WHY PUNISH SUCCESS?: Economy Added Fewer Jobs Than Expected in November - WSJ.com
Wouldn't it be nice if the US would focus on supporting and building the businesses of the future (rather than supporting old-line unions and public employment).
This will mean cutting back on lots of sacred Democratic wealth-transfer programs.
In the meantime, the debt bubble (as Peterson discussed today on Bloomberg) is building across the developed world (particularly the US and Europe); and, as he said, no one knows when it will burst - but, it could be very quick and nasty.
The unemployment rate would seem to attest to the fact that the Pelosi-Obama administration went down the exactly wrong track in terms of turning the economy around. And, the open question would appear to be even more apparent that the country won't embrace the job and wealth creating policies without some type of seminal event. Will we have to wait until the debt bubble bursts and interest rates start to skyrocket (or the Fed just prints money like crazy as an interim step)?
As noted elsewhere in today's WSJ, the Democrats thought they could take the Federal government's share of GDP to 25% and higher. One does wonder if they even thought of the logical consequences?
Because if they did, supporting more consumption and more tax driven redistribution of production and investment gains surely should have suggested less investment and less jobs. But, then again, logic seems to exclude the fact that producers like to keep what they produce, along with investors and that taking too much (the old number used to be about 19% of GDP in the 1980's) of GDP by government brings about stagflation.
Clearly the society is bifurcating into the educated, information-based society that is globally competitive and the un- or under-educated part that is not competitive. Right now policies are trying to punish the successful parts of the educated society for their successes. This wouldn't seem a very bright idea?
Friday, December 3, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment