Tapsearch Com EditorThe silent economic enemy ignored
June 7th 2011 21:19
Bizarre Politics Reports:
When a Nobel Prize isn't enough. Professor Peter A. Diamond, professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology does not make the cut in more ways than one.
Ray Tapajna Chronicles and The World is (not) Flat
Conservatives in the USA do not want to talk about the cause of the economic crisis but only want to talk about cutting debt.
Republicans do not want Nobel Prize winner Peter A. Diamond to serve on board of the Federal Reserve for this reason. Professor Diamond links the unemployment problem with the money problem. He writes about his rejection in the New York Times.
In my journey in the global economic arena I explore the lost worlds in the Flat World at Tapsearch Com
In my journey in the real world of economics, I do not relate to either side in this issue. First of all I do not understand how a super bank of banks can control the flow of wealth without any real consent of the people.
Furthermore, there is a disconnect between the investment community and production. Big money is actually divorced from production and through the Federal Reserve Bank tries to create new money products out of nothing. At the same time, in the free trade globalist world, production is moved from place to place for the sake of cheaper labor costs.
( Search under Tapsearch Federal Reserve Bank for more resources.)
A real economic value is discounted for the sake of the money products. The value of workers and labor is more of a natural asset than all the money products put together. This value is a real tangible one and most likely represents a better money standard than does paper money products.
Professor Peter A.Diamond won the Nobel Prize for his economic expertise. Just wanting to be on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank is a contradiction especially when he trys to tie the financial manipulations with the nature of unemployment.
He neglects to talk about free trade being the ultimate terminator of jobs and does not question why we have to compete with one another for the same jobs in a global economic arena. It is obvious that free trade and globalization have evolved in a driven way by powerful forces outside the will of the people and the real free enterprise system.
He is right about fiscal policies not being in line with job creation but needs to emphasize the fact that free trade and globalization came and stole our jobs away. In the process of new working class replaced a middle class of workers. And if you bring free trade to its final conclusion, it leaves an underclass as a measurement of where the averaging of incomes will end up.
What banks do or not do about raising or lowering interest rates are beside the point. We need to insert the brands of free trade, NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, WTO etc. in the discussion of any recovery. Throwing more money into an endless hole of free trade based on playing the funny money global monopoly games is nonsensical from top to the bottom and vice versa. In this frame of reference any fiscal policy is a precluded failure. It is 1937, all over again.
President Roosevelt threw in the towel after all his fiscal policies and recovery packages failed. He said he would no longer let the dollar stand in his way to re-create the American economy. He seeded the economy by passing the Lend Lease Act where products and commodities were shipped to our potential allies without worrying about payment. In doing this he ramped up our industrial base and then World War 2 came and production took over the process of restoring the economy.
With free trade the USA has smashed this industrial base and now nothing is left to fill the void. The only economic model that will work is to re do our local economies without sending production out of the country. God help us if we let the money changers keep doing their thing with Presidents like President Obama keep trying to bail out their failures.
Let us also not forget that the first stimulus package went to a foreign nation.
After getting NAFTA passed, the number of factories moved to Mexico quickly doubled to more than 4,000 factories being moved there, President Clinton still had to rush billions of dollars to save the Mexican peso and economy.
The first thing we have to do is to at least use the terms NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, WTO etc. in any discussions about what happened and where these programs stole our jobs away.
Conservatives in the USA do not want to talk about the cause of the economic crisis but only want to talk about cutting debt.
Republicans do not want Nobel Prize winner Peter A. Diamond to serve on board of the Federal Reserve for this reason. Professor Diamond links the unemployment problem with the money problem. He writes about his rejection in the New York Times.
In my journey in the global economic arena I explore the lost worlds in the Flat World at Tapsearch Com
In my journey in the real world of economics, I do not relate to either side in this issue. First of all I do not understand how a super bank of banks can control the flow of wealth without any real consent of the people.
Furthermore, there is a disconnect between the investment community and production. Big money is actually divorced from production and through the Federal Reserve Bank tries to create new money products out of nothing. At the same time, in the free trade globalist world, production is moved from place to place for the sake of cheaper labor costs.
( Search under Tapsearch Federal Reserve Bank for more resources.)
A real economic value is discounted for the sake of the money products. The value of workers and labor is more of a natural asset than all the money products put together. This value is a real tangible one and most likely represents a better money standard than does paper money products.
Professor Peter A.Diamond won the Nobel Prize for his economic expertise. Just wanting to be on the board of the Federal Reserve Bank is a contradiction especially when he trys to tie the financial manipulations with the nature of unemployment.
He neglects to talk about free trade being the ultimate terminator of jobs and does not question why we have to compete with one another for the same jobs in a global economic arena. It is obvious that free trade and globalization have evolved in a driven way by powerful forces outside the will of the people and the real free enterprise system.
He is right about fiscal policies not being in line with job creation but needs to emphasize the fact that free trade and globalization came and stole our jobs away. In the process of new working class replaced a middle class of workers. And if you bring free trade to its final conclusion, it leaves an underclass as a measurement of where the averaging of incomes will end up.
What banks do or not do about raising or lowering interest rates are beside the point. We need to insert the brands of free trade, NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, WTO etc. in the discussion of any recovery. Throwing more money into an endless hole of free trade based on playing the funny money global monopoly games is nonsensical from top to the bottom and vice versa. In this frame of reference any fiscal policy is a precluded failure. It is 1937, all over again.
President Roosevelt threw in the towel after all his fiscal policies and recovery packages failed. He said he would no longer let the dollar stand in his way to re-create the American economy. He seeded the economy by passing the Lend Lease Act where products and commodities were shipped to our potential allies without worrying about payment. In doing this he ramped up our industrial base and then World War 2 came and production took over the process of restoring the economy.
With free trade the USA has smashed this industrial base and now nothing is left to fill the void. The only economic model that will work is to re do our local economies without sending production out of the country. God help us if we let the money changers keep doing their thing with Presidents like President Obama keep trying to bail out their failures.
Let us also not forget that the first stimulus package went to a foreign nation.
After getting NAFTA passed, the number of factories moved to Mexico quickly doubled to more than 4,000 factories being moved there, President Clinton still had to rush billions of dollars to save the Mexican peso and economy.
The first thing we have to do is to at least use the terms NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, WTO etc. in any discussions about what happened and where these programs stole our jobs away.
| 24 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
