The U.S. Economy: Stand by for more worse news

[Schmelzer]

And his use of them is in coordination with, and corrected by, those other sources. He is not naive in the matter. He doesn't even take income tax data as a straight reference for income inequality, let alone wealth distribution.
There is no "less" or "more" involved. The other data improve all the information including the income tax stuff, and vice versa.
... for which income tax data was one - very significant but not isolated or unadjusted - source. ...
He uses Jane Austen novels, for example, to illustrate a couple of points and back some observations.

So, ok, this is already better. Income tax data as the base, other things useful to improve them, like Jane Austen novels.

In the second: Yes, there are places where land taxes are summed up - at the county, city, State, and finally Federal levels. Even before computer files, this was routine - it's how inheritance laws were enforced, for example (such court proceedings have always been rich sources of economic data, still are). Now it's automatic - software, spreadsheets, full time professionals devoting entire careers to the smallest details of such efforts, etc. You may have heard of Prince's recent death - that will be a small aspect of the large task of assessing his wealth. In fact, that part is apparently over - my newspaper listed his real estate holdings within a couple of days of his death.

Fine, at least a good argument. Why it takes so much time to extract an argument from you?

Why don't you know that?

Because you have not made the argument before.

What is the point of having a conversation in a forum? To learn something from other people who already know more about this. If somebody has a problem with relativity, I do not spend hours crying "you don't know relativity", I simply explain the points he does not know. In the discussion about the Civil War I have participated as somebody on the other, receiving side, and you have provided a lot of interesting arguments and sources, so that I have changed some of the ideas I had about this time. Unfortunately, you have stopped this.

And you in the real world accept this without qualm - you have no objection to the observation that the US is trending toward "banana republic economics", for example: that's all Piketty is saying, only argued from evidence and placed in context and with a specific notion of what that term means.

Yes, the problem is not that I would not be ready to accept simple arguments because of some libertarian prejudices or so. I had an issue with the idea that one could make conclusions about the change of the wealth distribution as a consequence of income tax changes, if the information about wealth distribution is mainly based on data about income tax declarations. Because these declarations will change if income tax changes, even if the wealth distribution would remain unchanged. And because the error would be clearly in the suggested direction - higher income tax - avoidance of declaring high income - looks like more equal income distribution.

You are the person who claims to have knowledge about these questions, so it would be easy for you to tell us how the researchers like Piketty solve this particular data problem. You could have immediately answered it. As I would have, if you would have had a similar problem with relativity.

Instead, you have preferred to waste weeks with meaningless "you don't know nothing" attacks without giving any useful information. All what we have found out is your point that inheritance taxation can, at least at some places, also lead to useful data about wealth distribution. Can. The question if Piketty or somebody else has really used it to solve the mentioned problem with income tax data remains yet open.

 

[iceaura]

So, ok, this is already better.

No, it isn't. I've been repeating myself for a long time now, and that is more of the same.

You are the person who claims to have knowledge about these questions, so it would be easy for you to tell us how the researchers like Piketty solve this particular data problem.

No: as I have said several times now, it would involve a coherent and detailed synopsis of a thick and dense book I do not have ready to hand. I referred you to the notes and references of it, because you were apparently completely ignorant of the kinds of information available to such researchers. I also listed for you several of the many and varied sources available, and have added to the list occasionally since (probate records, recently). Here's another one: tithing records, dowry records, and valuation of gift records, from churches. Add it to your list.

Because these declarations will change if income tax changes, even if the wealth distribution would remain unchanged. And because the error would be clearly in the suggested direction - higher income tax - avoidance of declaring high income - looks like more equal income distribution.

For the fifth or sixth time: wealth is not income; income is not wealth. Everybody knows this.

All what we have found out is your point that inheritance taxation can, at least at some places, also lead to useful data about wealth distribution.

And about twelve other sources I've mentioned, several of which (and others) you could have found for yourself in the notes and references of the Piketty book.

The question if Piketty or somebody else has really used it to solve the mentioned problem with income tax data remains yet open.

