Can the government make more money

Speakers Antony Davies. Topic Uncategorized. Prior to the invention of money, people relied on bartering to exchange goods and services. Bartering has two problems. The first is what economists call the double incidence of wants problem. To exchange goods and services, you have to find someone who not only has what you want but who also wants what you. The second problem with bartering is the retention of value problem. When bartering for goods and services, it is difficult to save up what you produce because items produced may not hold their value. Money solves both of these problems.

Trending News

Consider the case of the United States. What would people do with that money? Some of that money will be saved, some might go toward paying off debt like mortgages and credit cards, but most of it will be spent. You’re not going to be the only one who runs out to buy an Xbox. This presents a problem for Walmart. Do they keep their prices the same and not have enough Xboxes to sell to everyone who wants one, or do they raise their prices? The obvious decision would be to raise their prices. If Walmart along with everyone else decides to raise their prices right away, we would have massive inflation , and our money is now devalued. For the price of Xboxes to hold steady, the supply of Xboxes will have to meet this added demand. If there are shortages, certainly the price will rise, as consumers who are denied an Xbox will offer to pay a price well in excess of what Walmart was formerly charging. For the retail price of the Xbox not to rise, we will need the producer of the Xbox, Microsoft, to increase production to satisfy this increased demand. Certainly, this will not be technically possible in some industries, as there are capacity constraints machinery, factory space that limit how much production can be increased in a short period of time. By this logic, we also need the per-unit costs of producing the Xbox not to rise.

No quick physics

This is going to be difficult as the companies that Microsoft buys parts from are going to have the same pressures and incentives to raise prices that Walmart and Microsoft do. Wages are essentially prices; an hourly wage is a price a person charges for an hour of labor. It will be impossible for hourly wages to stay at their current levels. Some of the added labor may come through employees working overtime. Many companies will need to hire extra labor. This demand for extra labor will cause wages to rise, as companies bid up wage rates in order to induce workers to work for their company. Labor market pressures require wages to increase, so product costs must increase as well.

Too much, too fast

Join the conversation! First of all, the federal government doesn’t create money; that’s one of the jobs of the Federal Reserve, the nation’s central bank. The Fed tries to influence the supply of money in the economy to promote noninflationary growth. Unless there is an increase in economic activity commensurate with the amount of money that is created, printing money to pay off the debt would make inflation worse. This would be, as the saying goes, «too much money chasing too few goods. See all terms in the National Debt Glossary. See all questions about the national debt. You are leaving AARP. Please return to AARP.

Western Wealth

S tailor their immigration policies to attract and give citizenship to mainly techies and doctors. Brady ready for ‘whatever the future may bring’. Yep we should make more money in order to decrease its value. Hoover did not accept any salary from the government while he was President. Now we are at a time where critical scientific needs are waiting to be made. The government borrows around billion, 83 million dollars. Category: Economics and Finance Science. The government should provide more money to fund science Yes because We are indebted to several other countries as well, as ourselves. Already existing science job vacancies; creating skills,to create jobs that employ those skills when jobs like that already exist and are being taken up by immigrants,seems like an odd way to go about things. Immigrants in Canada have double the education rate than that of locals. Asked in Cigarettes How much money does the government make from cigarettes? The Navy does not make money. There are many.

Rising prices

However many scientists criticise this as undermining our economy in the longer term. The Obama administration in the USA is increasing its science budget and the rising powers of India and China continue to concentrate on sciences.

Should we be cutting funding? All the No points: Cost. Facebook Twitter Pinterest Email. The government should provide more money to fund science Yes because No quick physics The advancement of the human race is majoritavely down to science. If we look at anything in the world around us then science and resarch using the scientific method has been. The most obvious example is that which I am writing monwy.

Without the advancments that science has been able to make these word I am writing on mylaptop would be on paper and you would certainly not be able to read them so instantly. Did this happen instantly? Of course not it took many moons, of small steps at a time.

Now we are at a time where critical scientific needs are waiting to be. Global warming, energy supplies dwindling, more complex bugs, and ageing population and a growing third world with not enough food. This issues cannot be solved overnight and even the mostminute experiments in universities become necessary in building the govednment that willmark the next big expansion.

