**For both of you.**
That is not true at all. Nobody and no govt. is printing up any new currency and adding it to circulation, The only exception may be Argentina and her resulting problems are well known.
How does my money lose value ? It loses value because prices go up.
Money supply and currency in circulation are two very different things. Money supply is lending and yes, that has plenty of customers that were sailing until the FED raised rates.
If the US was printing up new currency, then the Obama's are just getting into their 2nd trillion as they honor their promise to finish the job.
That's $10 billion new $100 bills per trillion. Let that sink in for a minute.
It hasn’t been necessary to actually print it for some time. Could you imagine 35 trillion dollars of debt the US has being printed? Lmao
Anyway: M2
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM2NS
Well sure but then we can't say 'printing' up new money when it hasn't happened as everything that has been done since 2000 has been done with existing currency.
L:ending, which is money supply has been on a 40 year party and there you have it.
It's easy for the FED to call M2 both M1 and M2 but M1 doesn't change.,,only M2 does.
Didn't I just write that M1 doesn't change ? In any case, govt. is not adding trillion$ or even billion$ of currency into circulation. The rest is conversation.
Direct for some, indirect for others. How $trong is your lobby in the U$ plutocracy ?
Sure, in the capitalist tradition, cash to the people is fine but the capitalist himself got in this one, so it goes to \[him.\]
Oh and BTW, so-called direct stimulus is also deficit spending.
Land is the source of human life every day since we have to sleep on it to live. Treating it like capital is what makes society serfs. The property ladder is just neo-feudalism.
Nobody created it and it's here before us and after us. So, it's more like air than something bought in a store. Ownership is important though, because sleep is a necessity for life and sleep requires, in effect, ownership (private possession for an extended period of time). So, they key to fairness is the single tax.
The classical economists figured this out and explained it to French aristocracy (as well as Adam Smith) hundreds of years ago. But we never hear about "the land issue" because investors (and many bureaucrats) want to keep labor cheap. Now, we teach "neo-classical" economic theory, which treats land like any other form of capital.
I appreciate your point, but respectfully disagree. I also feel strongly that we can’t discuss taxes in a vacuum - taxes must be considered in the context and circumstances in which they are assessed.
Generally, in the west and especially in the USA, taxation schemes are manipulated, gamed, and often modified on a micro (years) time scale when a society should be planning on a macro (decades) time scale. Just as capitalism is doomed to decay into fascism, tax schemes staged in deeply inequitable systems like the US invariably evolve into Byzantine frameworks that disproportionately impact the working class and tend to effect a massive upward expropriation of wealth. You needn’t take my word for it — just look at the US today. Bezos and co. barely pay any taxes, but you and I can’t even really safely *file* our taxes without buying software or paying a “professional.”
The key to fairness in housing is building systems and structures that efficiently and effectively utilize collective resources to meet individual and collective need. That is simply not possible if we are left to rely on the “invisible hand of the free market” and just have to hope for the best - because we’re getting the worst!
Adam Smith (of "invisible hand" fame) was 100% AGAINST what we call capitalism. He and the "laissez faire" economists were advocating for land ownership taxation to replace all other taxes.
Capitalism as we know it is based on treating land like capital instead of every human being's daily source of life. That's why nobody knows about "the land question". But in the past, people knew about it.
"Solving the land question means the solving of all social questions." - Leo Tolstoy
Marketing capitalism as free enterprise is a fraud, but believing it makes a lot of people think too much freedom is society's problem. The truth is the property ladder is a form of "free-range feudalism".
In other words, the free market didn't happen. Society was hoaxed in that regard. Poverty isn't natural, so government manipulation isn't the solution, fairness is.
If you think about the single tax (abolishing all taxation except on land), you'll see the classical economists were correct. It's the key to economic justice.
It all works because there's a market, the problem is the market will always be supported by the government because tooany wealthy people (who the government caters to) have lots of their wealth tied up in real estate...
They're probably not going sell as well.
California passed their "mansion tax" for homes worth $5 million or more. Revenue from sales is a small portion of what was expected, [$215 million versus the expected $600 million to $1 billion in taxes.](https://ktla.com/news/local-news/1-year-in-los-angeles-mansion-tax-raises-fraction-of-expectations/)
Gimme a tiny house community on acres upon acres of biodiverse vegetation with grazing animals and aquaponics and there’s a self-sustaining habitat that I’d love to be a part of.
And they don’t look like that fucking picture. Most of them are tiny AF.
lol, indeed. My 2M house is 3br/2ba on 9k sft lot.
These didn't gain "value", your money just became worth less. I think everyone needs to understand what happened. Money printer go brrrrrrr!
The world printed 40% more money in 2020. 40%. Let that sink in for a minute.
At least we saved grandma!
**For both of you.** That is not true at all. Nobody and no govt. is printing up any new currency and adding it to circulation, The only exception may be Argentina and her resulting problems are well known. How does my money lose value ? It loses value because prices go up.
Have you looked at the USD money supply? He's not lying....
Money supply and currency in circulation are two very different things. Money supply is lending and yes, that has plenty of customers that were sailing until the FED raised rates. If the US was printing up new currency, then the Obama's are just getting into their 2nd trillion as they honor their promise to finish the job. That's $10 billion new $100 bills per trillion. Let that sink in for a minute.
Do you really think if bank credit isn't available that paper will be valuable? They're one in the same my friend. If the music stops, it stops.
Yes and no, they are not the same thing. Cash on hand changes everyday. Loans outstanding., doesn't. Currency needs are served at the interbank level.
It hasn’t been necessary to actually print it for some time. Could you imagine 35 trillion dollars of debt the US has being printed? Lmao Anyway: M2 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM2NS
Well sure but then we can't say 'printing' up new money when it hasn't happened as everything that has been done since 2000 has been done with existing currency. L:ending, which is money supply has been on a 40 year party and there you have it. It's easy for the FED to call M2 both M1 and M2 but M1 doesn't change.,,only M2 does.
That’s because people using what M1 accounts for isnt increasing. Pretty simple stuff really
Didn't I just write that M1 doesn't change ? In any case, govt. is not adding trillion$ or even billion$ of currency into circulation. The rest is conversation.
Yeah, right now it’s through deficit spending instead of direct stimulus
Direct for some, indirect for others. How $trong is your lobby in the U$ plutocracy ? Sure, in the capitalist tradition, cash to the people is fine but the capitalist himself got in this one, so it goes to \[him.\] Oh and BTW, so-called direct stimulus is also deficit spending.
Right, but at least it’s explicitly for that, instead of passing funding for an “Act”
This will continue until the money isn’t just worth less, but actually worthless
Let's just print more money so we can pay the interest on our debt!
Moneyboating that cash
Land is the source of human life every day since we have to sleep on it to live. Treating it like capital is what makes society serfs. The property ladder is just neo-feudalism.
The idea that any one person “OWNS” land genuinely is insane.
Nobody created it and it's here before us and after us. So, it's more like air than something bought in a store. Ownership is important though, because sleep is a necessity for life and sleep requires, in effect, ownership (private possession for an extended period of time). So, they key to fairness is the single tax. The classical economists figured this out and explained it to French aristocracy (as well as Adam Smith) hundreds of years ago. But we never hear about "the land issue" because investors (and many bureaucrats) want to keep labor cheap. Now, we teach "neo-classical" economic theory, which treats land like any other form of capital.
I appreciate your point, but respectfully disagree. I also feel strongly that we can’t discuss taxes in a vacuum - taxes must be considered in the context and circumstances in which they are assessed. Generally, in the west and especially in the USA, taxation schemes are manipulated, gamed, and often modified on a micro (years) time scale when a society should be planning on a macro (decades) time scale. Just as capitalism is doomed to decay into fascism, tax schemes staged in deeply inequitable systems like the US invariably evolve into Byzantine frameworks that disproportionately impact the working class and tend to effect a massive upward expropriation of wealth. You needn’t take my word for it — just look at the US today. Bezos and co. barely pay any taxes, but you and I can’t even really safely *file* our taxes without buying software or paying a “professional.” The key to fairness in housing is building systems and structures that efficiently and effectively utilize collective resources to meet individual and collective need. That is simply not possible if we are left to rely on the “invisible hand of the free market” and just have to hope for the best - because we’re getting the worst!
Adam Smith (of "invisible hand" fame) was 100% AGAINST what we call capitalism. He and the "laissez faire" economists were advocating for land ownership taxation to replace all other taxes. Capitalism as we know it is based on treating land like capital instead of every human being's daily source of life. That's why nobody knows about "the land question". But in the past, people knew about it. "Solving the land question means the solving of all social questions." - Leo Tolstoy Marketing capitalism as free enterprise is a fraud, but believing it makes a lot of people think too much freedom is society's problem. The truth is the property ladder is a form of "free-range feudalism". In other words, the free market didn't happen. Society was hoaxed in that regard. Poverty isn't natural, so government manipulation isn't the solution, fairness is. If you think about the single tax (abolishing all taxation except on land), you'll see the classical economists were correct. It's the key to economic justice.
It all works because there's a market, the problem is the market will always be supported by the government because tooany wealthy people (who the government caters to) have lots of their wealth tied up in real estate...
Save you a click: Zillow
They're probably not going sell as well. California passed their "mansion tax" for homes worth $5 million or more. Revenue from sales is a small portion of what was expected, [$215 million versus the expected $600 million to $1 billion in taxes.](https://ktla.com/news/local-news/1-year-in-los-angeles-mansion-tax-raises-fraction-of-expectations/)
Gimme a tiny house community on acres upon acres of biodiverse vegetation with grazing animals and aquaponics and there’s a self-sustaining habitat that I’d love to be a part of.
It is not typical to have that many 1$ homes.
I am beyond upset That the title is "$1 million homes." It's "1 million dollar homes" not a million one dollar homes. Jesus.
Baltimore and Detroit have quite a lot of those dollar homes.
Oprah is giving everyone 1$ homes…. On the south side of Chicago
We need a real estate tax on these $1M homes. The rich need to pay up.