The devaluation tax

 What is it really?

It is the market determined  cost of known losses from past bonehead government.  The losses long untraceable, unaccounted for but still have a residual in compounding interest charges. The tax system way too imbalanced to apportion it fairly, so make it a universal loss, an inflation tax on what ever fool needs the monopoly tax dollar.  Many of this debt derived from period when pricing was in chaos and government had little idea. There is no moral or legal basis to assign charges on about a third of this government debt, say each of 20 years, that is too long for  any fool taxer to look.

Why fake, why not bet it?  It is central bank money, technology here is competitive, know one should complain, their is an inherent dead weight loss for the monopoly tax dollar. So, go ahead, the most fair ting to do is collect about a sixth of government revenue from double spending, put it in the ledge contract. It is not a problem, the bankers are not at fault, there is no need to excite the Post Nixon Shock Hysteria. Then renegotiate the tax next time around under the coinage power as defined in immutable Law.

The main reason for the losses are the earmark costs, and it is natural top tie these costs into incentive grants n revenue sharing.  Unbalance government chain is no ones fault, that too is immutable by the law. So, make the revenue sharing market to spit the inflation tax. We then tie the coinage power with tax power, there is no law suit from the House when the Senate agrees to a Fed contact. The New Fed covers a fail monopoly fee, more more than a quarter point. The New Fed is almost completely out of the tax business.

My plan is backed up by numerous economists Nobel winners defacto, dead or alive, it is in the books. And it is simple, it needs the governor of Wyoming, my new hero to get this clue. The small state governors make this work, they control earmark flow.  A few of them, two, three is all I need, I am close.

A shared senate Treasury responsibility

The inflaton taxes. If we estimated the total facotr unproductivity using th Solow Euler approximation, then it is nearly 2% per year, or about 10% of the budget at a minimum. The Solow losses are unrecoverable, at that bound, lost in the noise. The House is not responsible, they cannot be traced back to districts. In central banking the coinage power includes these Solow losses. They are a natural responsibility of Treasury to discharge, not the central banker. The myth is that the central banker can discharge inflation tax, it cannot do so in a double entry accounting system bounded by public auction markets. 

The Fed cannot double spend, its fundamental job is to be hedge, it forces the market to no arbitrage at the soonest possible opportunity. But at the same time it is trying to inflate at some rate of maximum entropy. Proof:  Reduce the problem to a race condition in a round robin automated market. Once the pit poss sets an inflation payment, all the accounts want to jump in and reset their S/l accounts.  The Fed is operating a known hedge, as seen by periodic congestion build up.

 Inflation taxes are different color, different partition, spin in the Marlov 3 tuples.. The inflation tax is an estimate once step removed from the S/L balances, and that tax needs to be asynchronous to the Fed pit boss. In proper sandbox lingo, the inflation tax is a fails to deliver, s an exogenous scofflaw queue, viewed equally by the Fed and its accounts. That is, the cost of inflation shared by balancing the cost of crossing the partition for all processes on the S/L bidding board. So the bid flow in the computer itself has to have an inflation market to bid the future decisions by Treasury. You can almost get all this from balanced flows in a network of protocols and exchanges and sing protocol stability theory.

The is spin equal two, a 2,y,z point on the 3 tuples. There is another partition that manages the other spin angle. But no problemo, it is still Due Process fair, it is a Constitutional requirement, variance bound by contract, and as fairly applied via revenue sharing as possible. So, given the hard bound, we can reduce the possibilities of other methods around this problem. There are few. That is Boltzmann for you.