Right Winger
Registered User
- Messages
- 293
Yes, but capital items like housing aren’t counted in the calculation of inflation. The cost of servicing the credit is but artificially low interest rates meant that such costs were not inflationary.@Purple,
it's tempting to link the recent rise in inflation to QE.
The ECB started QE in 2014, phased it out, then restarted due to COVID.
However, I asked a senior Economics prof (the type who might be on the news), and he stated the recent inflation of 2021-2023 is not due to QE.
Artificially low interest rates, negative at times, drove capital looking for a return into real estate across the western world. The QE money kept banks capitalised and the system working while that happened.@Purple
Here is a quote from Scott Sumner on the effects of QE. When CB buy huge amounts of financial assets, they pay for them by creating more bank reserves (liabilities of the CB).
"Paul Krugman developed the modern framework for thinking about liquidity traps. Krugman showed that a large injection of reserves into the banking system might fail to significantly boost inflation when the economy is stuck at the zero lower bound for interest rates. This possibility is not because large increases in the “money supply” (i.e., the broader aggregates) would fail to boost inflation. Rather, Krugman showed that a large increase in bank reserves would not even boost the broad money supply if the base money injection were viewed as temporary. Instead, banks would just sit on the extra excess reserves and the money multiplier would fall as the monetary base increased. As a result, the broader aggregates would be largely unaffected.
In the years after Krugman wrote the paper, major central banks did inject large quantities of base money into their economies on a number of occasions, and in many cases, these injections had relatively little impact on inflation or the broader money supply. Instead, the extra base money was mostly held as excess reserves, just as Krugman predicted."
Page 16
also artificially low interest rates allowed governments like our own to keep borrowing and spending (even though they also had huge corporate tax receipts aswell), and all this was inflationary especially in the irish economy. Our economy was juiced up by both FDI receipts and QEArtificially low interest rates, negative at times, drove capital looking for a return into real estate across the western world. The QE money kept banks capitalised and the system working while that happened.
If the parents aren't that wealthy then they won't have that much property tax to pay. If you own a high value property then you are wealthy. Don't confuse wealth with income.Wealth tax on property will deprive younger children of not so wealthy parents or less wealthy children and grandchildren.Where will the taxes be spent?The state has a way of wasting this
No. You are comfortable, perhaps. Wealthy is a different matter entirely.If the parents aren't that wealthy then they won't have that much property tax to pay. If you own a high value property then you are wealthy.
Yes, different concepts entirely. Somebody should tell Sinn Fein.Don't confuse wealth with income.
Is it? News to me. When introduced here, it was all about diversifying the tax base and reducing taxes on labour. How's that working out for you?The purpose of property tax is to keep property prices low.
To a point. More relevant perhaps is that they stop people moving to where work, entrepreneurial or educational opportunities may exist. Easily solved by expanding supply. See my post #21 above.High property prices are bad for the economy. They take capital away from wealth creating sectors of the economy.
Amen!The State will always waste money. That's the nature of governments and, more specifically, the State Sector.
If you own a lot of wealth you are wealthy. The hint is in the name. You may not have liquid assets but that's your choice.No. You are comfortable, perhaps. Wealthy is a different matter entirely.
Indeed they should. Their "Wealth Tax" is nothing of the sort. It's an income and liquid asset tax. They exclude around 80% of all the wealth in the country. If you are old and rich then vote for the Shinners. If you are young and starting off in life they are the last Party you should vote for.Yes, different concepts entirely. Somebody should tell Sinn Fein.
Every day is a school day.Is it? News to me.
Yep, it certainly diversified the tax base a little, but it's only a token level tax. It should be much higher. Unfortunately our left wing government has vastly increased State spending over the last decade so they take more and more private income and redistribute it. We Irish are happy to be treated like children and want to State to be our Mammy.When introduced here, it was all about diversifying the tax base and reducing taxes on labour. How's that working out for you?
It's extremely hard to expand supply. See any number of my previous posts on that topic for the many reasons why.To a point. More relevant perhaps is that they stop people moving to where work, entrepreneurial or educational opportunities may exist. Easily solved by expanding supply. See my post #21 above.
Their lives will already be complete Hell.Or the 500 young people that KPMG on its own took into its graduate programme this year?
MaybeTheir lives will already be complete Hell.
But they’ll receive a great grounding and have great opportunities elesewhere.Maybe
But they have choices, lots of choices. Most of which didn't exist back when I was their age.
Some will hate KPMG and will leave. Some will love it and stay. Free world, free choice....
There is no incentive to do this (unless the IMF are in town). Every problem always needs "more resources", never more ingenuity.The obvious alternative is to cut current spending....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?