Human behaviour is what drives economics, not computer models, and human behaviour hasn't changed in a very long time. "Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time and I am convinced that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of the country. When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you lost, you charged it to the bank. You tell me that if I take the deposits from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families. That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on, you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a den of vipers and thieves." ~ Andrew Jackson, 1767-1845, 7th US President, when forcing the closure of the Second Bank of the US in 1836 by revoking its charter. And part of his farewell speech. "... It was not easy for men engaged in the ordinary pursuits of business, whose attention had not been particularly drawn to the subject, to foresee all the consequences of a currency exclusively of paper; and we ought not, on that account, to be surprised at the facility with which laws were obtained to carry into effect the paper system. Honest and even enlightened men are sometimes misled by the specious and plausible statements of the designing. But experience has now proved the mischiefs and dangers of a paper currency, and it rests with you to determine whether the proper remedy shall be applied. The paper system being founded on public confidence and having of itself no intrinsic value, it is liable to great and sudden fluctuations, thereby rendering property insecure and the wages of labor unsteady and uncertain. The corporations which create the paper money cannot be relied upon to keep the circulating medium uniform in amount. In times of prosperity, when confidence is high, they are tempted by the prospect of gain or by the influence of those who hope to profit by it to extend their issues of paper beyond the bounds of discretion and the reasonable demands of business. And when these issues have been pushed on from day to day until the public confidence is at length shaken, then a reaction takes place, and they immediately withdraw the credits they have given; suddenly curtail their issues; and produce an unexpected and ruinous contraction of the circulating medium which is felt by the whole community. The banks, by this means, save themselves, and the mischievous consequences of their imprudence or cupidity are visited upon the public. Nor does the evil stop here. These ebbs and flows in the currency and these indiscreet extensions of credit naturally engender a spirit of speculation injurious to the habits and character of the people. We have already seen its effects in the wild spirit of speculation in the public lands and various kinds of stock which, within the last year or two, seized upon such a multitude of our citizens and threatened to pervade all classes of society and to withdraw their attention from the sober pursuits of honest industry. It is not by encouraging this spirit that we shall best preserve public virtue and promote the true interests of our country. But if your currency continues as exclusively paper as it now is, it will foster this eager desire to amass wealth without labor; it will multiply the number of dependents on bank accommodations and bank favors; the temptation to obtain money at any sacrifice will become stronger and stronger, and inevitably lead to corruption which will find its way into your public councils and destroy, at no distant day, the purity of your government." Andrew Jackson March 4, 1837 http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=67087
Newsflash: Andrew Jackson was a red neck. He was against the central bank because he was not sophisticated enough to understand its purpose. Many things that have a legitimate purpose can be used to harmful (fatal!) results.
He was by know means perfect I'll grant you that. But that doesn't invalidate what he wrote. In fact he was right. Intelligence and sophistication has no bearing on what's right and wrong. After all, the last round of financial engineering was very sophisticated and look where it's gotten us. Why are the financiers of the world deemed to be the ones who know what's best for the rest? In a lot of cases (possibly a bad generalisation) they add little value other than to create schemes to skim small percentages from large sums of money and keep people indebted. And believe me, debt isn't only a financial problem. People from around the world have fallen for the idea of money for nothing and in the process have possibly lost the most important thing to all of us, true freedom. Maybe it was inevitable that financiers would effectively take over the world. But people like Andrew Jackson and others knew and warned of the dangers. I'm not an American, but I think that if the founding fathers saw what America has become they would castigate the people for abandoning what they fought so hard to accomplish.
Back in those days they understood Anti Christ. They knew that the Aristocracy could not rule with quite the iron fist and mental control through religion that they had been accustomed to in previous centuries and they knew that they would instead use the banking system to get control of the USA.. outside of that, wow, our current leaders are so much smarter of course..
The fathers of our country would not be very surprised to see the current situation. Disappointed, perhaps. But evidence suggests they expected the country to last about 200 years before undergoing some sort of revolution/repatriation. WTF! I've got Florida State@ WTF?@!
Do western populations have it in them anymore to stand up to their governments let alone revolt? Case in point, the AIG bonuses furore. Is this really the main game? What about the trillions already stolen? The bureaucrats and politicians know how to placate the public and give them their token victory to quiet them down. And never mind the constitution. No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. Maybe people shouldn't be angry over lawful contracts, no matter how obscene, and instead focus on the big picture.
Well, that's the question, isn't it? Can we reclaim our birthright, can we bring back capitalism? My guess is no, we cannot.