5 Comments
Apr 11, 2023·edited Apr 11, 2023Liked by Brian Romanchuk

Those two tax mechanisms I call Driving the Denomination and Releasing the Resources in Chapter 9 of Modern Monetary Theory: Key Insights, Leading Thinkers (https://www.elgaronline.com/display/book/9781802208092/book-part-9781802208092-17.xml)

Everything else to do with taking money from people should use a different word. We have plenty in English derived jurisdictions - Levies, Duties, Revenues, Excise, Tariffs, Tolls or Fees.

The problem is overloading the word 'tax' - which tends to be a US phenomenon. If you levy wealth, or apply duties to fuel then the problem goes away, and it becomes clear when we are talking about political charges, and when we are talking about economic ones.

Even the most rabid small government believer will need to raise taxes to ensure there are sufficient people to run the judicial system and the political system during a private sector boom. Whether cigarettes should be legal and attract duty is an entirely different discussion.

Expand full comment

1. How does the "source/sink" terminology you introduce above differ from the bathtub analogy that Stephanie Kelton and others use to describe currency injections and leakages (or drains)?

2. I read Richard Murphy's post at https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/04/11/mmt-and-tax-an-issue-that-needs-to-be-addressed-again/, but I don't do Twitter and so I can't find what he originally posted there on MMT and tax, nor can I find what Mosler et al. tweeted in response. So I can't determine to what extent I agree with your critique of Murphy above. Suggestions?

Expand full comment