• pjwestin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    If the independent calculations are correct, DOGE has cut $8 billion in government spending. 20% of that, divided amongst 350 million Americans, would be $4.57. If DOGE’s claims are correct (and they’re not), they cut $55 billion, which would be $31.43. Even if DOGE met it’s goal of $2 trillion, that would be $1,142.86, which would be a significant one time payment for a lot of Americans, but wouldn’t offset the loss of Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, a functioning Post Office, etc.

  • Netrunner@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    This is called a bribe. He doesn’t want to give any money out but he realizes that firing hundreds of thousands off people and robbing the government clean isn’t exactly a slam dunk policy, so instead he’s offering you as 2,500$ check to watch this happen.

    Sick shit, really.

    • FleetingTit@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      The initial claim of Musk was that Doge saves $2 trillion… That would be ~$1.2k per citizen.

      But honestly I’d be surprised if that figure isn’t closer to $100 billion “saved”, which would net each american a <$60 cheque. And all of that money goes towards paying higher egg prices.

      Edit: changed the numbers to reflect Trump’s claim.

  • Noite_Etion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 days ago

    Spend money on taxes to maintain important departments.

    The government guts important departments and programs.

    Gives just 20% of your taxes back.

    Profit?

  • Obelix@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    108
    ·
    2 days ago

    Which is kind of crazy, if you think about it: The federal budget is coming from taxes. So the deal is that Trump is destroying valuable services of federal institutions and only 20% of the “savings” are getting passed on? While normal people will have to pay for stuff like the weather forecast?

    • frezik@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      Another 20% would go towards paying the federal debt. Ok, but that still leaves out 60%.

    • novibe@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      66
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Why do people think the federal budget comes from taxes?

      The government prints money, pays for its budget, and THEN it taxes. It can’t wait for tax dollars to pay for the budget. Taxing is to make the dollar necessary and force its flow back to the government.

      They mostly “burn” all your tax dollars…

      Like the gvmt is not a company. It doesn’t have “obligations” and “revenue”. It fucking PRINTS the money. If any company could print money, they would stop giving a fuck about revenue instantly.

        • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          They’re describing modern monetary theory, which is very much the opposite of a libertarian position. MMT is a strong argument for more government spending., not less.

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            2 days ago

            Modern monetary theory says that the government can just solve problems by printing more money? Maybe it’s ridiculous too in that case, since there are multiple examples of that being a terrible idea.

            • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              24
              ·
              edit-2
              2 days ago

              There are a lot of excellent examples of governments solving problems by printing money. Most notably, basically every case of hyperinflation ever has been solved by printing money. Noted economist Mark Blyth goes into this extensively in Austerity: The History of a Dangerous Idea.

              What MMT posits is not that governments can freely print money with no consequences, but rather that we’re looking at the question if printing versus borrowing versus taxation backwards.

              The basic theory of inflation is that too much money chasing the same quantity of goods and services pushes up the prices of those goods and services in an effect rather like a bidding war.

              What MMT points out is that from a government finance perspective, this implies that the chief concern is the amount of money in circulation. If money is removed from circulation, via taxation, that becomes a control on inflation. This allows a radical rethinking of government spending, since your chief concern is no longer the balance of the budget, it is only the balance of the economy.

              This also gives you new tools with which to combat inflation. Right now, in contemporary liberal economics, the only control we have for inflation is interest rates, which disproportionately harm the least affluent. But by considering taxation as an inflation control we can shift the greatest burden of combating inflation onto the wealthiest instead.

              Cory Doctorow gets into a really good and approachable explanation of this in one of his more recent articles, when pondering the question of whether it is beneficial or even possible to eliminate the national debt:

              There is only one source of US dollars: the US Treasury (you can try and make your own dollars, but they’ll put you in prison for a long-ass time if they catch you.).

              If dollars can only originate with the US government, then it follows that:

              a) The US government doesn’t need our taxes to get US dollars (for the same reason Apple doesn’t need us to redeem our iTunes cards to get more iTunes gift codes);

              b) All the dollars in circulation start with spending by the US government (taxes can’t be paid until dollars are first spent by their issuer, the US government); and

              c) That spending must happen before anyone has been taxed, because the way dollars enter circulation is through spending.

              You’ve probably heard people say, “Government spending isn’t like household spending.” That is obviously true: households are currency users while governments are currency issuers.

              But the implications of this are very interesting.

              First, the total dollars in circulation are:

              a) All the dollars the government has ever spent into existence funding programs, transferring to the states, and paying its own employees, minus

              b) All the dollars that the government has taxed away from us, and subsequently annihilated.

              (Because governments spend money into existence and tax money out of existence.)

              The net of dollars the government spends in a given year minus the dollars the government taxes out of existence that year is called “the national deficit.” The total of all those national deficits is called “the national debt.” All the dollars in circulation today are the result of this national debt. If the US government didn’t have a debt, there would be no dollars in circulation.

