No one Politician controls the American economy.

Greedy businees people may threaten the economy.

External Link

Today I have economy on the mind.

Government does not fuel economic growth. Private citizens with money to invest, fuel economic growth.

Government can interfere in how much private citizens investment with policy initiatives.

It is a mistake for the FED to keep raising or lowering the interest because it allows corporations to manipulate government and the taxpayer has to pay for this manipulation. The FED changes interest rates on money under the assumption that if does not inflation or recession will occur.

Business people will not loose money. Well at least not, smart business people. However, corporate America has created the impression that if the Fed does not act then economic forces will result in recession or inflation. It is a rouse. Business benefit by lower or higher interest rates. When the rates are low, they pay less on interest. When they are high, they can charge the consumer more.

Right now, I would have to say that if there is a threat to the American economy, it is greed. Business people seem to think they can charge anything they want. The consumer, however, has a fair idea of what a sale price should be on what they buy. When consumers loose confidence in sellers, they will stop buying. This will lead to job loss and inflation.

I know that business people deliberately create appearance of economic distress in order to manipulate politics.

From the pressure of environmentalist, government raised vehicle mpg limits. This led to less consumption. Oil companies who had made their economic forecast on the revenue from the sales they were accustomed to raised prices in order make up for the reduction in consumption.

Reagan/Bush put in place policies that have contributed to the economic growth since the late 1980’s. He reduced financing of state governments. He involved the US in the GTO. Bush/Reagan initiated NAFTA. In addition, papa Bush got America out of the gold standard.

During this economic growth, private citizens were buying houses, not to live in them, but as investment property. So there were a lot of sellers and few buyers. How do you sell homes in a glutted market? You sell people with low income and bad money management practices on the hustle of adjusted rate mortgages.

Business people knew they could make money either way. People pay off the home and the banks profit on high interest. The buyers’ defaults and the banks keep the down payment and the home, and gets to sell it again.

When America succeeds, her economic partners also succeed. Were you had a lot of in countries such as China and India riding bicycles and living with their parents you now have Chinese and people of India buying cars and homes.

Therefore, now instead of one major consumer of oil-the US-you now have five countries trying to buy the same oil as the US.

Therefore, before you starts saying one politician can control a nation’s economy start looking all the factors that contribute to a national economy.

The people work, save, and invest control economies.

Sometimes these people want a profit no matter what the cost.

politics

Locked Post

Advanced Search

Watch this post

Do not email me updates for this post Email me updates for this post

Successfully updated karma reason!

heheheeh You really need to print about 500 copies of this, bind it all together nice and tight, and then use the resultant bound materials to smack a few sheeple, uh, I mean people, upside the head until you've knocked some sense into them.

Start with the inferior occifer and then pick any target after that. Sadly I expect you'd be exhausted before you ever got the first sheeple enlightened enough to understand the facts here.

Successfully updated karma reason!

Fairly well written but I find a few mistakes in your economics.

Your opening is precisely accurate. The government cannot create economic growth, it can only hinder it. True economic growth comes from increased production which is indeed financed by capital investment from private savings as you point out.

However, you misunderstand the Fed and its role in the economy. You instinctual assessment that it is unethical for the Fed to continue to raise and lower interest rates to the cater of Wall Street is correct, however, you misunderstand inflation.

You say that "if the consumers lose confidence in the producers, then recession and inflation will occur". This is incorrect. To the contrary, assuming the Fed made no changes to the money supply, the result of decreased consumer confidence would be decreased demand for goods, and consequently prices would fall. This would lead to a recession as defined by the government GDP-based definition, however, this is a foolish measurement of economic growth. GDP measures the total amount of goods and services bought and sold within a country's borders. By this definition, money borrowed from foreigners and spent at home on consumer goods (probably on imports from Asia) adds to GDP. This is clearly not healthy as it is nothing but consumption of consumer goods (which is a destruction of wealth), and to make matters worse, it is debt-financed consumption so the burden must be repaid at a price of reduced consumption in the future. There are other reasons why GDP is a poor measure of economic growth, but I think that is the most clear and influential one for this topic. I would define economic growth as a function of the change in the production of goods in the country.

Now for inflation. You mistake the price rise in the cost of goods for 'inflation'. Inflation literally means to the act of expanding, so it is no surprise that the true definition of inflation is the expansion of the money supply. The rising prices are a probable result of the inflation, but they are not the inflation itself. So where does inflation come from? Look no farther than the Fed and the banking system. Whenever you hear that the Fed is lowering interest rates, it isn't actually setting the rate and mandating that be the rate of interest. It lowers its target interest rate by buying assets (usually securities) on the open market with money created out of thin air. Then through the magical means of fractional reserve banking, this new money finds its way into the reserves of a commercial bank either by direct sale of a bond from a bank, or buy deposit from a private bond owner, then through the magic of fractional reserve banking, the banks pyramid new demand deposits on top of the new reserves which further adds to the inflation by a factor of the money multiplier.

There are several factors that can cause inflation, but to simplify matters I will focus on what is causing our inflation today. The central bank of the United States (the Federal Reserve) has the power to create money (government fiat currency in our case) out of thin air, and spend it into circulation, and then the banking system further inflates by practicing fractional reserve banking with the added money which eventually finds its way into the coffers of commercial banks. The ways to prevent inflation include, to allow abolish the central bank and allow free banking (by which natural market checks will bankrupt banks that inflate), to abolish the central bank and outlaw the fraudulent practice of fractional reserve banking. Of course by abolishing the Fed you would also abolish the Federal Reserve Note, which would have to be replaced with either a new government fiat currency, or even better a return to a bimetallic system and let gold and silver circulate as money once again. If you want the full details on banking and inflation, I recommend The Mystery of Banking by Murray Rothbard.

As for your assertion: "When America succeeds, her economic partners also succeed. Were you had a lot of in countries such as China and India riding bicycles and living with their parents you now have Chinese and people of India buying cars and homes."

I find this point to be both widespread and ignorant. The idea that the economic growth of Asia is fueled by American consumption is rather foolish. Economic growth is production, not consumption. It takes no special skills or resources to consume. Contrary to your point, the American debt-based consumption which is financed largely by Asians hurts the Asian economies and they would be far better off without it. There are two main reasons for this. One, they are wasting their savings to finance the great American spending binge instead of making them available for capital investment in their own countries. Two, they would be much better off consuming their own products instead of exporting them in exchange for worthless paper dollars, which have become the greatest export of the United States.

As for the real estate bubble, that was made possible solely because interest rates were held so low by the Fed to inflate our way out of the tech bubble recession, unfortunately the bubble just moved into real estate and on a much grander scale. Artificially low interest rates create the illusion that there are more savings available in the economy than there really are and this leads to a boom where there is widespread malinvestment and then a bust where there is widespread liquidation of that malinvestment. And of course, what's the Fed's answer to the real estate bubble? Lower the rates again by creating more inflation! Only this time the bubble is probably going to go into commodities and the risk of hyperinflation in the United States is alive and well.

Successfully updated karma reason!