In the last post we looked at the role of government and peoples desires, but this point may actually impact you the most.
Previously, we talked about government money and the concept of wealth. Let’s get back to the idea that government CREATES nothing. The better phrase would be, the government creates no wealth, it takes and consumes wealth, and moves it around—redistribution.
Government can “make” money through printing (the hip new phrase is “monetization”) and has a huge influence on its value. The Fed affects the value through restricting and expanding the amount of money available in the economy, but it cannot assign how much wealth a dollar can buy at any given time.
In this post we’ll discuss the concept of wealth. Quite honestly, I am still trying to fully understand wealth, but I’m going to take my best stab at explaining it. Following is a definition of wealth:
All material things produced by [physical and mental] labor for the satisfaction of human desires and having exchange value.
In the last post we defined the word tax, but here I’ll try to explain the relationship between government and wealth.
This next idea might seem elementary, but it’s important to keep in mind: government creates nothing. Nothing? Yes, as Aristotle said, “the thing rocks dream about,” that kind of nothing. Unless the government acquires money it can’t repair the road, provide law enforcement, or inspect the local fast food place which you could have sworn just served someone a fried rat (gross I know).
Here in Kansas, a while back, the then Gov. Sam Brownback vetoed a massive tax increase which was overridden by the legislature. More recently, President Trump signed a tax cut into law and he is possibly implementing tariffs. This has people thinking about taxes, and so I’m taking this opportunity to discuss taxes, money, and economics in general. I’ve worked hard to use simple terminology and avoid economic lingo.
However, at the risk of annoying or insulting my audience, I will say something which needs to be said. This topic requires a willingness to explore some new ideas. In a post of this length, I can write about the main points and the principals, but your own learning can build on what is written here, and I encourage you to do so. I don’t claim to be an expert in economics but I think the main ideas hold true. In other words, test my statements against the real world. I could be wrong.
This is a call to action against a racist element in most of our homes, and we endorse it nearly every day. I, too, have unwittingly used this company’s white-privilege symbol, but now I see it for what it is: a white-privilege promotion of racism. This racist problem is right under our noses, and you need to stop liking it.
I’ll elaborate in a moment, but every time you use this company’s program you performing a micro-aggression against African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Mexican-Americans (a.k.a. Latin-Americans) and everyone else in Americkkka who isn’t white. (The order of the preceding groups does not denote importance of one group over another.)
“Cake in a mug? Yuck!”
This was my first, visceral reaction when Jenna told me she’d found a new dessert. I thought, “It’s a gimmick. It can’t possibly be any good, and certainly the cake will be soup-like gloppy, or so dry and hard we’ll have to throw away the cup and all.” But she Jenna persisted, gently urging me to try something which just didn’t sound good. Begrudgingly, I agreed to sampel this “cake in a mug” concoction. Soon afterward, Jen brought me the fresh-from-the-microwave mug warning me it was hot (this was an understatement, it was near surface-of-the-sun temperatures) I waited, then stuck a bite in my mouth sure I wouldn’t like. But I did like it. I really liked it!