The current dollar system cannot exist with limits to expanding monetary policy. It needs the Fed and Treasury because of how huge the circulation is globally and how much risk has to be managed. One of the under explored themes in the current debate on tariffs is that no taxes, only tariffs, also imply that the empire of the dollar cannot exist. I'm happy to break that down in a later post.
This is a great read. I live in the penal colony called Australia, where we are massively over-governed, over-regulated, and, you guessed it, over-taxed. If it moves it is taxed, and if it doesn't move then it is pushed.
A lot of us Aussies watch the show that happening in the United States given we're kind of a sub-imperial arm of the U.S. I can't offer much in the end game as I don't know your country well enough, but this I am confident about: the numbers don't stack up. So perhaps it is more about introducing a different currency that might have significant yield and benefit to the U.S. I can't see the petrodollar going anytime soon and therefore you guys will keep your USD as the global currency.....at least for now.
Anyway, I watch with great interest.
In the meantime, Australia's politicians keep re-wrapping the printing press in the hope they can keep their pathetic existence alive in an AI age.
I love the idea Trump is placing on the table. I'm sure in everyone's mind the question is: Would this really be possible? I say that because more than having to pay taxes, People HATE THE IRS AND HOW THEY BEHAVE. THEY HATE CONGRESS FOR FINDING NEW WAYS TO TAX.
I would suggest that if it was offered to do a flat tax at a low level, people would do it in a heartbeat if it meant eliminating the IRS and all ways Congress has found to abuse the People via taxes.
Considere the States that do not have state income tax. How are they accomplishing this and what is the quality of life in these places?
People are reasonable and understand how the taxes are to be utilized but the corruption via taxes must be stopped. People will entertain the idea of this elimination if tarriffs could do it.
I would.
People are also very ready to downsize the government - severly. Again, this is because of the fraud and abuse. Scaling it back to the bones then allowing proper filling out as minimally as possible is what most would agree to, I think. It sounds radical, but People are angry.
Social Security and Medicare have been paid into for decades. To stop it would mean that future paychecks of certain peoples by birth year would not include the deductions. Many people have planned out their retirements with these inclusions and it would be detrimental to them for it to be lost. This is one reason it is so egregious that non-Americans are receiving these benefits, forcing retirees to take pittances and go back into the labor force to keep food on the table, roof over the head and essential medicines in the cabinet.
For younger peoples there should be options like HSAs without insurance, homebuyer accounts, IRAs or other vehicles that could be utilized - with all the deposits into these options being fully deductible from income taxes. (a Homebuyer account is a mythical bank account where deposits can only be used toward purchasing real estate.)
Tôi đang băn khoăn rằng Nước Mỹ đang triển khai bán thẻ định cư 5 triệu đô kết hợp với dịch vụ bảo vệ các nước khác bằng quân sự (khi Nato bắt đầu nhượng bộ đóng góp nhiều hơn). Vậy tất cả các nguồn thu nêu trên có đủ bù đắp cho Thuế thu nhập không, thưa bạn ???
"The substitution of two taxes must be examined at their fundamental level—merely discussing it in general terms is insufficient. One must analyze it from the perspective of property rights and transaction costs to gain clarity. At its core, a tariff is a form of administrative control that merely increases rent dissipation. Income tax, in essence, represents a redistribution of income rights, while value-added tax (VAT) functions as a profit-sharing contract. The notion of substitution is misguided; it only exacerbates rent dissipation."
In reading this article, it felt a little like asking if the US could theoretically go back to traveling on horseback as our primary mode of transportation. We *could* but it would require a whole bunch of changes.
Maybe in addition to a switch to pure corporate taxation? In any case, you’re making good points but felt like the conclusion was left unsaid …
With respect, I don't think a conclusion was intended to be offered but rather laying a platform for discussion - something I agree the American People need to begin engaging in as a method of deciding the real question: Who are we and what do we really want?
Yeah that’s fair. I suppose my mind immediately wanted a conclusion because of how chaotic the changes have been. I don’t even think it was a worthwhile experiment given how it was rolled out.
I think the second question is nearly impossible when it comes to a country as large as the United States. It’s not as simple as for the Danes or the Vietnamese. Lots of disparate people across many demographics. Who we are is much harder to answer than who we’re not.
When you say a different kind of dollar — what do you mean?
The current dollar system cannot exist with limits to expanding monetary policy. It needs the Fed and Treasury because of how huge the circulation is globally and how much risk has to be managed. One of the under explored themes in the current debate on tariffs is that no taxes, only tariffs, also imply that the empire of the dollar cannot exist. I'm happy to break that down in a later post.
