ENDEMIC {But my pet hate is exactly static equilibrium theory. The economy is FUNDAMENTALLY a dynamic system (since it involves one way exchanges and one way transformations of raw materials). Static equilibrium theory is completely and utterly inappropriate.} What static-equilibrium? The economy is always and perpetually in movement, for which stasis is quasi-impossible. Seems to me more like intellectual Bookish Economists looking for yet another bone to chew on. In the end, the final end, an economy serves only One Purpose. Which is to provide the greatest number of people the best standard of living possible. And, given the numbers, the US is nowhere near that goal nowadays. (Not with 15% of the population living below the Poverty Threshold since 1965. Don't believe that? See here: https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2015/demo/p60-252.pdf - scroll down to the infographic on page 20) Why? Because the chart above shows how poverty is long-term "Endemic to the US"! But also, because of the Great Recession that made naked our economic system, literally overnight. It happened because of mendacious fraud committed by the Banksters - a fraud so large and so cruel that entire lives were affected. And the Banking Community walked away from the Greatest Fraud of the Century (so far) with merely a slap on the wrist. I suggest to all who are interested in how nations/countries/empires come to a definitive and drastic halt to read the history of the Roman Empire. Because it seems to me that Rome's expansion parallels ours in an amazingly similar fashion. (Especially the bit about how Rome's Upper-Class of families managed to stranglehold its policy-making.) And, thus, perhaps the demise of ours as well? (Just askin' rhetorically ... ;^)

THEIR STATUS QUO {Actually, among 34 advanced countries, we’re No. 31. And, regulations are “an even greater impediment” to our competitiveness than taxes: Actually, we’re far less regulated than, say, Germany, which runs a gigantic trade surplus. ... } Well, it's mostly true this statement - but singling out Germany as comparative is not fair. The country happens to be economically the best amongst the EU-lot of countries. Look, the EU is an entity that is simultaneously different and very similar to the US. In fact, it is the ONLY one that is vaguely identical in construct to the US. The single-most difference is that the EU has no president - but it has the two other legs to a tripartite governance just as the US has (both a national and state Legislature(s) and Judiciary). What's missing in the EU is a President. And, as we know in the US, the election of that person depends greatly upon a characteristic called "personality". Which is difficult, across languages, to personify in an entity of more than 700 million people and 27 different languages. (Though, if anybody could do it ... likely it would be "Angela".) As regards the statement above; if "regulations" are an impediment then regulation-bound Germany would not be the world's third largest exporter, would it? Regulations bother some people in the US simply because it does not allow them to "maximize profits" (such that "I can walk away with a pretty neat share of those profits and perhaps join the Multi-millionaire's Club!") Income Disparity (as measured by the Gini Coefficient) is higher in the US than in most EU countries by anywhere from 10 to 15%. (See the Gini Index here: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/01/Gini_since_WWII.svg/2000px-Gini_since_WWII.svg.png ) Why?, one might ask. And my knee-jerk reaction is because Reckless 'n Feckless Ronnie instituted the flat-rate tax of 30% on all incomes above $100K per year. Can you imagine what that means to people earning 5, 20 , 20 megabucks a year? (That and the numerous kick-backs that make our taxation smell like Rotten Cheese.) It means they are Replicants ... and by hook or by crook they will mess with the American political system to maintain "their status-quo". Which they have done handsomely these past quarter century. Of course, it also helps a lot that we, the sheeple, keep electing our representatives based upon commercials on the BoobTube - where, of course, all these politicians "wash whiter than white". So, if we want to find the real culprit in "What's wrong with LaLaLand on the Potomac", let's all look in the mirror. Any country that allows only 37% of the electorate* to decide who controls a Chamber of Congress is on a steep slide to perdition ... *Got that wrong, have I? See here: https://infogram.io/p/79e249ceca292327958dc3c06fdd5ae2.png

If you say so ...

Clearly, with both chambers of Congress in Replicant hands, this idea - though seemingly a good one - hasn't got a snowball's chance in hell. Which is what the American people wanted, one must suppose, since so many stayed home rather than go to the polls in the last mid-terms. Thus handing the Replicant's a nationwide "field-day" ...

