Permanent ‘Quantitative Easing’

Photo by Giorgio Trovato on Unsplash
  1. To retain complete freedom from taxes/public debt, total spending by government could not exceed its current per capita level. Any additional spending that any government did undertake could definitely be limited, however, to selling bonds. That would require taxes of some kind/duration for repayment, but would be much different from simply imposing/raising permanent taxes.
  2. There would have to be a limit on hoarding money: at some point money would have to be returned to the central bank — but people and businesses would retain plentiful pools of money (based on income) and (unlike taxes) no money would ever be collected from any person or business before it could be used for purchases/investment.

--

--

--

unaffiliated, non-ideological, unpaid, academically trained in economics and philosophy

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Recommended from Medium

National Nonprofit Day (NND) recognizes the goals and positive impacts nonprofits have on…

Resilience, Social Enterprise and innovation in the absence of state sponsored welfare

Made In The USA

The Main Argument of Marx’s Wage Labour and Capital

Unsteady Paychecks Are Making Americans Anxious

Still Holding the Naira ?

A balancing act on a slippery road

Asset Class Valuations — March 2017

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Stephen Yearwood

Stephen Yearwood

unaffiliated, non-ideological, unpaid, academically trained in economics and philosophy

More from Medium

The Truth and blockchain

The Heat Death of Civilisation

Quit Liking Mediocrity and Less!

The Ever Growing Risk To Humanity From The Fossil Fuel Industry