Inflation Could Hit 20%

It’s now so obvious that inflation is in our future that even Business Insider admits it:

Wharton professor Jeremy Siegel said inflation could spike to 20% in the next two or three years due to “unprecedented” fiscal and monetary stimulus and an explosion of the US money supply…

Siegel went on to criticize Fed chair Jerome Powell for not acting to quell inflation in the near term.

The Wharton professor called Powell the “most dovish chairman” that he’s ever seen and said that the Fed chair’s stance could “be a problem down the road.”

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, the article makes no mention of President Biden or his policies. I’m not an economist, but even I can see that a big part of the problem is Biden’s excessive spending; any action, or inaction, by the Fed is downstream from Biden. If this crisis were happening during Trump’s administration, his name would be plastered all over the article.

It’s the Federal Government, led by clowns such as Biden, that are leading us down this path – and I’ll tell you what irks me the most.

What irks me is that if you bought silver (for example) at $20/ounce, and then sell it years later at $35/ounce, that same Federal Government’s collection arm (the IRS) will count it as “income” – even though your buying power hasn’t increased at all.

In other words, they’re taxing you TWICE. I say this because nobody invests ALL of his money in precious metals; people need cash for their day-to-day expenses. But due to Federal fiscal malpractice, that cash’s value decreases. Inflation is a form of taxation.

You made the wise decision to set aside some of your money in the form of precious metals, and now it’s time to sell it. Even though the actual buying power of those precious metals is more or less the same as when you bought them, since their fiat-currency value has “increased,” you’re taxed again.

Really, the same principle applies to stocks, real-estate or any other investment that’s meant as a hedge against inflation. Protecting yourself from the Federal Government’s inflationary policies should not be counted as “income.” If an ounce of silver could buy you two bags of groceries 10 years ago, and you get the same groceries today for that same ounce of silver, then you didn’t gain any income; you simply preserved your income.

Many times, on this blog, I’ve written about how The Left twists the meaning of words to its own ends. How it alters definitions in order to mold the minds of youth to fit its narratives. We’ve seen this with words like “hate,” “racism,” “diversity” and “fair.” These are all related to social issues, but it’s the same with fiscal issues. “Income,” “poverty” and “tax” no longer mean what they’re supposed to mean.

“Income” should relate to your buying power, regardless of any arbitrary units of fiat currency.

“Poverty” should relate to the lack of life’s basic necessities; it’s irrelevant that somebody else has more than you do. “Poverty” and “inequality” are unrelated.

“Tax” should mean the involuntary taking, by the government, of any of our assets. This includes increased expenses due to regulations, reductions of our buying power due to inflation, and loss of value of our real property due to use restrictions and forced Diversity.

If the masses could be made to see what’s being done to them, things would be a lot different.

This entry was posted in libertarian thought and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Inflation Could Hit 20%

  1. 370H55V says:

    The Trump Administration floated a trial balloon calling for indexing of capital gains to inflation, which would have been a well-received reform, but it got shot down as a “tax cut for the rich”. Of course.

    Contrast that now to your idiot Oregon Sen. Wyden, who wants to tax the gain on assets every year–even before they are sold. Apart from the problem of valuation of such assets and liquidity problems (difficult enough to pay property taxes on real estate, to which would be added tax on increase in value), Wyden doesn’t understand the difference between labor income and capital gains.

    He claims that it’s only fair to do it his way by comparing the income of a nurse, taxed by withholding every paycheck, against that of a plutocrat sitting on piles of stocks, bonds and real estate. What he doesn’t get is that the plutocrat, who might be a high-level corporate executive, also has withholding from her paycheck, and the nurse, who may have inherited a $300K property, would have to sell it in order to pay the annual cap gains tax.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.