With these problems on the horizon it is most blatnatly time to invest in these problems potential soloutionswhich can only be further scientific advancment, improving the yields of crops, alternative fuels, otherwise we could find ourselves in deep trouble and stagnating. No because The Industrial revolution has arguably been the fastest period of economic growth in history, and the funding provided by the government to tge was effectively zero. Instead people like Brunel would seek investment and the market system would very effectively differentiate between good investment in science and bad investment.

Historically governments have tended to be very bad at this, wasting huge moneh of money. In a time with such an enormous budget deficit, throwing more money at high speed trains and concord type experiments that do not make financial sense would be an alarming. Also Theoretical physics has very nearly govefnment had any practical benefits to an economy apart being highly correlated with genius and being the glamour-science. Western Wealth In the complexity of modern economic society, the most valuable commodoities are not naturally sourced, they are instead man made creations.

It is scientific advancments and ability to turn unvaluable raw materials into desirable commodities that creates so much of gkvernment wealth on which western society now depends.

The countries that have a large amount of raw materials tendto be poor,while Britain is wealthy because of its technological advancments. If investment in science and funding of its advancement was cut it will put Britain in a precarious scenario. It would be robbing its future of one of the few avliablesources of future wealth. While this may not effect the short term interests it would surely effect the long terminterests and prosperity, and create oppotunities for modernisin geconomies to take.

Wealth has been created by scientific advancments, but now the majority of money is not in the manufacturing,or indeed sceintifc advancments,it is in the ability to manipulate goods for sale. For example the money that comes to Briatin from BMW and Vaxuhall is the same, they produce cars, but the ability to market them and sellthem is where the weatlh is now generated, rather than the product.

Scientific advancement can certainlyinthelong term produce wealth. But in the short term the cost is too high when development can equally be gained by using another countries scientific advancement, also letting them foot the. In terms of making more long term money the case is obvious,but it also creates the jobs for mxke to go. Unemplyment is a major concern and where science funding offers the dual advantages of more jobs and better paid jobs, resulting in more wealth, its funding becomes an important aspect effecting all sectors of society.

Already existing science job vacancies; creating skills,to create jobs that employ those skills when jobs like that already exist and are being taken up by immigrants,seems like an odd way to mony about things.

Millions should be spent in creating jobs that require skills jobless people the unemployed already. In fact Canada and the U. S tailor their immigration policies to attract and give citizenship to mainly techies and doctors. Immigrants in Canada have double the education rate than that of locals. The G. P has recently matched the Euro and bad long-term planning has the leading role. The U. K cannot afford to make the same mistakes as the rest of Europe. If immigrants can fill in vacancies then the locals need not be trained to be proficient in science.

The government should provide more money to fund science No because Cost Obviously with a war going on, the endless need to supply the NHS and other domestic services, and a tge defeciet, it is important to balance the books carefully. To pump millions into science funding that can offer little or no immediate return is a foolish waste moneu money at such a time of need that it cannot be justified.

Yes because General opinion is that war-spending is a waste of British money. Sending just a few British troops to Afghanistan to fight alongside masses of Americans and locals is a fruitless investment both short and long-term The N.

S has been a recent disappointment, primarily because science education in Britain is not up to the mark. Better medical staff is a very important factor in better medical service. Science: a Threat to Society?

Science: Boon or Bane? Should We Give Money to Beggars? The government should provide more money to fund science. All the Yes points:. All the No points:. Most reacted comment. Hottest comment thread. Notify of. We would love to hear what you think — please leave a comment! Category: Economics and Finance Science.

Getting Rich on Government Money: Profiles by VICE

By continuing hte use this Can the government make more money or by clicking «OK», you consent to the use of cookies. The US tax code is around 2, pages long. And there are additional tens of thousands of pages about the tax code: IRS regulations, revenue rulings, and case law covering court proceedings around the code. But a few fundamental questions can get to the root of how American taxes relate to the US debt. Just as individuals earn wages, so does the government.

The Economist Who Put Stock Buybacks in Washington’s Crosshairs

This number reflects the amount of money the government earned from revenue, both taxes and miscellaneous sources or nontax revenue, an insignificant source. As we have said over the course of this series, the federal government provides services to its citizens, such as military protection, interstate regulation, and, of course, health care.