Remember your quote?:

Ultimately, the World Top Incomes Database (WTID), which is based on the joint work of some thirty researchers around the world, is the largest historical database available concerning the evolution of income inequality;

Those researchers, their staffs, and the reviewers of their published papers, are among the hundreds of researchers and market analysts and so forth who

- in your presumption -

have never recognized or dealt with that "problem". That would include the ones estimating income without income tax records at all, and comparing them with others.

Or as I put it several pages back and repeated since, your entire argument rests on your assumption that guys like Piketty (and he was never more than an example) are idiots, fools, ignorant dumbasses who haven't thought of even the most basic of objections to their presumedly naive and simplistic transcriptions of income tax data, straight into their wealth distribution estimates.

The entire pile of tangential relevance: is any of this leading to doubt of the central conclusion - that inequality of wealth and income is getting high and still growing in the US especially, but other economies as well, and that this is having at least some of the predictable and predicted consequences?

 

[Schmelzer]

No: as I have said several times now, it would involve a coherent and detailed synopsis of a thick and dense book I do not have ready to hand.

LOL. So it is you who does not have it "ready to hand". And one can only guess if you have really read it in the past.

For the fifth or sixth time: wealth is not income; income is not wealth. Everybody knows this.

And I know this too. But you will probably repeat this point through the next 200 posts.

Remember your quote?: Those researchers, their staffs, and the reviewers of their published papers, are among the hundreds of researchers and market analysts and so forth who
- in your presumption -
have never recognized or dealt with that "problem". That would include the ones estimating income without income tax records at all, and comparing them with others.
Or as I put it several pages back and repeated since, your entire argument rests on your assumption that guys like Piketty (and he was never more than an example) are idiots, fools, ignorant dumbasses who haven't thought of even the most basic of objections to their presumedly naive and simplistic transcriptions of income tax data, straight into their wealth distribution estimates.

They may have recognized or dealt with it. But we don't know the result of this. You know, in science it is in no way obvious that such problems can be solved. Science is simply not some dreamland utopia where everything is possible.

What good scientists do is to extract the maximal information out of the available data.

 

[iceaura]

LOL. So it is you who does not have it "ready to hand". And one can only guess if you have really read it in the past.

As I told you many pages ago, and three times since - yes. And of course you have to guess whether I've read it - the only other way would be to compare what I said about it with the book itself, when I recommended you look at the notes and references in it for a clue about what kinds of information are available and employed by such researchers.

"For the fifth or sixth time: wealth is not income; income is not wealth. Everybody knows this."
And I know this too.

You confuse them, continually, in your posting - remember when you were asserting that a gain in the market value of an investment was income?

They may have recognized or dealt with it. But we don't know the result of this

You mean you don't know the results of this. That is obvious. But that's not a mystery, is it.

What good scientists do is to extract the maximal information out of the available data.

Why yes. And then write it up, for the rest of us to learn and benefit from - or deny its reality and doubt its existence on theoretical grounds and "common sense", as the case may be.

The entire pile of tangential relevance: is any of this leading to doubt of the central conclusion - that inequality of wealth and income is getting high and still growing in the US especially, but other economies as well, and that this is having at least some of the predictable and predicted consequences?

 

[Michael]

In modern America, the inefficiently run companies would have been bailed out. We'd probably have a crap gaming industry, if even that. See 30 years ago, crony incompetently run companies weren't bailed out, they were allowed to go bust, even if it meant taking down then entire gaming industry. But, get this, the Sky did NOT Fall. And what emerged was Nintendo. A beloved gaming company with many franchises cherished by many children the world over. Probably one of the few that works tirelessly to produce really good family friendly games for children. Including many learning games.

THAT is the beauty of a free-market.

Because the corrupt, the morally bankrupt and inefficient were bailed out - we will never know what wonderful companies would have arisen from the ashes of 2008. Instead, we have the same horrible companies, BJ Morgan and GoldmanSux to name a few, oh, and bunch of small fry SlumLords who's livelihoods depend on single mothers, the working poor, and the State Aid transferred through them to them to keep them alive. They were bailed out along with the criminals on WallStreet. In a sense, changing the very fabric of America. It was as if the table cloth was pulled out from under the dishes, changing the pattern, but leaving the dirty dishes. Things are by far much worse now than then. We're on tract for a decades long slow decline in the living standards for most Americans.