That's exactly what I was going to ask.
Me too
A most excellent article, well written in plain English. Thank you!
This is a great read. I live in the penal colony called Australia, where we are massively over-governed, over-regulated, and, you guessed it, over-taxed. If it moves it is taxed, and if it doesn't move then it is pushed.
A lot of us Aussies watch the show that happening in the United States given we're kind of a sub-imperial arm of the U.S. I can't offer much in the end game as I don't know your country well enough, but this I am confident about: the numbers don't stack up. So perhaps it is more about introducing a different currency that might have significant yield and benefit to the U.S. I can't see the petrodollar going anytime soon and therefore you guys will keep your USD as the global currency.....at least for now.
Anyway, I watch with great interest.
In the meantime, Australia's politicians keep re-wrapping the printing press in the hope they can keep their pathetic existence alive in an AI age.
That's some blithering Aussie humor, love it! I got a friend there and she says they're AI-proof in business practices for at least another 2-3 years.
Thanks for proposing such a discussion.
I love the idea Trump is placing on the table. I'm sure in everyone's mind the question is: Would this really be possible? I say that because more than having to pay taxes, People HATE THE IRS AND HOW THEY BEHAVE. THEY HATE CONGRESS FOR FINDING NEW WAYS TO TAX.
I would suggest that if it was offered to do a flat tax at a low level, people would do it in a heartbeat if it meant eliminating the IRS and all ways Congress has found to abuse the People via taxes.
Considere the States that do not have state income tax. How are they accomplishing this and what is the quality of life in these places?
People are reasonable and understand how the taxes are to be utilized but the corruption via taxes must be stopped. People will entertain the idea of this elimination if tarriffs could do it.
I would.
People are also very ready to downsize the government - severly. Again, this is because of the fraud and abuse. Scaling it back to the bones then allowing proper filling out as minimally as possible is what most would agree to, I think. It sounds radical, but People are angry.
Social Security and Medicare have been paid into for decades. To stop it would mean that future paychecks of certain peoples by birth year would not include the deductions. Many people have planned out their retirements with these inclusions and it would be detrimental to them for it to be lost. This is one reason it is so egregious that non-Americans are receiving these benefits, forcing retirees to take pittances and go back into the labor force to keep food on the table, roof over the head and essential medicines in the cabinet.
For younger peoples there should be options like HSAs without insurance, homebuyer accounts, IRAs or other vehicles that could be utilized - with all the deposits into these options being fully deductible from income taxes. (a Homebuyer account is a mythical bank account where deposits can only be used toward purchasing real estate.)
Tôi đang băn khoăn rằng Nước Mỹ đang triển khai bán thẻ định cư 5 triệu đô kết hợp với dịch vụ bảo vệ các nước khác bằng quân sự (khi Nato bắt đầu nhượng bộ đóng góp nhiều hơn). Vậy tất cả các nguồn thu nêu trên có đủ bù đắp cho Thuế thu nhập không, thưa bạn ???
Sorry, could you share this in English?
"The substitution of two taxes must be examined at their fundamental level—merely discussing it in general terms is insufficient. One must analyze it from the perspective of property rights and transaction costs to gain clarity. At its core, a tariff is a form of administrative control that merely increases rent dissipation. Income tax, in essence, represents a redistribution of income rights, while value-added tax (VAT) functions as a profit-sharing contract. The notion of substitution is misguided; it only exacerbates rent dissipation."
In reading this article, it felt a little like asking if the US could theoretically go back to traveling on horseback as our primary mode of transportation. We *could* but it would require a whole bunch of changes.
Maybe in addition to a switch to pure corporate taxation? In any case, you’re making good points but felt like the conclusion was left unsaid …
With respect, I don't think a conclusion was intended to be offered but rather laying a platform for discussion - something I agree the American People need to begin engaging in as a method of deciding the real question: Who are we and what do we really want?
Yeah that’s fair. I suppose my mind immediately wanted a conclusion because of how chaotic the changes have been. I don’t even think it was a worthwhile experiment given how it was rolled out.
I think the second question is nearly impossible when it comes to a country as large as the United States. It’s not as simple as for the Danes or the Vietnamese. Lots of disparate people across many demographics. Who we are is much harder to answer than who we’re not.
"Who we are is much harder to answer than who we’re not."
Great point. Perhaps starting with who we are not leads us to who we are?