So:::: I'm not super-popular, but since my birthday I think I've noticed far fewer visitors to my blog, so I was thinking, and have come up with some things to say that I've figured out to try to sound smart, as well as to get my viewpoints across.
So, for the past long while, I've been learning about different potential banking systems a nation can use, like the current central banking system, or other options like gold or government fiat or even possibilities involving crypto currency.
We currently use central banking systems, and I think I've figured out some things::
What are taxes for?
1) Taxes pay the interest to whoever owns government debt.
2) Taxes lower inflation and;
3) Basically just make life more bearable/affordable, typically for people poorer than yourself (included in point 2).
That's basically how I look at it in a nutshell. The government doesn't NEED taxes --- but if they didn't tax, then inflation would be like a runaway locomotive.
I even made a python script to act as a simple economic model to illustrate various spending rates and tax rates. Heck, this python model even shows that it was totally expectable that apparent massive inflation that happened back in the 70s and 80s - so I must be on to something.
So::: what use is this information?
It's useful in helping to figure out what kind of government you support with their different economic agendas.
Conservatives would typically spend less and tax less. If you spend more as a conservative and tax less, then there will be big inflation, I think.
But in my opinion, a government that spends little doesn't get much done.
To be honest, if a government is in debt, that debt doesn't totally matter too much (but it might add to inflation), unless you want to tax to pay interest and if the interest takes all your taxes and starts increasing taxes. So debt for the government isn't the worst thing ever, except for inflation and taxes.
But generally speaking, I'd say it'd be better for the government to hold all the debt rather than the individual citizens themselves. It's just nicer that way.
So::: A conservative government would try to typically spend less --- which means there is less money in the economy or otherwise more debt for consumers, and basically the government just isn't taking care of people or doing things while the people themselves get dug into debt.
This is actually kind of problematic. It's a depressing picture in my mind I think, and I think we've seen this happen before.
But a government that spends more creates money and gets things done, causing people to have employment and resources to support them. Taxes here do a bit to equalize the wealthy with the poor --- but the main point would be to keep inflation lower with the higher taxes.
But what's really interesting is there was a TED Talk that said you are more likely to become a millionaire or billionaire in a social democracy rather than in a capitalist environment. That was pretty interesting.
So:::: from my perspective::::
A conservative government means fewer services and more debt for individuals ----
While a socially conscious government means more available services and lower debt for individuals ------
that's how simple it is ---- in my own mind thinking about this with the help of a simple computer model --- me trying to be smart like I used to be.
So, if this is an essay, I would just try to point out that social democracy makes way more sense than capitalism, or rather NDP better than Conservative.
That is how I see it.
Conservative === fewer services, more personal debt,
NDP ==== many good services, individuals more likely to be financially successful in life.
That really is actually how I'm seeing it right now, with everything I've learned.
On the religious side of this, I know LDS Mormon Prophet Ezra Taft Benson was saying that socialism is some kind of evil because it forces you to pay taxes, essentially ---- he believed people should be allowed to choose or not to choose to pay their taxes, is basically what I understood.
Here's the problem:::
If Millionaire A pays taxes but Millionaire B doesn't pay taxes ------
Then Millionaire A becomes less wealthy and Millionaire B becomes more wealthy than they would otherwise have been if they had both been forced to pay taxes by law.
Again, how I see it.
Basically, in an "optional tax system" people who don't pay would be overly advantaged and people who did pay would be overly disadvantaged --- which really just isn't right, THAT is actually an immoral system, that essentially punishes those who want to do good.
But if everyone pays taxes, then the system is fair, no one is overly advantaged for being greedy, and the good and charitable person is not overly hurt for their goodness.
So, yeah, basically the past LDS Mormon Prophet thought that forcing people to pay taxes was wrong (paraphrased), but I do not agree.
If you don't pay taxes or choose not to pay taxes, then you are really just exhibiting signs of narcissism and the like, and that's really not a good thing.
I believe that taking care of people is a really good idea. The least one can ask of all is to have all pay their taxes.
In my thoughts and models, I was mostly basically considering income tax ----- I'm not going to state an opinion on tax-free savings accounts except to say that I still view TFSAs as socially conscious, which I accept.
So there you go, this is me trying to write something that sounds smart and might seem overly complicated who doesn't understand things I've learned.
It's also basically my way of saying "Social Democracy looks like the way to go", which is why I like the NDP.