All economic theory is bullshit; it mistakes money as a product of intrinsic value, rather than a proxy representing the labour of humanity as a whole. The economy will naturally expand as the population does, independent of any metrics of pencil pushing exercises.
The question we should ask ourselves is this: is this really the best for humanity? Why should the masses toil at subsistence rates to enrich a select few, when we have the means and technology to end labour altogether? Is work inherently moral, or is it just the remnant of our subsistence farmer ancestry?
All systems of economy and government are arbitrary. It is, therefore, moral and just to exchange the existing systems for one that liberates and names more people happy, rather than one that wastes humanity’s time, blood, and bones.
Thanks for this, all this discussion if investment be spending makes it seem like we are comparing a tax on making investments to sales tax, and perhaps unsurprisingly finding out that no one has the former while many places have the latter.
We’re comparing tax on investment income vs tax on salary. We’re comparing the reward deserved by the guy who puts up the money to build the capital to the reward deserved by the people who actually build it. We are saying the former deserves more credit.
And it comes from an attitude that while there will always be enough rabble to do whatever needs done, there is a shortage of great men (gender included intentionally) to decide what should be done.
