There is no "single action" one can take. Complex problems are seldom solved via "simple" one-step solutions. :roll:
But speaking as a common citizen? If I had my druthers I'd rather:
1. We eliminate the Federal Reserve system entirely, taking control of the production of money from banks and returning it to the Dept. of Treasury.
2. Repudiate MMT and return to a resource-backed monetary system.
3. Re-invigorate American industry, starting with increased development of our own natural resources and businesses that produce HERE using them.
4. Regulate and limit both personal and business debt.
5. Keep student loans but tie them to yearly educational success standards, while reducing compound interest rates which only serve bank profiteering.
That's just a few. I'm sure other people have their own suggestions. :coffeepap:
1. Here's the problem with that: What generally happens when you hand the production of money to politicians who want to give free goodies to the people who elect them? They jack up the presses, so to speak. At least an independent central bank can keep that tendency somewhat at arm's length.
2. I agree with you on that one. The idea that a country can print away its debt or spending problem by printing more money without consequence is a pipedream. Look, for example, at what is going on with China. In eighteen months, the country blew through $1 trillion worth of foreign exchange reserves, about one-fourth of its total, trying to defend the yuan. And yet the currency is still hitting multi-year lows. This represents a real and serious loss of wealth to the Chinese, and explains why Chinese and foreigners are almost in panic mode trying to move money out of the country and why the Chinese have installed capital controls in an attempt to put a finger in the dyke. Now some Chinese economists are advising that intervention by the Chinese central bank should stop and the currency should be permitted to find its true value because the intervention and depletion of the FOREX reserves is generating more capital flight. Once again, people are discovering that you can't hold back the tide by peeing against it. Mr. Market wins again, just as he always does. :2wave:
3. I'm fine with that one, too, although we might differ on how that's done. It stands to reason that if we reduce the costs and increase the benefits of producing here, we'll get more domestic production. We don't want to reduce families to penury by cutting labor costs, but we can make investments that make the workers we have more productive. We can improve their training and better match their skillsets to the needs of employers. We can reduce corporate taxes, invest in needed infrastructure (roads, bridges, ports, etc.), and streamline regulations. We can also leverage access to our markets with the threat of tariffs or other barriers to entry for nations that don't want a level playing field. Instead of using a "one size fits all" approach to trade agreements, we should tailor bilateral treaties that better suit the actual conditions we face from individual countries.
4. There already are regulators of public and private debt, which go by various names. One is called
income, a second one we can call the rate of
interest, another we can call
inflation, and yet another we can call
liquidation or
discharge, as in bankruptcy. To the degree that the first two regulators are allowed to work, the necessity to resort to the last two is reduced. Remember, an economy is a lot like an ocean, and, when it comes to the ocean, you can build jetties and ports and such, but you can't regulate the tide.
5. Have you ever noticed how the cost of things government subsidizes always seems to increase to absurd levels, whether it's housing, medical care, or the cost of college? I mean, do we really need more philosophy graduates saddled with six-figure debts so that their alma maters can hire Thoroughbred faculties, thus furthering an arms race for the best talent with other institutions? Investments in public colleges are fine, but just tossing checks at all comers so that Little Johnnie or Susie can say "I've got a degree in anthropology from Podunk U and I'm broke!" is not very efficient. In the 19th Century, we had the land-grant universities that focused on engineering, math, and science. Those are great areas to invest in, as well as community colleges that can partner with companies (employers) to provide workers with proper, relevant training.
Cease the personal crap or infractions will be issued.
