The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
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.
Austerity can only be implemented in the shadow of a concentration camp.
by Cyrille - Apr 12 26 comments
by DoDo - Apr 6 39 comments
by Cyrille - Apr 8 6 comments
by ARGeezer - Mar 31 10 comments
by Zwackus - Mar 29 8 comments
by aquilon - Apr 3 156 comments
by Xavier in Paris - Mar 27 5 comments
by ManfromMiddletown - Mar 20 66 comments
by Oui - Apr 16
by Cyrille - Apr 1226 comments
by Cyrille - Apr 86 comments
by DoDo - Apr 639 comments
by aquilon - Apr 3156 comments
by ARGeezer - Mar 3110 comments
by Zwackus - Mar 298 comments
by DoDo - Mar 279 comments
by Xavier in Paris - Mar 275 comments
by ManfromMiddletown - Mar 2066 comments
by DoDo - Mar 1818 comments
by ARGeezer - Mar 1737 comments