Login
You're viewing the mastodonapp.uk public feed.
  • Daniel AJ Sokolovnewstik@social.heise.de
    Oct 22, 2026, 4:14 AM

    @bignose @michael_w_busch Ok. If the point was “to stop him causing so much trouble”, we'll never know if it worked, because he died just two years later.

    The point about slowing inflation by taxing very high earners exceptionally high isn't clear to me. The more people make, the smaller a share they spend.

    If you take 80% away from the top earners, the money is going to someone else, who is going to spend a higher share of it = more demand for products +/ services = higher prices.

    💬 1🔄 0⭐ 0

Replies

  • bignosebignose@theblower.au
    Oct 22, 2026, 9:57 AM

    @newstik
    > The point about slowing inflation by taxing very high earners exceptionally high isn't clear to me.

    In any country that has sovereignty over its money (USA, Australia, UK, Japan, etc.), the country's government creates money by fiat: they pass a law saying they spend money, and that act credits an account at the central bank. It's a number in a spreadsheet.

    By the government then paying for things, that money then can circulate among private entities as our currency. Or, some entity could cease to circulate it for some duration and hoard it, increasing their power to spend compared to the rest of us.

    Taxation (by that country) of entities or transactions is the opposite of creating money: It is the country selectively removing money from the economy.

    So, an entity paying that tax thereby returns (“revenue”) the money; it is now out of circulation, effectively destroying it. That entity has less spending power, and thus less upward effect on prices.

    @michael_w_busch

    💬 0🔄 0⭐ 0