Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Part of the reason why the stock market is at an all time high is because there's not enough investment in the real economy. Why no investment?
There isnt a demand. Thats pretty much it. Creating a welfare state doesnt boost demand, you need a healthy economy, importing jobs, policies that encourage the middle class to have, and spend their money, or at the very least, save it so banks can lend it out, not create tax policies that remove it from the economy to give it to the government and reasons for banks to buy federal debt rather than loan it out to the citizens to invest.
The stock market is a large part of the real economy.
Yes, but it's the speculative part. I think the OP is referring to hard investment - plant, equipment; business operations, not securities transactions.
Yes, but it's the speculative part. I think the OP is referring to hard investment - plant, equipment; business operations, not securities transactions.
The National Economy is not their concern. Profits are.
It is supposed to be the politicians concern though to serve the best interests of the Nation, but
when The Big Multinationals fund their campaigns and you have thousands of Revolving Corporate Politicians as well in DC, the results are hardly surprising.
In this Global Economy, Emerging Markets is where the money is and they have purchased politicians to lead them there at the citizens expense.
It is really not a new thing either.
Some of the Biggest US Corporations funded Hitler's War Machine prior to WW2 and also sold Saddam Hussein Chemical Weapons among other things.
If we ever go to war with China, The Multinational Corporations favorite trading partner, they will also throw useful Americans into the fire to fight for them.
They will always sell out their country if there is a profit to be made elsewhere.
A lot of the Corporations moved to China in the 90's when the economy was good, but 10 million in profit over 1 million is even better.
Corps are spending massive sums on capital equipment in the USA. That is investment. The stock market highs are simply reflecting how successful these corps have become, as shown via record earnings.
If I buy a stock from you for $100, I hand you $100, you receive $100
The net change in the economy from the transaction = 0..
its paper wealth, it becomes real once you sell your stock, but someone else simply buys in, so while you might now have cash, they no longer do.
The fact is that stocks value changes to a large degree based on the success, or lack thereof, of the company. These companies provide real goods and services.
There isnt a demand. Thats pretty much it. Creating a welfare state doesnt boost demand, you need a healthy economy, importing jobs, policies that encourage the middle class to have, and spend their money, or at the very least, save it so banks can lend it out, not create tax policies that remove it from the economy to give it to the government and reasons for banks to buy federal debt rather than loan it out to the citizens to invest.
People cant spend the same $ twice.
I agree that demand is still low, but your other comments aren't necessarily true. They surely can be, but it depends on the state of the economy. Regarding spending the same money twice; when talking about consumption and demand, keep in mind that the wealthy already consume as much as they desire. Any extra money they receive will not change demand for consumer goods. This is one main argument that tax cuts for the wealthy have run their course. "Creating a welfare state" sounds undesirable - and it is - but during a robust economy, it's not necessary. In certain situations, however, tax policy can manipulate consumer demand. The investment class doesn't spend extra money once, much less twice. Consumer demand can be increased by directing more money to those who will spend it and less to those who will invest it. A more progressive tax policy would have other effects on the economy, but it can be used to increase consumer demand.
The National Economy is not their concern. Profits are.
This is correct and why what we did was B.S.
Quote:
It is supposed to be the politicians concern though to serve the best interests of the Nation, but
when The Big Multinationals fund their campaigns and you have thousands of Revolving Corporate Politicians as well in DC, the results are hardly surprising.
It's not that simple. Those who made these decisions came from Wall Street. Of course they are going to look after their buddies so that when their days in office are over, they get looked after.
It's incredible that people think any of this (giving trillions to Wall Street) ever made sense. The government and private industry are not partners with the same goals.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
