Well then keep stumbling around proving that what didn't work in the past won't work now either. And all the while call others silly.
What exactly didn't work? Capitalism? Leverage? Monetary Theory? Keynesian Theory? Anti-Capitalist Measures that distort economic incentives? Capitalist incentives that are not aligned with "societal welfare"? Because all those things are contributors of the current problem. And the Austrian school is not the opposite of all of those things (since some of those are opposites of each other). Finally, it's worth pointing out that I don't actually think Austrian is "bad" or "wrong" (nor do I agree with it entirely). But at the same time, to think that one school of fairly academic thinking is the ultimate answer is both simple minded, and having been demonstrated over and over again throughout history, extremely dangerous.
lol Ohh hardcore Americans, is there anything you can't stay in denial about? Someone's been ignoring the blatantly obvious facts about how the healthcare bill was passed due to the billions being spent by drug companies because of how it would benefit THEM the most. No I'm not repeating what Ron Paul said by the way, this was a news article posted on here but the search engine is crap for forums so I'm too lazy to look for it. We live in an age of Corporatism, it does not matter whether you are Republican or Democrat, so long as you support the corporations you will never get what you want in politics or the economy.
Unfortunately for most of you Ron Paul is right. He is among a few congressmen not to be in wall street's pocket. His knowledge of economics are awesome (Austrian Economics) but the only bad thing is his love for a gold base economy. America's economy, politics and media have grown ignorant to the true nature of economics that makes him look stupid when he attaches the fed, fractional reserve lending and other current government expansionist practices. The current system is already about 100 years old, he is a fool when he attacks a system that has become the nation itself. Anyways, I am please to listen to REAL ECONOMICS whenever he talks.
We are here because of wars and the Rothschilds..... Wars, because Europe tacitly allowed us to inflate the dollar to recover World War I & II expenses, and the bankers (who control the FED) because Wealth benefits as holders of hard assets where the poor and middle class see their savings slaughtered. Heaven help us if a commodities-based reserve currency is (invented) adopted. Then our masters will not be able to lure us into debt with easy credit. Then they will develop new ways of separating us from our earnings, perhaps called "taxes." Opps, been there, done that. I think I'll read "Atlas Shrugged" again.
Just in case some don't understand "gold based economy"... 1. When America was on a "gold standard", it was inconvenient to deal directly with gold.. it was cumbersome, heavy, and not easy to sub-divide accurately. So, America printed paper money which was "convertible into gold on demand". 2. When American government got loose with their spending and deficits, prudent Dollar investors "converted" their paper notes into gold, thus depleting our gold reserves... and in so doing, held the US Government's "feet to the fire" when it came to spending. 3. Nixon put the kibosh on all of that... by removing the convertibility of paper money into gold. And hopefully you have been paying attention and know the rest. However, there is no genuine NEED for a "gold standard" on fiat. There needs to be SOME standard to prevent abuse of the money by politicos... but it doesn't need to be gold. We could have a "faith" based currency. That is, the US government could promise to (and actually adhere to) "increase the money supply by no more than ______% per year". The amount of money the economy NEEDS is proprotionate to the population. That is, if the population increases 2% per year, we NEED money supply to also increase 2% per year. But Noooooo... being restricted to only increasing the money supply to keep pace with the population is not adequate "screwing with the money" for the politicos... and therein lies the basis of our problem. IF the US Government were to HOLD to increasing the money supply by the approximate increase in the population.. and any bonds we floated were of course backed by the "full faith an credit of the US and its ability to tax the populace to honor debt commitments", we wouldn't need our money to be backed by any other than our "taxing authority"... Unfortunately, history has proven we can't trust politicos with anything that important...
his knowledge of economics might be awesome to some but his knowledge of human nature is lacking. to actually think that capitalism can operate without regulation as he advocates shows a lack of knowledge of our history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional-reserve_banking The truth is that when you put $1000.00 in the bank, the bank can lend out $900.00 of it. If the 900 is deposited deposited in the bank by the borrower. The bank can lend out another $810.00 If that borrower keeps the money in the banking system as a deposit somewhere, the banks can lend out another 729.00. ETC ETC. Fractional Reserve Lending allows the banks to leverage your money. It is good for manufacturers, in that they have a chance of getting paid more from producing more products. It is bad for those who have amassed a sum of money because the banks are always creating more money.