[OT] Ameros will clog the tubes - was Re: Network Neutrality

Von Fugal von at fugal.net
Sat Dec 6 09:22:14 MST 2008


<quote name="Andy Bradford" date="Fri,  5 Dec 2008 at 22:33 -0700">
> Thus said Von Fugal on Fri, 05 Dec 2008 12:39:14 MST:
> 
> > I  feel   that  inflation  is   inevitable  in  many   respects.  Well
> > distributed, limited inflation is acceptable and manageable.
> 
> Are you  talking about monetary  inflation (the classical  definition of
> inflation) or the more modern definition  of price inflation? And why is
> it ever acceptable and manageable?

Monetary inflation. Price inflation is certainly avoidable. I only say
it's inevitable because finding that ideal money that will never expand
and never fluctuate in usage, could prove hard indeed. If we used gold
as money, and more gold is mined, we have inflation. To me that's
acceptable and manageable. My point is that people seem to to think that
because no matter what we do, we'll have inflation, means that we might
as well let the government control that inflation. Wrong answer. More
wrong is the conclusion that inflation is NECESSARY. It certainly is
not, and if we were able to find a money that never inflated, there
would be no detriment from the lack of inflation.

> If we  all awoke tomorrow morning  and found that all  our bank accounts
> had evenly  doubled overnight, how  would that benefit anyone?  The only
> people that  would actually benefit  are those  who woke up  earlier and
> discovered the increase sooner. They  would then spend their money, thus
> driving  up prices  for the  late  comers (or  those who  thought to  be
> prudent and  save it).  Late comers  would find  that their  infusion of
> money wouldn't buy  as much as those  who spent their money  early on in
> the  process. Eventually  overall higher  prices would  reflect the  new
> situation of  the doubling of the  money supply. Those who  had acquired
> goods  and  increased  their  capital  wealth  early  on  would  end  up
> wealthier, and those who didn't end up poorer.
Yep, those early risers are the government and it's suppliers.

> > If  taxation is  the exact  same thing,  then, why  not just  tax? Why
> > inflate instead?
> 
> Taxation  is such  a distasteful  thing. Nobody  gets elected  on higher
> taxes. This is why democratic governments are so able to wage war. If we
> had to pay taxes for all the wars we get, the costs would be unbearable.
Precisely, so given the choice between taxation and inflation, I'll
choose taxation anyday. Why allow the government the subversive and
deceitful tool of inflation, to be able to tax us more than we otherwise
would allow? Inflation (by government) is even more distasteful than
taxation, because it is at least as distasteful as any taxation, but the
tasters are future generations. Ick! The perpetrators can continue to get
themselves elected because the current electorate don't see the inflation
for what it is.

Von Fugal
-- 
Government is a disease that masquerades as its own cure
-- Robert Lefevre
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://plug.org/pipermail/plug/attachments/20081206/a0b8dfb7/attachment.bin 


More information about the PLUG mailing list