              The only way to eliminate the national debt is to tax every dollar in circulation out of existence. Because the national debt is “all the dollars the government has ever spent,” minus “all the dollars the government has ever taxed.” In accounting terms, “The US deficit is the public’s credit.”

              https://doctorow.medium.com/retiring-the-us-debt-would-retire-the-us-dollar-30f366e0bc40

              I’m citing Doctorow here rather than academic sources because he’s very good at explaining this stuff in comprehensible ways. For a more extensive breakdown The Deficit Myth by Stephanie Kelton is regarded as an excellent resource. Kelton, BTW, was formerly Chief Economist on The US Budgetary Committee; she absolutely knows her stuff when it comes to government level finance.

                • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  No idea why you deleted that comment. You’re right.

                  The bank bailouts in 2008 didn’t cause the tiniest bit of inflation. Again, Mark Blyth calls this out specifically in his book and many of his lectures. The predominant question plaguing economists in the 2010s was “Where the fuck is the inflation?”

                  Japan has an incredibly high debt to GDP ratio, and their main economic constraint right now is too little inflation.

                  Once you start looking for the examples they’re there. This whole idea that government spending = inflation is a total myth.

        • AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          What??? Libertarians are almost all against income tax, they are literally stating it’s necessity to the current system. Even if you don’t believe them your statement makes no sense.

      • catloaf@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 days ago

        Before currency was even invented, taxes were levied in the form of precious metals, livestock, crop harvests, and other resources. The government can’t print a chicken.

        In the US, the first issuance of currency happened centuries ago. The government’s spending comes from tax revenue (and issuing bonds and other stuff).

        • novibe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 days ago

          That was only true when money had any relation to a physical good like gold.

          Fiat money dominates, and it’s not bound by anything.

          Like I’m not saying any crazy conspiracy theory. It’s just how the world has worked since Nixon…

      • karashta@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I’m not sure why you’re getting down voted for stating a fact: money has to be created through direct spending or back stopping the creation of money by private banks via the reserve system before it can be taxed away.

        You can’t tax back something that doesn’t exist yet.

        Just because it’s not “our tax dollars” doesn’t mean is isn’t OUR public money.

        • Obelix@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          They are getting downvoted, because they are obviously wrong. Of course the government is “creating” the money. But it can’t just print money and spend it. Countless governments tried it and it always led to hyperinflation - and therefore the budget of course has to come from taxes

          • novibe@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            How is it wrong if it’s factually what happens now? People have a “common sense” understanding of how the government works, and THAT is wrong.

            Ever since fiat became the norm, all governments all over the world that print their own money and have debts denominated in their own currency simply print money to spend, for their budget. That is a FACT.

            Only countries that have the majority of their debt denominated in another currency (the dollar mainly) that face inflation when printing money.

            The US and Europe printed trillions during covid, and that barely caused a blip in inflation. Inflation only came after supply chains shock and the war.

            Like do some basic research, if I’m so obviously wrong it will be very easy to see…:

            • AtHeartEngineer@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Idk why you are getting down voted, what you are saying is also how I largely understand things. Props to you for following through on replied.

              • novibe@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                Most people have fallen for neolib propaganda… of “we don’t have enough money for free universal healthcare”, “if you want free university we’ll need to raise taxes” etc etc.

                They think the government is a household.

            • Obelix@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              The US and Europe printed trillions during covid, and that barely caused a blip in inflation. Inflation only came after supply chains shock and the war. Like do some basic research, if I’m so obviously wrong it will be very easy to see…:

              I still remember 2020 and 2022, it’s not that long ago. So Covid started to hit the US in spring 2020. And take a look at inflation rates:

              Yeah, it took some time, but you really can’t deny that there was “barely a blip in inflation” and that it came only after the war started.

              • novibe@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                As I said, the initial inflation was caused by supply chains shock. Many countries had lockdowns. Like China, who produces the majority of everything anyone purchases around the world. Then when the lockdowns ended there was a shortage of shipping containers.

                Inflation is caused when money is printed and sits in financialized investment. If it’s used to increase productivity it causes the opposite.

                China has been running massive deficits (printing money like crazy) for over a decade and they have very consistent and low inflation.

              • DancingBear@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                Nah see, it only causes inflation when we help Americans with their student loans, or raise unemployment benefits and other social programs.

                But when we bail out banks with hundreds of billions of dollars it doesn’t cause inflation at all…

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          2 days ago

          They’re being downvoted for suggesting that the government can create value just by printing more money. That actually causes inflation.

        • novibe@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          It’s just that this argument, based on things that are not facts since the 70s, is used to cut social programs, investment in education, infrastructure etc.

          When it makes no sense. The gvmt is not gonna go broke from paying its programs. It prints its own money, and all its debt is denominated in dollars.

          We SHOULD cut military spending, subsidies to harmful industries, to private prisons, police forces etc. The way the money is spent SHOULD reflect the will of the people more.

          But this argument about “revenue” and “public debt” are literally from the mouths of establishment neoliberal ghouls who have no objective other than enriching their friends. It’s not reality and is only used for harm.

    • teamevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      The piece of shit doing this could give every American one million dollars and still have 150 billion

  • teamevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 days ago

    Fuck you…the asshole doing this could give every American one million and STILL be worth 150 billion. Fuck your saving,I want the govt for the people by the people.