Nancy Pelosi said: “We have to pass it, to find out what’s in it.” A Doctor called to a radio show & said: "That's the definition of a stool sample"
"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," Barack Obama January 2008
That's not relevant. The question, again, is which is more fundamental: demand, or business? In the simplest case, demand fuels production. Ergo, it is more fundamental, because production can fail. There can be demand without supply, but no supply without at least some kind of demand. Businesses are on the supply side of the equation.Originally Posted by eohrnberger
I have to re-iterate what I said in my last post, however. It would be a big mistake to ignore the supply side altogether, and I understand that. We owe much of our economic development to more and more products and services filling more basic demands. But this doesn't preclude anything I've said previously--I take these points to be logically consistent, and furthermore, to provide a decent set of principles by which to guide economic policy.
Well, they are now, which is part of why businesses are closing down. Investors still want the returns they were getting in the 90's and early 00's, so they're moving capital out, in large part to China, India, Russia, and into some restricted markets in the U.S. that still offer those kinds of yields (often with the illusion of relative safety). This is a practical problem, and for my part, I think we ought to be ruthless about stopping it. Wealth belongs primarily to whatever produces it. It's demonstrable that society as a whole produces wealth, not individuals, and especially not individual investors.Originally Posted by eohrnberger