tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7210808931697333236.post8190737837196148623..comments2023-09-16T04:35:48.772-05:00Comments on FunkyPundit: The Times' Economic Illiteracytomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10731216793449263743noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7210808931697333236.post-31961095727240541252007-01-12T11:11:00.000-05:002007-01-12T11:11:00.000-05:00All I'm saying is that:
"... it has nothing to do...All I'm saying is that:<br /><br />"... it has nothing to do with increased circulation." <br /><br />Is a VERY strong position to take.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7210808931697333236.post-40741806980157266952007-01-12T10:37:00.000-05:002007-01-12T10:37:00.000-05:00And that explains why Keynes can claim responsibil...And that explains why Keynes can claim responsibility for stagflation. Under this theory, all one needs to do -- which is what Nixon did in following Keynes's teachings -- is increase the money supply, which, he thought, would lead to greater spending and more jobs and more growth. Instead it created massive inflation. The Fed has recently been keeping money tight, and while yes, tax receipts will climb again in 2007, it has nothing to do with increased circulation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7210808931697333236.post-88354529642893225692007-01-12T10:15:00.000-05:002007-01-12T10:15:00.000-05:00n 2003, the year Bush’s “Jobs and Growth” tax act ...<i>n 2003, the year Bush’s “Jobs and Growth” tax act went into effect, the federal government collected a little less than $1.7 trillion in taxes. For fiscal year 2006, the government expects to collect a little less than $2.3 trillion.<br /><br />That’s an increase of $600 billion. While the slice of the pie might be smaller, the pie has grown much larger. This, bear in mind, has all happened while the other variables affecting the economy besides taxes — disruptions like hurricanes and high energy prices — have been almost uniformly negative.</i><br /><br />For being as righteous as you are, you're pretty vulnerable to criticism. In 2003, the USG spent $2.1T, and in 2007, that number is <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/sheets/hist01z1.xls">projected</a> to be $2.7T, or about $600B.<br /><br />Keynes, by way of ECON 101: Macroeconomics, would tell us that money multiplies because fractions of it are saved and fractions are respent (and in the US, we respend a lot of it). Since we tax that circulation, we would expect to see increased tax receipts from that spending.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com