Yes, it's the "expected rate" at the time you get the loan. Guess what banks expect when inflation is low? They expect it to stay low. These are fallible people, not emotionless machines.
Banks are run by people who are not going to be around in 30 years when your loan matures. The people who approved all those 3.5% loans in the 2010s do not care that they essentially lose the bank money when inflation is higher. Plus the original bank probably sold the loan to some dumb investors long ago. That's who takes a bath when interest rates rise (due to inflation).
It's not just that. People fought duels over their honor in the past. We don't have duels anymore, so we shouldn't rely on a judge to recuse themselves.
It is a founding concept of European law that no one should be a judge in their own case:
It's not a common misconception. If you have a fixed rate loan, say a home loan locked in at 3% or 4% (like many current homeowners), then inflation above normal helps you. When your loan was created, a sub 2% inflation rate was priced in. Anything higher than that means you are winning and your lender is losing.
Your advantage is that you can choose to refinance when rates are low, or keep a good interest rate when rates are high. Also, I don't know what inflation hedges you are talking about that "rich people" have access to. Anyone can buy stocks, real estate, or inflation protected bonds.
But the shrinking economy would happen in an uncontrolled cycle. It would be too sudden. Even your job at the plant nursery would be cut. That's why deflation is bad: it's an uncontrolled brake on the economy.
True about loans. Inflation benefits all debtors, not just the government. So poorer people who borrow benefit from inflation more than rich people who lend. As others have said, stagnant wages are the real problem.
Regarding deflation, people living in deflation actually do delay purchases. That's why the deflation persists. There is a cycle that happens where delayed purchases reduce business sales, which causes layoffs. That causes people to delay more purchases.
In your truck example, someone would definitely delay that purchase if they lost their job.
Do you really think that there's a bunch of children running drugs around so they need to be strip searched? Let me repeat that: do you think children are committing crimes right and left?
The police searched them, so if there was "evidence" they would have been arrested. "Child drug gangs" would be all over the news. Since that didn't happen, we know that these children were targeted based on assumptions (probably race).
Black children have a problem with people assuming they are older than they really are and treating them like adults. If you think there's a ton of "evidence" that literal children are committing a ton of crime, you're part of the problem.
I think in one sense it can be good. Sometimes it is counterproductive to downvote someone from 1 to 0. I think this would prevent that, as the first downvote is probably the most important one.
But I agree that making any data public will allow everyone to be categorized easily. "This person dislikes this content and likes other content."
Remember, you are giving this info to everyone. Mark Zuckerberg will be able to see what you like and dislike in all public votes.
My favorite story about the gulags is the childhood of Mikhail Gorbachev.
He was born in a family of peasant farmers. His paternal grandfather opposed the collectivization of the farms and was sent to the gulag. His maternal grandfather supported collectivization of the farms, and ended up as the chair of the local farm. He was also sent to the gulag.
It is the same. Property tax valuation isn't "exactly correct", nor does it need to be. It's just roughly consistent across similar properties. If anything, it's easier to value the private shares you own because they are exactly the same as the shares someone else in your company owns. Properties are all unique.
I don't mean to insult you, but you are clearly not an expert in finance. Like I said, I understand why you don't want to pay a valuation tax on your shares but it would be technically simple to implement.
Honestly though, you don't have to worry about it. No wealth tax is being proposed on any amount under $100 million. And no tax is proposed above 2%. If you have $100 million in private shares, your tax burden will not negatively affect your life. Get an expert.
Valuing your incentive shares is not hard. It's done every day. The bank that would give you a loan does it to know how much money they can loan you.
Your illiquid private shares would just have the value discounted by some percentage to account for this: say, 30%. So you could be taxed on the remaining 70%.
I understand that you don't want this to be true, but it is. You are not the first person with an illiquid asset, and It's relatively easy to value it for tax purposes. Property tax is paid based on the assessed value of real estate, which is also illiquid. Every year billions of people manage to pay their property taxes without having to sell their homes.
Making $93 million with inside information on volatile tech companies is easy. This guy sounds pretty bad at trading.
If you know that Tesla is going to have a "historically successful quarter", it's child's play to buy a call option that will triple (or more) your money. This dude could even have hidden his inside info by buying and selling a series of options on index funds that held Tesla (instead of the real thing). The index would jump by a small amount that could be magnified if you buy the right contracts.
If they tripled their money each time, they could make 81x their starting money on just these 4 companies. They should have at least over $100 million, if not $1 billion.
This actually tells you how to convince these people to vote for you. Hint: they don't care about policies.
Remember when trump said "Take the guns first, then worry about it later"? That's what these people like: action. The Democrats should just act and force the Supreme Court to stop them.
Declare all student loans forgiven and let the Republicans deal with the fallout. Negotiate more than 20 drug prices, for all Americans immediately. Direct the FTC to investigate food price collusion. This shit literally grows on trees and you can buy fresh food directly from farmers for almost nothing. Moving it a few hours away to a city should not jack up the price substantially.
Russia has had democracy for 33 years. The people living on the Ukrainian border have electricity and running water. They are not idiots. You are acting like missing a few comforts makes people so stupid they can't take care of their own lives.
Guess what? Most people who voted for George Washington for President lacked running water. And all of them lacked electricity (except Ben Franklin I guess). They figured it out because you don't need running water or electricity at all. If you can run a farm and feed yourself, you can figure out who is lying to you and choose your leader.
You realize the interview only showed the people who give the best sound bites? I bet you could find someone living in Washington DC who still thinks Clinton is President. And maybe someone who thinks Hillary Clinton is President.
People are responsible for who they vote for. Being uneducated is not a good excuse when there's only a few choices. It's not like they're being asked to run the entire country. If they are voting, they have a major responsibility and entire years to make up their minds.
This shows that Hamas was more interested in being warlords than the actual business of governing. Just like the Israeli government is more interested in conquering a tiny bit of bombed out desert than actually living in peace.
Both sides are clearly led by pieces of shit. Israel has a democracy though, so they are choosing to be led by pieces of shit. Palestinians might have some shitty beliefs about Jewish people, but they don't have a voice in their government.
Literally no country actually cares about Palestinians. Iran and their proxies (Hezbollah, Hamas, the Houthis, Syria) just want to be warlords. Turkey, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia just want to distract their domestic audience. Europe is just going to wring their hands and hope the killing stops.
America is actually the biggest force for peace in the region. All of these were signed in Washington DC (or nearby at Camp David):
Uhh... what?