Today I saw a news article about the Japanese government planning to provide cash subsidies to low-income families. Why do many capitalist countries adopt this kind of money distribution to stimulate the economy, while China has never taken such measures? Many liberals online advocate that the government should give money to the people, generally believing that this is beneficial to the people. Their reasoning is that the rich have more money, while the poor have less, and distributing money leads to inflation, which dilutes the wealth of the rich and benefits the poor. How should this view be countered?
1 Like
This needs to be discussed from several aspects. First, a large part of the wealth of the rich, or the bourgeoisie, is not stored in the form of currency, but in means of production, bonds, and similar assets. Therefore, the idea that printing money will dilute the wealth of the rich is incorrect. Because real gold and silver, workshop machinery, and so on will not depreciate just because the money supply increases.
On the other hand, according to my friends in Japan, the Japanese government’s money distribution is conditional. They give money to those who pay more taxes, and many poor workers pay less in taxes than billionaires. Therefore, this kind of money distribution is difficult to reach the poor and often ends up in the pockets of those ‘big taxpayers’.
2 Likes
I see
I see
Understood, that is indeed the case. But there is still a problem: since issuing money causes inflation and does not harm the interests of the bourgeoisie, why doesn’t the Chinese Communist Party implement the same policy? So far, the CCP has only trialed the issuance of a small amount of consumer vouchers that can be used to directly purchase goods in a few regions; most of the vouchers are still “discounts”. Moreover, who does issuing money actually harm? For these capitalist countries (including many countries like the United States that adopt this policy), the people who receive the money are very poor individuals who didn’t have much money to begin with.
It is not the case that those who pay more taxes receive more money. Those who pay less taxes receive money because, generally, workers who work more pay more taxes, so they are not included among the recipients. However, international students who do not work can receive this money. The source of this money is the taxes paid by people working in Japan, which are given to low-income workers and some international students. The Japanese government, under the pretext of increasing public welfare expenditures, raises taxes, but in reality, only a tiny fraction is redistributed. This move by the Japanese government can also serve to divide workers. Some taxed workers, deceived and very angry, believe that their taxes are being taken by those who do not work, and they harbor strong resentment towards low-income workers. This kind of money distribution is not true welfare; the amount given is still not enough to sustain a basic family life.
Ultimately, the money issued comes from taxes, which are either extracted from the working people or collected from the bourgeoisie. The taxes collected from the bourgeoisie are also ultimately derived from the surplus value created by workers. Moreover, although it is said that so much money is issued, in reality, only a part of it is given to workers; the other part is still invested by the bourgeoisie in semiconductors and AI, updating fixed capital in emerging industries.
Furthermore, when the bourgeoisie distributes this money, it ultimately serves their interests. Workers spend money to purchase accumulated goods, which allows a large amount of commodity capital to be converted into monetary capital, enabling the continued reproduction of capitalism and allowing the bourgeoisie to continue exploiting workers. While it seems that issuing money benefits workers, it ultimately benefits the bourgeoisie; it can be said that it is preemptively seized and thus firmly controlled. Additionally, it can deceive workers, achieving a threefold effect.
However, China disguises the distribution of money, such as various discount coupons and recent trade-in subsidies, which more clearly reflect the purpose of the bourgeoisie in issuing money. The budget for trade-in subsidies largely goes toward updating fixed capital, and providing money only when consumers buy things essentially encourages consumption. But because China’s bourgeoisie is more decadent and reactionary, it does not effectively deceive people.
Indeed, even if money is issued, it won’t reach the poor. Actually, China has issued money within the domestic repair system before. The subsidies given to impoverished households are like this; often, the truly poor find it very difficult to get them, needing to submit a bunch of materials, wait for approval and opportunities. Meanwhile, wealthy farmers and others who have connections with local governments in the areas of the repair system tend to receive subsidies quite easily. There are also subsidies for poor students in schools, which is even more obvious; many recipients wear brand-name clothes and hold new mobile phones.
Moreover, the money issued is actually printed out of thin air by the bourgeoisie. The so-called distribution of money to the working people is ultimately just the bourgeoisie taking away the future earnings of the workers and then giving a part of it to deceive the workers.
Returning a part of the stolen property from the working people will not cause losses to the bourgeoisie.