Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="notimp" data-source="post: 8992530" data-attributes="member: 101990">Another example for why taxation is a must. You get all the money. You save for retirement. The house market collapses, or the stock market crashes.There goes your plan for retirement.In societies with a normal demographic progression you have the people currently working, pay for the retirement of people currently being retired. As the second sector (if normal demographic progression) is smaller - stuff suddely works out - stock market tanking or people loosing houses, doesnt matter - there is still money to attend to your elders.Same argument with education.Another argument for taxation are large infrastructure projects. Where investments needed are so high, that they arent recoupable within one generation of 'people' this goes for people heading companies as well - if upfront costs get too large, no one is investing.Another argument is complexity. If you have to 'grassroots organize' from scratch on every issue that arises - your flexibility and response times tank. So if you dont want to pay people to do 'governing jobs' - you are about 200-500 years to late to even think that thats theoretically possible. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />How come, I havent met one libertarian yet that actually roughly knows what his tax money is mostly going to and why.... <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="wink    ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" />On topic - it is mostly a money infusion to stop the stock market from tanking.Large companies, that are structurally 'necessary' boing, pretty much should always get saved, no matter what.Why cruise line companies also are bailed out I have no freaking idea.You need huge sums (at least announced), to keep the stock market from tanking (its more expensive to built economy back up from nothing), that both political sides agree on.The issue as far as the left are concerned in this case is 'lack of oversight on spending'.So to give you the example in Germany - three very big companies, with assets to get over more than six weeks of income drops, suddenly announced they would stop paying their leases/rent, as soon as government announced, that there will be a special - no termination clause for people that cant pay rent due to corona curfews. With the state picking up the difference.So the fear is, that companies will optimize for getting most of that fund money - while still reducing workforce, and 'risk'. If there is little oversignt on looking after who gets what - the system will be abused.On a very basic level, this money is handed out in an expectation, that companies will use it in ways so they dont have to let go of workers during mass curfews. It will never be micro managed where it goes (you simply open the hose), but some basic restrictions should be in place so it can have the intended effect.Also if it needs to be 6 trillion in the end can be discussed as well - but basically no one knows. Still cheaper to rebuilding the economy from nothing.</blockquote>

Verification

Search

Search

Reply to thread

Settings Notifications

Options