Trade is better than tax!

[morganist]

WTF are you even saying?

What government trades? They confiscate. They buy things - especially votes. They give things away. - see the former.

But trade LOL.

By taxing the population as the main source of income for a government the government is limiting its income to a percentage of domestic GDP. If the government was to develop its own products it can get a cut of the gobal economy which is much greater than the domestic economy. By not trading on the international stage the government has limited its income draw.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-morgan/austerity-alternative_b_15926506.html

 

[morganist]

LOL sell off what they previously confiscated. Of course.

Otherwise nooooooooooooooo.

They have no competition and no incentive and most of all they haven't a clue.

Read the article and the linked articles. Governments can get a share in new product development on the international stage. Entrepreneurs will approach the government to help trade internationally. New government systems and processes can be developed and commercialised around the world. This is where they can make money.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-morgan/austerity-alternative_b_15926506.html

 

[morganist]

A country imposed a 25% tariff on your goods and you imposed 2.5% tariff on their goods, that's not free trade, that's fools trade. --rephrased from DJT

Read the below article. What about government redesign and innovation of public sector services that can be sold around the world and shared government ownership of internationally developed new product innovation. The government can make its own money. It should!

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-morgan/austerity-alternative_b_15926506.html

 

[SunTrader]

Read the article and the linked articles. Governments can get a share in new product development on the international stage.

I read it. It's nonsense. Government can do what it wants ... except turn a profit. But as long as it has an strong powerful army and printing press it doesn't need to.

Countries get in trouble when they believe such fantasies.

 

[morganist]

I read it. It's nonsense. Government can do what it wants ... except turn a profit. But as long as it has an strong powerful army and printing press it doesn't need to.

Countries get in trouble when they believe such fantasies.

The government could easily make money from getting involved in new products, especially products like new insolvency products, national debt products etc.

 

[morganist]

I read it. It's nonsense. Government can do what it wants ... except turn a profit. But as long as it has an strong powerful army and printing press it doesn't need to.

Countries get in trouble when they believe such fantasies.

If governments tax they can only get a cut of the domestic economy. If they trade they can get a cut of the global economy. Trade is better than tax and governments can trade.

 

[sandp500trader]

But the government makes nothing, it produces nothing. If we were communist and didn't have a private sector, then the government could make things and sell things, however, it would fail as government enterprises always do. When soy bean farmers sell soy beans to China, and make a profit, the government steals part of that profit, hence, the government is benefiting from the global economy through trade. What you're saying is, wouldn't it be great if the government owned the soybeans, then they would make 100%. North Korea had the same thought process.

 

[morganist]

But the government makes nothing, it produces nothing. If we were communist and didn't have a private sector, then the government could make things and sell things, however, it would fail as government enterprises always do. When soy bean farmers sell soy beans to China, and make a profit, the government steals part of that profit, hence, the government is benefiting from the global economy through trade. What you're saying is, wouldn't it be great if the government owned the soybeans, then they would make 100%. North Korea had the same thought process.

There are loads of products the government can create. They can get patents, licences and contractual agreements to new developments. They would be selling to the free market or other governments. They could agree to get patents with entrepreneurs and share the commissions of the sales, the can revamp their own systems and sell them to other countries for example a new regulatory system for tax or pensions etc and the software and calculations that come with it. The below article and the linked articles explain the process of commercialising new products. The government can invest in free market products and share the profits. They can help to get international trade deals going and guarantee they get a cut.

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/peter-morgan/austerity-alternative_b_15926506.html

 

[morganist]

But the government makes nothing, it produces nothing. If we were communist and didn't have a private sector, then the government could make things and sell things, however, it would fail as government enterprises always do. When soy bean farmers sell soy beans to China, and make a profit, the government steals part of that profit, hence, the government is benefiting from the global economy through trade. What you're saying is, wouldn't it be great if the government owned the soybeans, then they would make 100%. North Korea had the same thought process.

It just has to front the money up for free market products and get a cut of the profits. It can help with international trade and the regulatory process.

 

[sandp500trader]

But the government already has incentive programs, and it already gets a cut, it gets the cream of the crop, it gets a cut from the profits earned.