UnSubRocky wrote on Jul 12^th, 2026 at 11:46pm:


The reason that New Yorkers voted for a musso was that he promised free child care, free buses, rent freezes for one million households, city-run grocery stores, safety improvements and taxing the wealthy to fund essential services.

Now let's see if he keeps those promises!   

UnSubRocky wrote Yesterday at 12:15pm:


Indeed .....when the billionaires are threatening to leave...

The silly part is: money is created ex nilhilo; the sovereign currency-issuer doesn't need "taxpayer money" (either of billionaries or the rest of us).

Thr US Fed can fund New York's essential services at no cost to "taxpayers", provided the resources needed to deliver the essential services are available.

(google)

The famous quote, "It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning", is widely attributed to Henry Ford, though its exact origins remain debated.

It reflects Ford's skepticism toward modern banking and central banking, such as the Federal Reserve, which he and others viewed as opaque. The quote suggests that public unawareness of how money is created and credit is allocated allows the financial system to operate with little oversight.

The Mechanism of Money Creation: most money is not printed by governments, but is instead created digitally by commercial banks through the process of lending.

But private banks, by ancient custom,  are granted the sole privilge of money creation, ie 'credit money' creation.

It's time the public sector claimed its share of that privilege, with the sovereign currency-issuing government issuing free "fiat money"  (free for the government, not the private sector including you and me who have to earn money or borrow and repay the loan with interest); (with the govt) taking care to balance resource supply and demand in the macro economy, to avoid inflation. 

But I doubt Mamdani knows this, otherwise he would be shouting it from the top of NY's skyscrapers...

Aquarius wrote Yesterday at 2:43pm:


Didn't you read the post before yours?

You are merely spouting all the current mainstream dribble about "other people's money" (Thatcher)/"no such thing as a free lunch"/ "money doesn't grow on trees" etc  etc

Re the latter: money IS created out of thin air.

Hence your statement: "every benefit comes with a cost whether visible or hidden.
doesn't understand benefit and cost.

For a sovereign currency-issuer, the benefits, eg  housing, food and transport, required by everyone,  "cost" is measured in terms of the nation's available resources  NOT money; fiat money(issued by the state) is unlimited since money can be created out of thin air by the legal currency-issuer.

ie, for a currency issuer, the cost is NOT money but real resources eg labour materials research etc.      

Billionaires won't leave the region where they are making their money. It is too much effort to just uproot and leave the place they have called home for such a long time.

Well, yeah, people in the billionaire bracket can move to a holiday home and stay there. But, for the rest of the time, are they going to give up their $50 million home that they have lived, just because of some taxation that they are required to pay.

If I was given a job of sitting around and watching movies for $100,000/yr, but I had to move to Brisbane to do it, I would probably not bother.

The effort of packing up and moving would be arduous enough. I would be questioning why not get me a house here in Rockhampton and let me do the job from this town. I know people here.

Moving interstate might be alright for a billionaire family, if they are trying to avoid high taxation. But, realistically, they are paying more money than necessary in a move just to avoid being taxed. Why bother moving?

UnSubRocky wrote Yesterday at 8:42pm:


Interestingly, Gavin Newsome - the Dem governor of California - is ok with a Federal wealth tax, but not a state wealth tax  ---you can see why.

But Trump  wants lower taxes for the wealthy, believing that the wealthy create wealth for the entire nation as well as  the states and themselves.

But  Bezos, who notoriously  refused to increase the wages of his workers despite the c-o-l crisis burdening his workers .....go figure.

Are you saying governments should tax the rich? 

The Greens have been saying that for a decade, but their vote has flatlined for a decade, because no-one likes paying higher taxes - (while ON's vote has soared..how is ON going to fund government for Pauline's "battlers"?).

Interesting that you can't comment on Ford's observations (#2657).

Setanta wrote Yesterday at 9:43pm:


You are missing the big picture relating back to the original response. If a billionaire wanted to save some money on increased taxation imposed upon him/her, why spend more time and money moving out of the area to get a tax break in a new area? Is not the business where you are making your money just staying where it is? And what are you recouping if it is where your residency is located that determines your taxation you pay? A year of expenditure and a business lifetime of travelling to your organisation to conduct business?