That's semantics. In that model, you need to destroy money to avoid it becoming worthless.

Only if the rentier was planning to spend it.

Money that just sits in your bank account does not cause inflation.

If you tax rentier, you destroy costs.

You keep saying that, but it's just not so.

If you tax the rentier, you make sure that the rent is paid to the tax man rather than the private rentier. But that does not make the rent go away - the user still has to pay it.

What it does do is alter the term structure of the rent - from being paid up front in the asset price to being paid over time in taxes. Which is helpful in preventing bubbles, but not make the rent any lower in and of itself.

Like Michael Hudson says, interest grows exponentially,

But it does not, unless you allow scammy stuff like negative amortisation loans.

- Jake

If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.