Probably culminating in a War. Maybe even a Dictator.

Thank the Progressive Socialists, they gave us the Central Bank and crony Capitalistic Federal Government it now funds. This IS it's function.

 

[iceaura]

In modern America, the inefficiently run companies would have been bailed out. We'd probably have a crap gaming industry, if even that. See 30 years ago, crony incompetently run companies weren't bailed out, they were allowed to go bust, even if it meant taking down then entire gaming industry.
- - -
Thank the Progressive Socialists, they gave us the Central Bank and crony Capitalistic Federal Government it now funds.

The Progressive Socialists gave you the strengths of the economy and government of 1993 - holdover from the more competent governance of the pre-Reagan era.

Things are by far much worse now than then. We're on tract for a decades long slow decline in the living standards for most Americans.

We've already seen that. It's thanks to people who talked like you, who voted against the New Deal and ushered in Reaganomics.

 

[Michael]

We've already seen that. It's thanks to people who talked like you, who voted against the New Deal and ushered in Reaganomics.

The New Deals (there were multiple failures, just like QE) were not continued; because they didn't work. There's no conspiracy here. They didn't work, most of what they regulated, were brought to an end. Not all, but most. And all they ended up doing is strengthening the Federal Government / Mafia who, to this day, use New Deal regulations to steal from the public - see, California raisins for an example.

Look, it's quite clear you think the only way to organize society is to use the threat of violence against innocent citizens - I disagree.

You can continue to try and paint this historically, politically, right, left, progressive, conservative, whatever. You think the way we should structure society is through the initiation of coercive violence against INNOCENT citizens and I don't. But, here you're in luck. This is EXACTLY how our society IS currently structured. AND, we have the largest most intrusive and powerful American Government ever in existence. Now that we've all normalized to being spied on, it can pretty much monitor all of our communications day in and day out. Exactly like the book Nineteen Eighty Four. Lucky you.


Note : The Progressive Socialists gave us the Income Tax and the Central Bank. The Central Bank screwed up the money supply and ushered in the Great Depression, culminating in WWII.

We can thank the Progressives for our Military Industrial Complex - which their past policies fund.
We can thank the Progressives for our Prison Industrial Complex - which their past policies fund.
We can thank the Progressives for our Welfare Slums - which their past policies fund.

Progressives are always just one more rule from it all finally working out. Just one more rule. Never mind we have millions and millions and millions of lines of new regulations, it's never enough.

Don't worry, this all culminates in a Dear Leader, who's going to 'get shit done' for the Good of the People.

 

[Billy T]

...
Note : The Progressive Socialists gave us the Income Tax and the Central Bank. The Central Bank screwed up the money supply and ushered in the Great Depression, culminating in WWII.

We can thank the Progressives for our Military Industrial Complex - which their past policies fund.
We can thank the Progressives for our Prison Industrial Complex - which their past policies fund.
We can thank the Progressives for our Welfare Slums - which their past policies fund. ...

You give all the blame /credit to "Progressive Socialists." That is silly as US has damn few of them. US is a far cry from Scandinavia, where they are common. Simple human greed, should get most of the credit /blame. That results can be avoided with better early education, as done in Norway:

“In Norway (and most if not all of Scandinavia) when students finish the first grade, both they and the same teacher move up together for the next grade. Etc. thru graduation from elementary school. This simple no cost difference from US schools has an enormous benefit.

First, there is no passing a problem child on to the next grade teacher as you are the next grade teacher too. If Johnny can't read or do math, there is no passing him on to the next teacher. All know who is responsible - no ducking / hiding responsibilities, as in US schools.

Secondly, at the start of every grade after the first the teacher on day one, knows her students well. She knows, for example John is two grades ahead in math but having trouble with his foreign language (All will be fluent in three, two not Norwegian, languages by eight grade). But Jane, who already has mastered three by fourth grade is a half a grade behind in math. So teacher can on some days have them helping each other in the back of the class room during say knitting class (even the boys take that).

Thirdly, thus educating the class is a mutual group project and responsibility - all learn at an earlier age to help each other - take responsibility for the welfare of others. Later in life, they still think it completely proper, correct and DESIRABLE to pay ~50% of their income in taxes so ALL have good education and health opportunities.”

