Fiscally Irresponsible

in LeoFinancelast month

The Finnish government today approved an extra 1.5 billion in debt burden to cover expenses in this budget, for a total of 13 billion in debt. That might not sound like much for some countries, but it is significant for a country of 5.8 million people. It works out to €2,250 per capita

OI000709.jpg

I was talking with a colleague about this, and mentioned how governments taking on debt is taking money out of our future pockets. He didn't quite get this at first, bit all debt requires repayment and in Finland it is about 5 billion in interest payment obligations on already existing debt. Without that debt of about 200 billion, they would have still had to borrow around 8 billion to cover the budget.

This is how all debt works of course, where the more we borrow, the less we can spend our resources on. And in a culture where we are driven by instant gratification, in a on-demand consumer culture, with a line of credit available; it is very easy to get into debt. 10 dollars in interest repayments a month, turns into 100, and then 1000.

But, what a lot of people don't seem to realize is that when this is done at the national level, it means that future buying power of citizens is also reduced. Not only that, in institutional systems where there are protections, like banking, those bailouts serve to protect what should actually be allowed to fail. Instead, it supports a broken model, prolonging failure.

This only really happens in centralized systems, where the assumption is that the status quo model is better than any alternative. The other assumption is that failure of the banking system, means that everything fails. However, while it would be highly disruptive, this is not true.

For example, the only known economic that works perfectly, is nature.

Nature never fails.

There is never a collapse of the natural economy, because it is always perfectly balanced under the rule of, energy cannot be created or destroyed, only transferred. What this means is that while components of the natural economy "fail" on the human sense, like suns dying ad dinosaurs being hit by meteorites, the balance is always 1:1, as the energy just gets transferred to somewhere and something else.

There is no waste, there is no leakage, there is zero corruption.

In the human experience however, we are always going to be imperfect when we make rules, because our existence depends on us trying to survive. Nature doesn't care if we live or die, but we do, so we act in ways that we believe will meet our human needs. Whether they do actually meet them, or they don't.

But, we are also imperfect in identifying what we "need" in a sense that we can get confused and influenced into not meeting our needs, by seeing that the resources required is money, rather than money being a token for marking trade of the resources required. Instead of satisfying human needs, we have created a system that identifies money collection, as meeting needs.

And, this problem is exacerbated in a centralized system, as with limited insight into individual needs, and money as the representation of meeting need, resources get poorly allocated, no matter whether the intentions are good. It is like me choosing for everyone who reads this article, what they will eat for dinner. As I will eat it too, will I choose something that is good for me, or good for you? Will it be too spicy, or not spicy enough for you? Will it cater for food allergies, preferences, cultural needs? Unlikely.

Centralized decision making doesn't work.

And, since no perfect decisions can ever be made, the best we can do is make sure that as little damage is done by the decisions we make, by not applying them unilaterally across entire populations, magnifying the errors, compounding the impacts. And, the only way to do that is through a decentralized system where errors are made, but they are more localized, and what works and what doesn't is continuously evaluated through usage and opt-in choice. Businesses will start and fail, just like the suns in the universe, but the entire system can survive and even thrive, as decisions get made that meet the needs of individuals, but still meeting the needs within a framework of a community.

Essentially, the way we govern now might have been the "only way" at some point in history, but is antiquated, superseded by innovation that allows us to organize ourselves in new ways, at scale. We can collect, process and evaluate the needs of individuals with greater clarity, and still build systems where individuals can make their own decisions, without risking the entire structure. While highly disruptive when making the change, once we are moving in that direction, the processes within the system itself will start to correct and account for the changing meta, improving itself through all activity.

Or, we can keep what we have, and pretend that an economic crash, is natural, and keep pretending that all the consequences of a broken economy, is just the way it has to be. Getting more and more into debt, until it collapses and we reset, for the next round.

Systematic slavery.

Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]

Posted Using InLeo Alpha

Sort:  

It works out to €2,250 per capita

In the U.S., it’s $102,830 per capita or $266,950 per taxpayer.

What could possibly go wrong?

That s just the extension debt. All up, it is 37,400 euros per capita. Which is over a years average salary, or €85,000 per taxpayer. Nowhere near as bad as the US, but not very good for a country that only a couple decades ago, was largely debt-free.

It's worse than that. The government is selling Smallsteps into tax debt slavery for their own immediate benefit. It's an absolute perversion.

Indeed it is. And, the debt is even coming close to being used to invest into generative growth, but instead to largely placate idiots in return for votes.

“No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems—of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.”

—Thomas Sowell, Dismantling America: and other controversial essays (Source)

I believe that we have nature to thank for our existence, but nature doesn't have for us.

Nature cares nothing, for anything :)

I really feel like the government should have let the automakers fail back when they bailed them out. Part of the reason I picked up some Ford stock was because they were the only American automaker that didn't take a bail out. I also wish though that I had bought some GM stock after the fact. It exploded.

I also wish though that I had bought some GM stock after the fact. It exploded.

Bailout money ends up in the hands of the investors.

Remember the cruise line that got bailed out? Stock price skyrocketed after that too.

Interesting write up. National debt is scandalous and by right should be voted on by the people. I'm personally not happy with National debt and an a firm believer in balancing the books running a surplus and saving for a rainy day.

Just imagine if there was a 50/50 system - 50% of tax money was put aside for fundamentals - 50% was allocated by the taxpayers.

I'd vote for such a system, where the people get to vote for what percentage is allocated to Military/Health/Roads/Education/Welfare etc

At the end of the day, they are taking money out of my pocket for tax, so I'd like to be able to influence how and where it is spent.

Europe is just replicating whatever the US is doing. US has never had such a high debt - and somehow, us Europeans want to go that path as well. Logics???

Buy Bitcoin! Then again, I'm sure most people reading this invest outside of fiat, debt based currency.

They are doing for people and | think it will bulish USD

People tend to live in the moment and at some point, that debt will have to be paid back. They need to look out and see how it will affect things in the long term.

I don't know how it is for Finland, but in the Philippines, adding debt isn't that big of a deal to the current president. It always seems to be a problem for the next president. I hope that's not the case for you, but that amount is still very high. I just wish they use the money wisely.

All governments are irresponsible with money. They are there to enrich those who are directly in power. In the US the government does not have the best intentions from either side. Republicans and democrats both do what they want not the will of the people they represent.

Nature is natural and you can't determine what is coming up with , it's left for you to try and make the best out of it.