A more honest and effective way to begin an answer to the “pay for” question.

"[Home] Builders are facing higher costs too, for construction loans, building materials and diesel. They are also deal with persistent labor shortages, driven by immigration enforcement activity during the past month, which have caused construction delays and discouraged legal workers from reporting to work." wsj.com/economy/housing/u-s-…

A more useful observation is that rate hikes now have a large, direct fiscal price tag. This does not reduce "fiscal capacity" (which is about the ability to meet payment obligations of any size) but "fiscal space" (which is about inflation risk associated with making those payments). The right question: Is the stream of interest payments inflationary, given who receives the interest as income?

I hasten to add that this was an epic policy failure. In the US, reliance on the Fed/QE/ZIRP together with a pivot to deficit reduction left us with a jobless "recovery" that paved the way for you-know-who.

Inaugaration Day vs today. 8 charts that might matter when voters head to polls. Are you better off today?

"Constant shifts in diesel prices, transportation costs and the tariff environment have emboldened business to feel justified in passing costs on to consumers, said Firrincieli, the sales manager from the logistics company."

Excited to share that distributor made the MMT documentary Finding the Money free to watch worldwide.

And, of course, it’s “taxpayer money” when it’s something you’re against and “public money” or “federal dollars” when you’re for it. Them’s the rules.

Remember, it's "repression" if you reduce a subsidy that overwhelmingly benefits the rich (interest), but it's good old-fashioned deficit reduction when you repress subsidies for ACA Medicaid, SNAP, etc.