Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003
Daschle needs training
Thomas M. Miovas, Jr.
Harry Binswanger wrote:
> The mattress image [saving money by
> stuffing it under a mattress] could get
> people started along this dangerous road.
> The end of that road is the lethal,
> to the left, recognition that unsaved
> money goes into investment, where it
> creates jobs and wealth.
I think your attempt at double-evasive-think tripped you up. I think
you meant to say that saved money generally goes into investment,
<HB: Yes, make "unsaved" "unspent.">
rather than into immediate short-term consumption.
But even if the super rich didn't invest their saved money, it's still
theirs by the right of having earned it, and if they want to stuff it
under a mattress, then so be it. They have no moral obligation to
keep the economy going, if by this it means that they can only keep
their money if they do with it what politicians want them to do with
it.
<HB: True, but this was a Daschle comment on the *economics*
involved. Daschle he wanted to make us think that it is better for
economic progress if tax breaks go to the non-rich, because the rich
tend to *save* more! Which is the direct opposite of what any non-
Keynesian economist knows. I.e., in terms of economic "stimulus,"
it is better if the tax breaks go to the rich, i.e., to the savers, i.e.,
into investments, i.e., into production.>