This quote from: http://www.sciforums.com/threads/be...ative-to-hillary-c.145890/page-5#post-3341569

 

[iceaura]

The New Deals (there were multiple failures, just like QE) were not continued; because they didn't work. There's no conspiracy here. They didn't work, most of what they regulated, were brought to an end. Not all, but most

Nonsense. The American economy worked fine under the New Deal restructuring and reforms, such as a steeply progressive income tax and Social Security and Medicare and separation of investment banking and so forth, until they began to be rolled back - beginning with Reagan in 1981, hitting its current wallowing nadir around 2002 when W gave up on enforcing even what remained of banking regulation in the US, and cut taxes for the rich while launching full scale war on credit.

Note : The Progressive Socialists gave us the Income Tax and the Central Bank. The Central Bank screwed up the money supply and ushered in the Great Depression, culminating in WWII

It's as if WWI never happened, isn't it. It's as if the New Deal banking and Wall Street regulations and all the rest came before, rather than after, the Great Depression. It's as if FDR had been President in the 1920s. Wingnut World is truly a magical place, where cause and effect are inverted in time as well as space.

We can thank the Progressives for our Military Industrial Complex - which their past policies fund.
We can thank the Progressives for our Prison Industrial Complex - which their past policies fund.
We can thank the Progressives for our Welfare Slums - which their past policies fund.

The Progressives like Reagan? Or were you thinking of Nixon?

 

[pjdude1219]

In modern America, the inefficiently run companies would have been bailed out. We'd probably have a crap gaming industry, if even that. See 30 years ago, crony incompetently run companies weren't bailed out, they were allowed to go bust, even if it meant taking down then entire gaming industry. But, get this, the Sky did NOT Fall. And what emerged was Nintendo. A beloved gaming company with many franchises cherished by many children the world over. Probably one of the few that works tirelessly to produce really good family friendly games for children. Including many learning games.

THAT is the beauty of a free-market.

You know you really shouldn't use examples when you don't understand them. the Video game crash of the 80's had nothing to do with inefficiently and everything to do with marketing and money types( the people you defend in free market) making decisions that hamstringed developers that encouraged poor game design to meet time constraints made by people who didn't know what went into games. well that and the infamous atari coke binges but i digress. rather than being a validation of free market ideals its an indictment of them. Also nintendo hardly emerged from the ashes of the crash. it was already 100 years old at that time. it reinvented its self into a game company about that time though. and its hardly beloved. it ran one of its major franchises into the ground( star fox) and is entirely reliant on a few franchises to stay afloat. and plenty of companies make family friendly games. if anything nintendos focus there has hurt them not helped them.

 

[Michael]

 

[Billy T]

Yes, the job creation was about 100,000 less than needed, but for me the unemployment falling to only 4.7% when very few jobs are being created is more of a concern. It did not get down to 4.7% because people looking for work found jobs - just the opposite.

Large numbers of people who were looking for work and thus increasing the unemployment rate when they could not find any, simply gave up all hope of finding work and ceased to be "Looking." I. e. no longer are counted as "unemployed" (but still have no job). 4.7% is a reflection of how discouraged many potential workers are.

That does not occur when the "recovery" is real. Instead of thinking in terms of an interest rate increase soon, the Fed should be gassing up their helicopter to drop money in poor neighborhoods, where it will be spent, not saved.

 

[Billy T]

Negative interest rates are spreading and no one knows what the long term effect of this will be. Bill Gross, regarded by many as THE expert on bonds thinks this is not going to end well. Read text and watch the video here:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/10/bill-gross-10-trillion-negative-yield-supernova-will-explode.html?__source=newsletter|eveningbrief

I'm inclined to agree with him. Saving is the foundation of investments, but who will save, if you are charged to do so? Perhaps some of the 20% upward surge in price of gold in first half of 2016 is partially due to negative interest rates.

On 1 Jan 2016 POG was 1060.30 $/oz and on 6 June 2016 POG is oscillating above and below 1275$/oz

And with latest poll data, UK is leaning towards Brexit and that may make POG > 1400$/oz according to:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/09/fed-...d-price-with-1400-a-possibility-says-anz.html

I think the graph will automatically update.

