Bible Belt & Covid restrictions

[pondwater]

No, "government fiscal policy reduces the buying power of my money" is not the same effect as "the government is taxing me more."

For example, when the government lowers taxes, that puts more money into the economy.  That increases inflation, which reduces your buying power... which according to you, is "the same effect" as raising your taxes.  The idea that lowering taxes and raising taxes are the same effect doesn't make sense.

You're just arguing semantics with yourself. It's basic supply and demand. Does government printing more money negatively affect the buying power of that money, yes or no?

[Spider-Dan]

You always like to start shouting "Yes or no????" when you get caught.

You claimed that reduced buying power is "the same effect" as paying more taxes, which is false.  Now, if you would like to change the topic of discussion to the impact of inflation on income & wealth, I'm happy to do so; I don't need to play your silly "STAY ON TOPIC" game to avoid inconvenient questions.

But let's get one thing straight before we continue: the amount of taxes you or I pay has absolutely no direct relationship to federal spending on social welfare programs, for exactly the same reason that Biden taking the US military out of Afghanistan did not mean we saw a tax reduction.

[pondwater]

You always like to start shouting "Yes or no????" when you get caught.

Got caught? LMFAO, yeah I got caught calling you out on your bullshit propaganda. Most people can answer a simple yes or no question that gets straight to the point, but you refuse to answer questions that point out your own nonsense. As has been noted by several members here, you always twist, spin, and deflect everything to your point of view. There's a reason why you usually reply with a bunch of silly spaghetti vomit that goes in circles and won't answer a simple yes or no question. Most people here already know that reason whether they will admit it or not.

You claimed that reduced buying power is "the same effect" as paying more taxes, which is false.  Now, if you would like to change the topic of discussion to the impact of inflation on income & wealth, I'm happy to do so; I don't need to play your silly "STAY ON TOPIC" game to avoid inconvenient questions.

Of course it's the same effect. In the case of taxation, the government has more money and the public has less through confiscation. And in the case of increasing the money supply, the government has more money and the public has less through devaluation. The end result is the same.

But let's get one thing straight before we continue: the amount of taxes you or I pay has absolutely no direct relationship to federal spending on social welfare programs, for exactly the same reason that Biden taking the US military out of Afghanistan did not mean we saw a tax reduction.

The amount of money the federal government spends has an affect on how much money I have and/or how much my money is worth. Whether it's through printing more money and debasing the currency or confiscating my money through taxes. The outcome is exactly the same.

[Spider-Dan]

Of course it's the same effect. In the case of taxation, the government has more money and the public has less through confiscation. And in the case of increasing the money supply, the government has more money and the public has less through devaluation. The end result is the same.

100% wrong.

The easiest counterexample is debt; say, a fixed-rate mortgage.  When inflation devalues the currency, my payment to the bank doesn't increase with it.  It stays at exactly the amount agreed to when I signed it.  This is nothing at all like increased taxes that leave me with less income to spend.

You don't know what you're talking about.

[pondwater]

100% wrong.

The easiest counterexample is debt; say, a fixed-rate mortgage.  When inflation devalues the currency, my payment to the bank doesn't increase with it.  It stays at exactly the amount agreed to when I signed it.  This is nothing at all like increased taxes that leave me with less income to spend.

You don't know what you're talking about.

No that's a bad example. That's because you already purchased the home and executed the mortgage months or years earlier at a set price before the inflation hit. The bank is getting their agreed upon interest rate at the time they loaned you the money. Just like the seller of the house got their agree upon price at closing.

An appropriate example would be to buy a house and execute a mortgage before inflation. And then do the same thing after inflation. Not only would the house cost you more. The cost of the loan would also cost you more.

You can only cite loans payments which are legally protected within the document at the time they are executed. Which if before inflation hit would be no different than buying a new TV before inflation hit. But after inflation hits, it takes more of your devalued dollars to buy the house and the TV.

Also, this is the important part------------------> what happens to the cost of virtually everything else besides the loan you signed back when Tupac was alive? Also, what happens to interest rates? Also, what happens when you have to pay substantially higher costs for food, electricity, gas, and all other essential items? Are you sure you're going to be able to pay your "exact amount" that you agreed to when you signed your mortgage?

A devalued dollar is less spending power, which in effect equals less money. I think it's you that don't what you're talking about.

[Spider-Dan]

No that's a bad example. That's because you already purchased the home and executed the mortgage months or years earlier at a set price before the inflation hit. The bank is getting their agreed upon interest rate at the time they loaned you the money. Just like the seller of the house got their agree upon price at closing.

You're almost there!  Let's see if we can get you the rest of the way.

So since I agreed (in 1996?) on the home purchase price & the mortgage interest rate, as well as the principal+interest repayment schedule, at that point, inflation only helps me pay my mortgage more easily!  That's literally the relationship between inflation and debt: good for debtors, bad for creditors.  (And if you're really smart, you can figure out what deflation means for debtors.)

But you know what I DIDN'T have a final, unchanging agreement on in 1996?  Taxes.  So while the impact of inflation can be good or bad (good for a mortgage or student loan, bad for buying groceries or plane tickets), paying higher taxes (that change over time) simply means less money in my pocket.  That is not the same effect as inflation.  Not even close.

Also, this is the important part------------------> what happens to the cost of virtually everything else besides the loan you signed back when Tupac was alive?

The same thing that has happened to wages in the same time frame: they increase!

If you want to argue that inflation is bad... fine, whatever.  That topic is clearly far too complex for us to have a productive discussion (though the arguments you are offering against inflation make it sound like you think deflation is a good thing).

My point is that inflation (and deflation) are not even remotely similar to a tax increase (or decrease) in a society that prints its own money.  An increase in federal taxation has a direct and measurable negative impact to income, but inflation has many complex impacts on costs, some of which are good for the consumer and some of which are bad.

[pondwater]

You're almost there!  Let's see if we can get you the rest of the way.

So since I agreed (in 1996?) on the home purchase price & the mortgage interest rate, as well as the principal+interest repayment schedule, at that point, inflation only helps me pay my mortgage more easily!  That's literally the relationship between inflation and debt: good for debtors, bad for creditors.  (And if you're really smart, you can figure out what deflation means for debtors.)

But you know what I DIDN'T have a final, unchanging agreement on in 1996?  Taxes.  So while the impact of inflation can be good or bad (good for a mortgage or student loan, bad for buying groceries or plane tickets), paying higher taxes (that change over time) simply means less money in my pocket.  That is not the same effect as inflation.  Not even close.
The same thing that has happened to wages in the same time frame: they increase!

If you want to argue that inflation is bad... fine, whatever.  That topic is clearly far too complex for us to have a productive discussion (though the arguments you are offering against inflation make it sound like you think deflation is a good thing).

My point is that inflation (and deflation) are not even remotely similar to a tax increase (or decrease) in a society that prints its own money.  An increase in federal taxation has a direct and measurable negative impact to income, but inflation has many complex impacts on costs, some of which are good for the consumer and some of which are bad.

OK guy, if you say so 👌👌👌

[CF DolFan]

And where does the Bible say that?  The verse you cited specifically states that Jesus did NOT come to abolish the law.

Again, seems like you pick and choose what you want to obey.

Grammatical error. I forgot the " but I did italicize his quote before the ... so you could have caught that if you were looking closely.