Economics 101

[madbaker]

Q: Identify the fallacy in this argument:
"Proposition [x] is not a tax increase.  [If passed the measure will] issue $xx million in state bonds."

Comments

[tsgeisel.livejournal.com]

Wait - you mean that bonds aren't free money? That we'll have to pay it back someday?

Next thing you know, you'll be saying that you have to pay off credit cards, too.

A: The fallacy has something to do with it being a Federal matter, not state.

[fionnbharro.livejournal.com]

Um.....

It assumes we think '$xx million in Bonds' has something to do with the SFGiants' Salaries.

Maybe?

Re: A: The fallacy has something to do with it being a Federal matter, not state.

[madbaker.livejournal.com]

Bzzzt! Bonds are issued at all levels - federal, state, county, and city. Read the answer above.

Re: A: The fallacy has something to do with it being a Federal matter, not state.

[fionnbharro.livejournal.com]

And corporate. And, yes, I know corporate paper is different.

Your initial post mentioned 'state' explicitly. I was making the obvious and obtuse reference to *that* in the subject line. Sometimes my attempts at amusing myself and others never rise above 'attempts'.

*sheesh!*

[aastg.livejournal.com]

Aw, everybody knows bonds aren't direct taxation, they're *voluntary* taxation!

(I know this because the idiot two cubes over from said so.)

[albionwood.livejournal.com]

Hah! I see we have been reading the same pamphlets lately. That one jumped out at me, too. But as I think about it... It's not really fallacious, is it? A bond issue does not raise taxes, now or later, in merely increases debt. One might assume that a tax increase may eventually result, but one could equally assume that economic growth will cover the debt (the usual excuse), or that the State will eventually default, or something else.

Where I have a stronger objection is the claim that "Proposition [xyz]will not raise taxes." To me that is a different and less defensible claim.

[madbaker.livejournal.com]

Absolutely true. However, one might equally truthfully say "This 100% increase in spending is not a tax hike." No, it's an increase in spending.

But based on historical patterns, debt and/or spending increases lead to tax increases. The money has to be paid back eventually, after all, and forecasting increased economic growth is a mug's game.

[albionwood.livejournal.com]

"A mug's game" - that's a new one to me!

Californians financed a lot of the recent economic growth with home equity loans; gonna be hard to convince people the State can't do the same thing. The arguments against debt financing just don't resonate with people any more, since our entire economy runs on it. Even the so-called conservatives running the Federal gummint have completely given up on the idea of fiscal responsibility; that whole concept is just so September 10, y'know?

The long-term view of the US economy looks increasingly gloomy.

[madbaker.livejournal.com]

Saith the OED:
"mug's game, a thankless task; a useless, foolish, or unprofitable activity. colloq.
1910 Belloc Pongo xv. 233 One cannot arrest millionaires with impunity... Even in a wild democracy to arrest them is Mug's game. 1918 Flying 12 June 427/2 Flying's a mug's game, mater, A fact I know full well. 1930 G. B. Shaw Apple Cart ii. 77, I am going out of politics. Politics is a mug's game."

It derives from "mug 1. a. A stupid or incompetent person, a 'muff', 'duffer'; a fool, simpleton; a card-sharper's dupe. slang."

I love having access to the OED.

[albionwood.livejournal.com]

The money has to be paid back eventually

NIMTO.