"25%. That's how much European stock markets could plunge over the course of two or three months if voters in the U.K. vote in favor of Brexit, according to a study by risk modeling company Axioma. The U.S. wouldn't escape the market turmoil either, the study found. The stress test was based on market responses to big shocks in the past such as 1992, when the British pound crashed. " Quote from today's Quest means business Email.

 

[Michael]

A Gallup Poll was done to measure the trust Americans put in core institutions:

I'm wondering, is it good to see the trust in the Police and Military (after over a decade of phony war - remain the same) while Religion is on the wane? I find it a bit disconcerting that toothless Religion (which for the most part, does a bit of good - since it's been defanged) while mouth full of teeth Kill Machine enjoys 3/4th total trust!?

Really?

CONgress dropped 10 pts. That's good to see.

Oh, and look at the Banks. Now, that is fantastic to see

 

[Michael]

ABC News: US Federal Reserve keeps rates on hold amid concern about .... the mess they've made of the economy when attempting to bailout the most crooked, incompetently run crony so-called "FREE" market / hyper-government-regulatory-capture / rent-seeker fiat-currency barfing banks in modern history.

The Economist (2010): Green shoots

 

[Michael]

This is what one Millennial thinks: Baby Boomers Ruined The World For Millennials

The Millennial generation is my generation—we were born between the years 1982 and 2004; i.e., we’re the Baby Boomers’ own children; i.e., the people they themselves raised. But over the past five years or so, I’ve noticed that it’s become fashionable for Baby Boomers to write insulting and self-righteous articles complaining about how “pampered,” “entitled,” and even “narcissistic” they perceive Millennials to be. After reading several of these articles and having them quoted to me many times by Baby Boomers, I have finally reached my breaking point. I’ve had it with this nonsense. No longer will I stand by and listen to Baby Boomers complain about the splinter in my generation’s collective eye while they ignore the wooden beam in their own. From almost any vantage point you take, the Baby Boomers are the worst generation in world history.

The Baby Boomers grew up in and inherited the richest economy in world history. There is no doubting this. They had every advantage you could possibly ask for. The post-World War II America in which they grew up was an economic powerhouse the likes of which the world had never seen before. When they came of age, more of them went to college than any generation before them, and it was so cheap that they could afford to pay for it with summer jobs waiting tables. They did drugs, screwed each other silly, studied underwater basket weaving, and generally gave their parents a bigger middle finger than any generation before them ever had, then went on to become respectable yuppies with high-paying middle management jobs in corporate America. The ones that didn’t go to college got factory jobs where they could make enough money to get married and raise middle-class families on a single income. They bought houses, new cars, saved for retirement, and had the 2.5 kids they wanted.

Then those kids—the Millennial generation—grew up. And what did their parents do for them? They enrolled them in a thousand extracurricular activities, shielded them from every failure and disappointment, and attempted to regiment every minute of their lives so as to avoid every kind of pain and suffering. They brainwashed them to go to college at all costs and encouraged them to rack up insane amounts of debt to do it. Then while their kids were away at college, they spent like crazy. They bought themselves new cars, new homes, new furniture, remodeled their homes, expanded Medicare, waged a few wars, etc., etc., and rapidly turned the country into the largest debtor nation in world history and caused the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Then they used their political power to bail themselves out and keep themselves rich by mortgaging their children’s, grandchildren’s, and great grandchildren’s futures. Then while their kids struggled to find jobs and launch their own lives as no generation of recent memory ever had, the Baby Boomers—the richest people who have ever lived on Earth—passed a law which forced Millennials to subsidize the costs of their rapidly aging parents’ healthcare. Oh, and did I mention that they legalized abortion, ushering in a holocaust which has claimed more than 50 million human lives, divorced each other and destroyed their own families more often than not, and locked their kids in cages for using the same drugs they did on their way to their cushy careers?

In light of all this, I find it hard to take these people who are so incredibly blind to their own imperfections seriously when they call me “narcissistic” and “entitled” for wanting them to at least be polite to me while they destroy the country and rob me blind.

