Inflation and purchasing power: who benefits? The winners ?

[Christophe]

Unearthing the subject, price inflation according to Wolinksi:



Other boards here: https://www.econologie.com/forums/humour-t1191-3840.html

A more recent topic on inflation: https://www.econologie.com/forums/l-inflatio ... t9980.html

[dedeleco]

Cute !!!

We must add the granulated pellets which will drop in price when we no longer buy them by curdling or burning wood or free bio mass wasted or abandoned everywhere.
Same for oil !!
By pedaling !!
Good for health !!!

[Did67]

b) The winner every time is the State with the VAT it collects because directly linked to the price of the product in question. He wants to increase purchasing power as he lowers VAT ...

...

Still just as bad a macro-economist, my dear Christophe ...

I'm not going to take it all over again:

a) of course, the amount of VAT collected increases, but as the value of what the State can acquire with that decreases (inflation = increase in prices for the same good and service), the State does not have a greater part of the cake (the cake being the total value of goods and services) ... The "number" increases, but what the State can buy with no!

b) when are you going to understand that even if we do not agree with everything, overall, the State is a set of free services for everyone: roads, schools, security (yes , the cops, police, etc ...), justice (even if it does not work well), culture (number of subsidized events, theater, etc ...), free research (not that of Monsanto) ... etc ...

So to complain about "too much state" is to want "less state" = a system where the rich have everything anyway (their planes, their schools, their theater not subsidized) and ... the poor nothing ! Go for a walk in sub-Sahelian Africa, you will see what a country without a State is!

Frankly, I do not understand these regular and untimely pushes of "neo-liberalization" to the nut on a site which would like to be a little more intelligent.

Let it be clear once more, I am for more public actions, therefore more taxes and redistribution, even if I do not have the solution to better manage this amount, democracy being only the least worse systems ...

So I'm sad to read such nonsense!

[Christophe]

did67 les anêries it's you who put them there. Your speech was true, it is no longer! Should think about updating the "system" did67 ... (sorry but when I am treated like a bad ass, well I react ...)

The public infrastructure is there! Large state projects have become extremely rare compared to a certain period. The State no longer needs heavy investments (as a% of GDP).

So where do the levies continue to go up? Pkoi we continue to chop in an area that is dear to you: national education but also research, justice ... all of them are currently on a budget level! Currently the French state budget is an operating budget almost exclusively (including maintenance + debt) not to say survival and is no longer an investment budget: it invests very little (compared to a period which you knew, me not!)

I believe that currently, under pressure from various lobbies and the swindling of public debts, the States enslave more than they serve their populations ...

40% of your taxes (roughly speaking) will go to reimburse the debt interest... is that serving a people as public goods? And the longer we wait to change the system, the worse it will get (monetary interest creation) ...

It's not me who says it is regret Philippe Seguin: https://www.econologie.com/philippe-segu ... -4146.html Extremely rare public intervention on the part of a well-known politician!

Did67: he says publicly all the same that taxes are no longer used to build things or hire civil servants but to repay the debt!

So I persist and sign! My remark of "bad macro economics" is good: lowering the VAT would boost purchasing power! And if it is not that of buyers, it will be that of sellers since VAT is a compulsory tax on commercial margins ...

The income and the usefulness of the government budget is not really the debate ... but you introduced it so well ...

[pb2488]

The debt charge (interest) is around € 45 billion for a state budget of around € 285 billion (2010). Is 15% from the state budget which goes in interest and not 40%. The deficit is around € 150 billion, it would be € 105 billion if we had no interest to pay. Finally the countries which still have the right to turn the printing press (= 0 rate credit) are in the same m ***** as us, or even some have even fared much worse in the past (hyperinflation). .
FYI, state personnel costs (salaries of "a few" civil servants) are € 120 billion per year, not counting pensions.

[Christophe]

The debt charge (interest) is around € 45 billion for a state budget of around € 285 billion (2010). Is 15% from the state budget which goes in interest and not 40%. The deficit is around € 150 billion, it would be € 105 billion if we had no interest to pay. Finally the countries which still have the right to turn the printing press (= 0 rate credit) are in the same m ***** as us, or even some have even fared much worse in the past (hyperinflation). .
FYI, state personnel costs (salaries of "a few" civil servants) are € 120 billion per year, not counting pensions.

So yes but no

a) I did talk about 40% on taxes and not on the budget (but I was wrong see c)). I read this on wiki a while ago ...

b) Wikipedia is not entirely in agreement with your figures (nor with mine, see note below):

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dette_publ ... e_la_dette

Debt service represents the annual payment of maturities (capital plus interest) of the loans taken out. The debt burden represents the payment of interest alone; it amounted to 47,4 billion euros for the year 2005, that is to say almost the totality of the income tax paid by the French (which represents, in 2006, 17% of the receipts of the State). In 2005, this charge was the second budget item of the French State, after that of National Education and before that of Defense23. In 2006, and for the State alone, the interest charge on the debt was 39 billion euros, or 14,6% of the State budget24. The interest charge in 2007 amounted to more than 50 billion euros (12% increase compared to 2006) [ref. desired]. It is the equivalent of the public deficit.

The repayment of the principal of the debt, which is part of the debt service, represents for the State approximately 80 billion euros, that is to say the sum of all other direct tax revenue (corporate tax , ISF, etc.). In total, the State's debt service represents 118 billion euros, which corresponds to all of its direct fiscal resources, or even almost to VAT (around 130 billion25.

c) In the end, debt service (= debt + interest = 118 billion / year) represents well 40% not of taxes but of the total State budget (118 billion is 40% of 285 billion).

Here is my confusion / error. So it's much worse than what I just answered in Did67 ... probably because I'm bad at macro economics ...

[Christophe]

And who are the beneficiaries of this "heist of the century"?

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dette_publ ... 9.C3.89tat

State creditors [edit]

The French state has gradually turned to international financial markets from 1973 (recast of the statutes of the Bank of France, reform contained in Law No. 73-7 of January 3, 1973, published in the official journal of January 4, 1973), and even more since the creation of the euro, which means that in 2007, 60% of the debt of the French State is held by non-residents (i.e. non-French households or businesses) 44.

This share of non-residents, 2/3 non-EU nationals, has increased steadily since 1999, when it amounted to 28% 45. In the 2nd quarter 2007, 58% of OATs issued by the State were held by non-residents (foreign companies and households); within the remaining 42% held by French companies or households, 60% were held under insurance contracts (such as life insurance contracts), 20% by credit institutions, and 17% by the mutual fund bias46.

But as the other countries are also in debt, the converse must be true: French companies and households must also be the creditors of foreign public debts ...

In the end, those who palpate are those who receive commissions on all these investments = the banksters ...

[pb2488]

In the end, those who palpate are those who receive commissions on all these investments = the banksters ...

Source? Figure? and above all the most important: Who are the "banksters" ???

[Christophe]

Ben asks your banker, he doesn't work for nothing, does he?

Convinced by the 40%?

[pb2488]

Ben asks your banker, he doesn't work for nothing, does he?

Like you and me: It makes a bunch of crooks ...

Source? Figure?

Convinced by the 40%?

Yes but 40% is the weight of the debt not only of his interests !!! This is not the same.

And indeed, it is very serious to have so much annual deficit ... We live on the back of future generations who will tighten their belts for us.

(On the other hand, I didn't really make a mistake. 45 instead of € 50 billion, that doesn't change orders of magnitude.)