If we are serious about getting things done — universal healthcare, basic income, solving climate change — we need to reject the taxpayer money myth in its entirety.
i’m not sure there’s a lot of value in arguing that, since we have a fiat currency, the government can just make new money and no one has to pay for it. the argument will simply change from “people who need welfare are mooching on taxpayers” to “people who need welfare are causing inflation”. it’s not really changing anything
the argument we should be making, as progressives, is that it’s fucking inhumane to let people die on the streets. we’re wealthy enough as a country that we can afford the taxes to ensure that never needs to happen. of course, if we implement universal healthcare, then you’ll be paying for your own healthcare, as well as others’, and we’ll all benefit from it being cheaper
the same goes for housing, etc. but arguing from a position of strength (i.e. we live in a country wealthy enough to do this) feels a lot more persuasive, to me, at least for an argument in the abstract - something you’d see on television, for example. it’s less persuasive for individuals who are obviously struggling, but for them, the argument is simply the fact that the system isn’t really working for them. and what would universal healthcare, etc, do…?
i’m not sure there’s a lot of value in arguing that, since we have a fiat currency, the government can just make new money and no one has to pay for it. the argument will simply change from “people who need welfare are mooching on taxpayers” to “people who need welfare are causing inflation”. it’s not really changing anything
the argument we should be making, as progressives, is that it’s fucking inhumane to let people die on the streets. we’re wealthy enough as a country that we can afford the taxes to ensure that never needs to happen. of course, if we implement universal healthcare, then you’ll be paying for your own healthcare, as well as others’, and we’ll all benefit from it being cheaper
the same goes for housing, etc. but arguing from a position of strength (i.e. we live in a country wealthy enough to do this) feels a lot more persuasive, to me, at least for an argument in the abstract - something you’d see on television, for example. it’s less persuasive for individuals who are obviously struggling, but for them, the argument is simply the fact that the system isn’t really working for them. and what would universal healthcare, etc, do…?