new systems, potentially, but updating the regular system is more of a liability since missing a single day can screw the company up. At the same time, it seems like the big companies, at least the one I'm in, are mostly carried forward by the inertia of their own weight. I am fully convinced there will be another massive financial crisis if other major banks are like mine, just cause there really isn't anything that can be done if something is messed up. It's like fake it til you make it, only in reverse. Once something goes wrong, the requirements for constant regular action leaves no time to go back to correct the damage. All you can do is mitigate. Like debt gaining interest, eventually ...
Does anyone have any advice for the work, life, content creator balance? I just genuinely have not had the spirit in me to be able to create the content I want to be able to create these past few months as I am just feeling totally worn out day in and out. I'd like to get back into the philosophic deep dives and contemplations you followed me for, yet that's feeling like a lifetime ago now and every day feels like a step away from where and what I'm supposed to be doing
My locals app is finally working again. Been sick lately. Started considering the differences between corruption and evil. I decided to look at it from a moral framework and came up with a new perspective on how to define the 2 from a moral standpoint. A corrupt person will defy their morals to achieve their goals, whereas an evil person will determine their morals based on whatever ends satisfy or help to achieve their goals. In this way, you can see that a corrupt person may acknowledge when they are doing something morally wrong and feel guilt over it, whereas an evil person will determine that all who oppose them are the true evil threat and could even assess their own will as being justice.
Just a little thought that's been running through my mind lately. And it's interesting because it really makes you wonder which is worse? One who will defy morals or one who will redefine them? Perhaps they both have the same end result, but do they both have the ability to find redemption? I ...
Welcome to Commutation Construct. This is a community designed around maximizing open dialogue and discussion. Get your first month on us by using the coupon code "STARTHERE" or by following this link:
Happy to have you!