Tax relief measures just because stock market is down. Enough of this foolishness!!!!!

[morganist]

what if economic targets unrealistic?
recession is a part of the economic cycle
when you try to cancel recession you get what happened yesterday
is money printing market intervention? because it all will be financed with QE
do you believe all taxes must be cancelled and all government expenditures financed by money printing?
don't you think money printing is also tax?

If you don't have continual economic growth it causes investment defaults, which the economy cannot afford at the moment due to the high level of public and private sector debt. In terms of generating economic stimulus there are a few more new techniques that I have developed. I explain these techniques in the letters sent to politicians with attached articles linked below.

http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2020/02/letter-to-chancellor-of-exchequer.html

http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2020/02/letter-to-prime-minister-of-united.html

Expansion of the personal taxation allowance for further occupations should not cost the government revenue but it should provide an incentive for further work that will create economic growth. Pension saving optimisation has been used in the United Kingdom successfully to stimulate economic growth, when inflation hits all they have to do is increase the annual pension allowance again.

 

[morganist]

These government people are wasting all their bullets on the first inning. The market drops 10% from ATH(!!!) and they have an emergency 50bp cut. Then the market dumps on them to new lows. Now they announced a fiscal package the market rallies then dumps on them.

What bullets will they have left when the real crash comes along with 20-30% down move. Geez. No strategic thinking.

There is a new school of economic thought in the United Kingdom, it seems to work. See link below.

http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2020/03/letter-to-prime-minister-regarding.html

 

[zdave83]

Tomorrow there is a meeting with with senate and house Republicans to discuss a "possible tax relief measure" that would provide "a timely and effective response to the coronavirus" what a fuxking joke this is. It is amazing how quick they act every single damn time markets fall to help the markets back up, absolutely no such thing as free markets. Let the fuXking markets do what they need to do without any intervention.

Why do people believe everything is all about the markets? There is a real economy, businesses, employees and families out there. If it turns out they truly need assistance to get thru this, why is putting a plan in place to help them a bad thing?

 

[smallfil]

Funny, extreme liberals against government intervention when it does not suit their agendas. They are fine with Obamacare and Medicare for all yet, do not care about fellow Americans who work in airlines, cruise lines or even retail who stand to lose jobs over the Corona Virus? Careful hypocrites, your children or grandchilden could be among those who lose their jobs and you will still be blaming President Donald Trump from not doing enough. The US economy is bigger than the US stockmarket. How are the companies in your portfolio going to do well when, businesses are having a hard time making monies? Maybe, you can use the remaining brain cells in your head to figure out that one.

 

[tommcginnis]

Why do people believe everything is all about the markets? There is a real economy, businesses, employees and families out there. If it turns out they truly need assistance to get thru this, why is putting a plan in place to help them a bad thing?

Because it's bad signalling behavior. It suggests Mommy will always be there. It enables a calcification of any sort of danger response mechanism -- it *disables* fight-or-flight -- entirely necessary in any (responsible) economic environment. It is insidious, bit-by-bit sponging its way through the flesh of the economy -- from the lay-about teenager to the corner newsstand to General Motors. The end product is a moribund economy bloated and fattened for the kill: a major recession. And when that real contraction hits? "No bullets left."

 

[d08]

Governments have a reponsibility to achieve economic targets, it is covered in many statutes and treaties. If economic growth is not attained it will lead to recession and the default of investments. Even if you don't agree with intervention from the government taxation cuts would be something you should approve of because taxation is a market intervention in itself. Reducing taxation is a taking away governmental power and market control.

Do governments have a responsibility to have debt at serviceable levels? Seems not.
The markets are not even down much. If you actually believe what you're saying then cooling measures need to be taken during a ridiculous bull run like we save before Corona. But no, nothing happened. This type of thinking will only lead to a true recession.

 

[d08]

If you don't have continual economic growth it causes investment defaults, which the economy cannot afford at the moment due to the high level of public and private sector debt.

Talk about a circular argument. We cannot afford to service our debt if there are defaults so let's increase the debt, making the situation even worse.

 

[tommcginnis]

If you don't have continual economic growth it causes investment defaults,...

((to D08)) Indeed -- a total fiction (if broadly held -- even in the orthodox, non-Morganist world )...
• There is no mathematical proof of such a policy-driven outcome.
• Equations/models which purport to show such an outcome eventually come around to a singular-but-startlingly-unsupported assumption: that the rate of growth in GDP must exceed the rate of growth of the population, such that per-capita GDP itself grows.
• If per-capita GDP remains static in an at-equilibrium economy, then disaster is declared, completely ignoring the fact that the economy was at equilibrium.
• Much of Europe has seen a population decline for the last generation or so. Those economies where the population changes were greater than GDP changes (e.g., Germany, England) were seen as relatively successful. Those economies where the population changes were less than GDP changes were seen as "problematic" (PIIGS: Portulgal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, Spain).

 

[morganist]

Do governments have a responsibility to have debt at serviceable levels? Seems not.
The markets are not even down much. If you actually believe what you're saying then cooling measures need to be taken during a ridiculous bull run like we save before Corona. But no, nothing happened. This type of thinking will only lead to a true recession.

Governments are legally required to hit the economic target they have set, things like the Stability and Growth Pact and ECB inflation targets, which are legally necessitated under the EU treaties. It may have been one of the reasons the UK left the EU, although they have their own legal required targets to hit.

There are targets set to slow down the economy if inflation is present and tools are used to achieve this. Governmental targets are not so much about pushing up stock prices but hitting inflation, economic growth and poverty eliminating targets. They are legally obliged to attain these targets.

 

[morganist]

Talk about a circular argument. We cannot afford to service our debt if there are defaults so let's increase the debt, making the situation even worse.

There are many other ways to stimulate an economy other than debt. I have provided links to two letters with supporting articles that explains them, see below.

http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2020/02/letter-to-chancellor-of-exchequer.html

http://morganisteconomics.blogspot.com/2020/02/letter-to-prime-minister-of-united.html