That's okay, they just want to feel good about themselves while making you pay your rent as they're your Baby Boomer SlumLord and YOU are their early retirement. Oh, this means no kids for you.... too bad. That's okay, nothing a refugee crises can't drum up replacements for.

It should be noted, many of these Baby's put their kids into Day Supervision Centers (which they made appear to be socially 'normal' so they could have their me-time or prioritize their work over their families, many of these children grew up unloved and untouched - thereby developing depression and eating disorders from their underdeveloped neocortices, such as their somatosensory cortex, of course, this is still the norm today - nice of you Baby's, setting by example, how great).


Well, this is how it is - that is, until you Millennials realize there's more of you than them. For the first time, their generation will be eclipsed - demographically. Isn't that something? Oh, and let's not forget; many of you are working from home. Their home. That they rent to you. THEY own YOUR means of production... something to think about. Something a small 'redistribution' tax wouldn't maybe take care. Say: 99%? + free room in at the Soylent Green Happy Happy Government Welfare Estate? Given they just poured trillions and trillions of dollars worth of debt over you, to bailout their retirement incomes - this only seems fair. Hell, one could say: Self defense.



Welcome To America
Land of the Fleeced
Home of the Slave

Why, there's a couple Slave Owners there....

 

[Michael]

Central Planning at it's best: Abenomics is a total failure, therefor the IMF calls on Japan to 'reload' Abenomics because doing more of what's failed in the past is bound to work in the future.

In summary, the Central Planners over at the IMF have studied Japan's economy - and have come to the conclusion that Abenomics has been a total and utter miserable failure. Thus, their advice now is to scrap all of the plans for hitting any kind of economic targets, and just start forcing companies to raise wages by 3%. Punishing any companies that do not do so - with fines. This, while simultaneously raising everyone's taxes by 15%.

Welcome To Central Planning - IMF style. We needs us some inflation. Lots and lots and lots of inflation. You know, because when all your shit costs more, that's good for you. And if you're a SlumLord, why, whatever better way then, to pay off your loans, than with rent-adjusted inflation inflation inflation.

Yes indeed.
Central Planning and Givernment Regulation at its very finest.

Luckily for monocultureal Japan, is it's packed with very hard working (5am - 10pm) honest people who have a strong sense of community and social support.

Incidentally, Japanese Finance Minister calls on older Japanese to just hurry up and die already! Now, let's stop and digest this a bit. In Japan, unlike in the West, the old are venerated. While someone 55 may be considered a has-been in the West, good for the glue factory. In Japan it's quite the opposite. The older you are, the more wise you're considered to be. One of the first things Japanese try to do when they meet someone new, is to figure out their age - in order to give the appropriate reverence. Older people are somewhat looked up to for advice about all sorts of things. Sex appeal aside, the old are treated better than most in Japan. Maybe not asked about the latest electronics - but even then, maybe. Now, if you have the Public "Servants" in Japan calling on the old to just hurry up and die, that sort of says something. Imagine what it might be like in the USA, where the old Baby Generation are directly responsible for the financial plundering and resultant plight of the young Millennials (even now, being shafted with their medical bills - talk about gall) who can no longer afford to have their own families because they're too busy repaying 30 year T-bonds that paid for all the goodies their grand-parents enjoyed.

It'll be interesting to watch as 25 years (22 more years) of Central Bankster, Central Planning and Givernment Regulation plays out in the multicultural West. Particularly the USA. Particularly once the Millennials figure out exactly who's shafted them.

 

[Michael]

The Economist: Expect the worst
Fed officials try to understand why they cannot keep raising rates
Jun 20th 2016

FOUR times a year the meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee, the Federal Reserve board that sets monetary policy, concludes with a special flourish: a press conference, and the publication of the members’ economic projections. The latter includes a “dot plot” which shows how members think rates will unfold over the next few years. When the new dots were released at the end of the June meeting, on the 15th, it quickly became clear that one was not like the others. FOMC members overwhelmingly see the Fed’s main interest rate rising to between 1% and 2% in 2017, then on to between 2% and 3% in 2018: all of them, that is, except one. That oddball member projected the interest rate would stay right about where it is now over the next two years. When the projections dropped, Fed watchers immediately speculated about just which member had turned super-dovish (or super pessimistic). Two days later, all was revealed......

