by Can it be truthfully said that “internal borrowing shifts the war burden to future generations while taxing places it on the present generation”? A thousand times no! The present generation must still give up resources to produce the munitions hurled at the enemy. In the future, some of our grandchildren will be giving up goods and services to other grandchildren. That is the nub of the matter. The only way in which we can impose a direct burden on the future nation as a whole is by incurring an external debt or by passing along less capital equipment to our posterity. Paul A. Samuelson I fall någon till äventyrs tror att det bara är postkeynesianer och MMT förespråkare som tycker argumentet “vi måste ha ett balansmål eftersom ett underskottsmål orättvist skulle belasta
Topics:
Lars Pålsson Syll considers the following as important: Economics
This could be interesting, too:
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Schuldenbremse bye bye
Lars Pålsson Syll writes What’s wrong with economics — a primer
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Krigskeynesianismens återkomst
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Finding Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors (student stuff)
Can it be truthfully said that “internal borrowing shifts the war burden to future generations while taxing places it on the present generation”? A thousand times no! The present generation must still give up resources to produce the munitions hurled at the enemy. In the future, some of our grandchildren will be giving up goods and services to other grandchildren. That is the nub of the matter. The only way in which we can impose a direct burden on the future nation as a whole is by incurring an external debt or by passing along less capital equipment to our posterity.
I fall någon till äventyrs tror att det bara är postkeynesianer och MMT förespråkare som tycker argumentet “vi måste ha ett balansmål eftersom ett underskottsmål orättvist skulle belasta kommande generationer” är uselt underbyggt, är det kanske dags att ta sig en funderare …