Thread by @asymptosis

So many wrong things in this @mileskimball
article. Let me count…

• When you spend down your balance-sheet assets, the money vanishes. Like you consumed it.

• When you don’t spend down your wealth, you are "making resources available," so we have more assets to "invest." 1/

https://twitter.com/dandolfa/status/1077679218790608897

@mileskimball • Less consumption spending, slower wealth turnover, means we have more stuff.

• Spending is “appropriating resources for yourself,” rather than causing production of new stuff.

• Reducing C in C+I…magically increases I! /2

@mileskimball • $125T in highly concentrated wealth results in more investment than $125T in widely distributed wealth. #GotIntermediation?

• Philanthropy has ever in history, will ever, come even vaguely close to “taking care of the poor,” distributing "resources" "efficiently." /3

@mileskimball • You can create a consumption tax that’s progressive relative to income (much less wealth!) without taxing rich people’s spending 100%+++.

• (Alternative: regressive taxes r gud.) /4

@mileskimball • Everybody has a choice about whether to spend most or all of their income. Greedy poor people are impoverishing us.

• Taxing people’s health and education spending (etc. etc.) is a good thing, cause it’s not “investment,” it's "consuming resources." 5/

@mileskimball When Smaug appropriates everybody's gold coins and hoards them in piles, he's "making resources available." 6/