Central Bank Planers, Centrally Planning.

If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years there'd be a shortage of sand.
-- Milton Friedman


It should be noted, it's not just our Banking System - it's everything. The Government regulates everything from our fiat-currency (via our Central Bank) to what color you can paint your home, to whom you can marry - even your inability to buy raw milk from a farmer. All of it. Everything. As an example, I know of a surgeon who works in the college that determines which surgeons can specialize in his field. This is akin to letting the fox grow the chickens - not just watch over them. Of course, he magically 'knows' exactly how many should be allowed into his particular sub-specialty. And for over a decade that's exactly zero. Which means he can drive a convertible Ferrari. You know, because free-markets are bad. Hyper-Regulated Government maintained regulatory capture is guuud. Which is why one of these Rent-Seekers will probably kill you (assuming your don't smoke). Government "Schooling" is getting one thing right - that much is for sure.

Example after example, from Government Schools to Government Regulated lead-polluted public water. It's all a mess.... And all of the private institutions that could have done something about it - are gone, or about so. All that's left is Giverment. AND thank The Gawds for Givernment! And for our Central Bank Planers, doing their Centrally Bankster Planning

Well well, it's almost 2018, a full decade of bailing out the richest of the rich. Let's see what they do next.

 

[iceaura]

The Government regulates everything from our fiat-currency (via our Central Bank) to what color you can paint your home, to whom you can marry - even your inability to buy raw milk from a farmer. All of it. Everything.

No, it doesn't. The currency is the national government's direct responsibility, but not the other three: No single government in the US regulates those three things, and the national government regulates none of them. This is as close as they come: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/GuidanceRegulation/UCM209789.pdf

btw: the US government has been in charge of the the currency for more than a hundred years, and there is no shortage of it. Neither is there a shortage of Federal highways, ports, airports, rivers, or military capability. Meanwhile, we have at times run short of oil, railroad cars, antibiotics, blood for transfusions, vaccines and drugs, skilled and educated employable people in certain fields, computer chips, and so forth. All private enterprise supplied - the source of most shortages. So Friedman's gentle witticism is worth a chuckle, but not incorporation into an adult's political outlook.

Example after example, from Government Schools to Government Regulated lead-polluted public water. It's all a mess.... And all of the private institutions that could have done something about it - are gone, or about so

There are plenty of private schools, and home schooling is just fine everywhere. It's lack of regulation that puts lead in the water - private corporations have always been happy to dump lead everywhere and put it in anything - paint, plumbing pipes, gasoline, roofing material, children's toys, any damn thing at all - unless prevented by some government or another. And you are as always living in libertarian la-la land, where government is the root of all evil.

Love of money is the root of all evil. According to experts in the field.

 

[Michael]

"We're dealing now in very early days a crisis which has got a way to go. If we went back on the gold standard and we adhered to the actual structure of the gold standard as it exited prior to 1913, we'd be fine. Remember that the period 1870 to 1913 was one of the most aggressive periods economically that we've had in the United States, and that was a golden period of the gold standard."
-- Alan Greenspan, June 27, 2016

--o--
LOL

Greenshoots Alan, Greenshoots


Note: Not long now, 12 years maybe? Then the Millenials can elect their Redistributor The Great and being deploying the NSA and Police State for the Good of Society
Note 2: We were 1 vote away from the Federal Government having the legal ability to access any American Citizens web browser History at any time for any reason, no warrant needed.

Welcome To Amooorikkka
Land of The Fleeced
Home of the Slave

Between the War on Terror, War on Drugs, Patriot Act and GFC - the Government is making out just fantastic. It's as if it's a cancer that feeds on the weakest aspects of the human condition.

Note 3:
War on Terror - Binny Boy was a creation of the US Government.
War on Drugs - creation of the US Government following the monopolization of Rx/regulatory capture to rent-seeking MDs (incidentally, drug abuse is at all time highs).
Patriot Act - the name says it all
GFC - created by Alan Greenshoots himself.

Thank the Gawds for Givermint.