Dale
2014-03-18 13:03:28 UTC
I lean toward to the progressive side
the establishment has to evolve
I recognize there is an investment in the status quo and the status quo
has gotten us everywhere we are at, but they must glean and garnish the
future
I remember Reagan promoted "trickle down" economics, a trickle is a
start if it is all that you can afford, but you really need a "flow"
you do have to credit that establishment recovery out of terrible
inflation in the late 70's
Reagan would have had a 15% return on a DOW Index Fund throughout his years
I won't preach about the 1987 market market sell off, it led to a
progressive candidate being elected, Clinton
Clinton followed up with a 33% market
the only way economics is going to work is to accept supply and demand
in all aspects, that is capitalism and strife and it fulfils individualism
Marx said the value of money is the labor that produced it, you need to
apply supply and demand to labor
if you paid the jobs that people want less (less demand) more money
and paid the jobs people want more (high demand) less money
the establishment supply side model would work and the establishment
could evolve progressively because the work would be valued as much as
the money and Mark's theory would be fulfilled
a better supply and demand model would mean more prosperity, and peace
for desperate people because there would be more wealth to share with
the desperate
skill would follow because the low skilled employees would not want
something they could not do (lower demand)
responsibility would follow because the content would not want it (low
demand)
I think this means that the demand side and capitalism and true economic
libertarianism would be fulfilled too
I never had enough money to be in the stock market, but there seems to
be a pattern of sell-offs when establishment candidates get in, working
people with pensions in the market can trade out of the sell-off as fast
and lose hard earned money, I think there needs to be more respect for
hard work (coal miners, etc.)
the establishment has to evolve
I recognize there is an investment in the status quo and the status quo
has gotten us everywhere we are at, but they must glean and garnish the
future
I remember Reagan promoted "trickle down" economics, a trickle is a
start if it is all that you can afford, but you really need a "flow"
you do have to credit that establishment recovery out of terrible
inflation in the late 70's
Reagan would have had a 15% return on a DOW Index Fund throughout his years
I won't preach about the 1987 market market sell off, it led to a
progressive candidate being elected, Clinton
Clinton followed up with a 33% market
the only way economics is going to work is to accept supply and demand
in all aspects, that is capitalism and strife and it fulfils individualism
Marx said the value of money is the labor that produced it, you need to
apply supply and demand to labor
if you paid the jobs that people want less (less demand) more money
and paid the jobs people want more (high demand) less money
the establishment supply side model would work and the establishment
could evolve progressively because the work would be valued as much as
the money and Mark's theory would be fulfilled
a better supply and demand model would mean more prosperity, and peace
for desperate people because there would be more wealth to share with
the desperate
skill would follow because the low skilled employees would not want
something they could not do (lower demand)
responsibility would follow because the content would not want it (low
demand)
I think this means that the demand side and capitalism and true economic
libertarianism would be fulfilled too
I never had enough money to be in the stock market, but there seems to
be a pattern of sell-offs when establishment candidates get in, working
people with pensions in the market can trade out of the sell-off as fast
and lose hard earned money, I think there needs to be more respect for
hard work (coal miners, etc.)
--
Dale
Dale