Tax Evasion

We should not match the work to the workforce.

Without tax evasion we could match the workforce to the work.

Surplus investor income is the income of investors that exceeds actual real investment. Without government borrowing or taxation speculation in existing assets would be  the main outlet for that surplus income. The money used for speculation in existing assets is not really being spent back into the productive economy. Speculation transfers existing assets from one speculator to another without creating any real demand. Money stuck in speculator accounts is not part of the real economy and might as well be kept under a mattress.

Taxing surplus investor income to get it back into circulation helped make 20th century capitalism prosperous, but the very rich led a successful tax revolt. The very rich hated the 90% tax rates, even though it was only an attempt to recirculate surplus income. They discovered that taxing surplus investor income is not necessary to make capitalism work, because government debt will do almost the same thing. Now, we just borrow the money we used to tax.

Borrowing surplus investor income makes government debt grow by the same amount. U.S. government debt roughly equals the taxes that investors did not have to pay after their taxes were cut. Investors like government debt. Government debt is a safe investment outlet for surplus investor income.

taxcut
                cartoon

The Failure of Stimulus.

Borrowing surplus income in order to get it back into circulation could be a functional solution to excessive investor income, but our reliance on a trickle-down stimulus has made our recent stimulus programs ineffective. Trickle down economics is another policy tailored to please the very rich. The trickle down ideal is that surplus investor income that the government borrowed should go right back to the rich, as if it wasn't surplus in their hands already.

Most economists support directing the borrowed surplus income to where it will be spent, thus getting it back into circulation. Still, we are immersed in propaganda from the very rich telling us that investors would invest more and create jobs if they got that surplus income back. We can't stimulate the economy by giving more money to people that already have too much. Investors at the top are the only group who are not going to spend additional income, that's why it had to be borrowed from them in the first place. It is still surplus income every time it goes around the borrow/trickle cycle.

An effective stimulus policy must break the taboo on direct stimulation of consumer income. When income is transferred from the surplus income of investors the those who don't have enough to get by, it is not government spending. The spending is by those getting the transferred money. It is not the government deciding what to buy. It is only the government trying to keep the economy from stalling due to too much income in the hands of those who don't really need it.

We should match the workforce to the work.

It would be possible without tax evasion.

Stimulation to make jobs is the wrong goal. We should only do the work we need to provide goods and services. It is no longer true that "the harvest is abundant and the laborers are few." (after 2000 years) Automatic tools have make labor surplus, and the once abundant harvest is no longer a match for our wasteful hyper-consumption.

The best form of spending is for the direct alleviation of suffering, not for the hyperactive economic kick it would provide. If we just alleviate suffering no further wasteful economic kick is needed.

Low consumption busywork could provide full employment, but that is only possible if money from the physical productive sectors is available to support that busywork. Why not just face it? We don't need full employment to provide goods and services. Full employment is the road to ruin. Neither busywork nor hyper-consumption have any place in a sane economic system.

The economy needs some workers, but people (workers) don't "need" jobs, they just need money... unearned money will do, just like the unearned income the top 1% can't even spend. Dividends are what people need in addition to just wages. Then people can stay home more and repair the many items we already have without any need to "consume" our throw-away wealth just to make way for maximum production, profits, and jobs.

When work is the only respectable way to get money, then unpaid work will be neglected. Motherhood is the most important job in the world. I'm glad my mom didn't do it for money.

It's long past the time when we should have admitted that we are parasites on the planet and that maximum production will not make more wealth, not for much longer. Making jobs is the wrong economic goal. We should just do the work needed to provide goods and services and little else. Time-freedom is the most important kind of freedom... playing near you.


Officials like deficits because they reap immediate political benefits...

Barry Brooks
http://home.earthlink.net/~durable/