THE AMERICAN WAY-OF-LIFE {Seriously, there is essentially no chance that conservatives, whose ideas haven’t changed in decades, will reconsider their dogma. But maybe progressives will be more open-minded.} I'm not blaming Obama; the problem of 50 million Americans living below the Poverty Threshold existed before he arrived and will exist long afterwards. Which means it is a pernicious problem, endemic to the "American way-of-life". There is simply no excuse - it's been around for a long, long time. Half a century: (See here: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Number_in_Poverty_and_Poverty_Rate_1959_to_2011._United_States..PNG/600px-Number_in_Poverty_and_Poverty_Rate_1959_to_2011._United_States..PNG ) And we don't seem to have the courage to even acknowledge the problem, let alone try to rectify it. Shame on Uncle Sam ...

MYSTERIOUS MIRACLE OF LIFE {Job Growth in Last Decade Was in Temp and Contract ... indicates the proportion of American workers who don’t have traditional jobs — who instead work as independent contractors, through temporary services or on-call — has soared in the last decade.*} Yes, and so what? Are you living in France? And you think that an employment is guaranteed for life? The "kids" - yes, high-school and university- are demonstrating AGAINST any change in the Labor Law (a document thicker than the bible) that is the key-reason French companies have outsourced production to North Africa and eastern-EU countries (particularly Poland where Ikea now makes most of its furniture). (Just what the hell are they teaching them at university?) Let's think again, shall we? Because it seems that we feel that by some Mysterious Miracle of Life unemployment has been banished? Moreover, unemployment is a basic fact-of-life, for which dedicated forethought is necessary. Of the kind, "Now, what do I do to make sure my unemployment will be as minimal as possible?" Permit me to answer that question, "Get a Tertiary Education (Vocation, 2- or 4-year) in any profession you fancy. Then go back and get another one when the one you chose was not good enough. Education should be a "professional tool", and neither a starting- nor an ending-point in our lives. It's like a ... highway that takes you somewhere. And when the destination is not what you want, you take another highway to somewhere else ... *The "last decade", I will remind you, began in 2006, just two years before the Great Recession Debacle. Any simpleton can make the connection. We've had the worst recession since the "Great One" in the 1930s that threw more than 20% out of work. (See here to refresh your memory: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/58/US_Unemployment_1910-1960.gif/495px-US_Unemployment_1910-1960.gif )

I am not sure about the teacher/student ratio or even the money spent. What I am sure about is that kids can be taught by computer. This does not mean, in any sense, that teachers are out-of-date. It does mean, however, that they needn't teach everybody all-the-time and perhaps can give more attention to only specific students who need it. Iow, the objective is a different "way of teaching" that takes out the "rote" of it ...

Any school or district superintendent that cuts budgets should be burnt at the stake ...

{Give me 25 disciplined kids and a chalk board} Right, first find "25 disciplined kids"! I've seen a couple of 'em in a museum. What is happening nowadays is a direct-result of the "Be-all-ya-wannabe" generation. The results speak for themselves ... PS: Spare the rod and spoil the child.

{If DoD ever get SW that works the chips change......} This is what we can expect from the DoD and anything affiliated with it (including the CIA): http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35931539

Castigating private water companies in block for the poorness of the water-supply (just because of Flint) is unacceptable. They often do a better job of it. Let's look rather at the mechanism for TESTING THE WATER SUPPLY, which should not be handled by private companies. Public Administrations should have at least "oversight responsibilities" for the water-supply. And most other needs of the community as well. Why not garbage collection? Or, the Fire Department! Or a whole host of services that rightfully* should be administered by a central public administration (be it town/city, state or national). Public Administrations should have recourse to private-companies for services at the best-price for a given quality of service. Then the administrations need only oversee the measurement of the quality-level of any service, and need not build the costly apparatus necessary to its provision ... *I employed "rightfully" because I am not sure that public policing should be the responsibility of private companies. Administering the law should be wholly internal to a public-administration.

The irony of it all is that, in general, we are a highly educated nation. This OECD-comparison of Tertiary Educational Attainment* shows how true that fact remains. All we need do is bring down the cost. The American people don't need to be taught the importance of Tertiary Education (vocational, 2- & 4-year), but many do need badly a means of obtaining it. Currently, it appears that the average postsecondary-educated student has a diploma-debt of 30K to pay**. The NCES shows the tuition costs here***. Moreover, I'd like to posit this premise: Were we to spend more on Public Education at the Tertiary level, we'd likely see in the future far less in Unemployment Insurance payments ... *https://data.oecd.org/eduatt/adult-education-level.htm (The blue-dots indicate country Tertiary Educational levels.) **http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/12/04/average-student-loan-debt-jumps-10-percent ***See loan-amounts in Figure 3, here: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cug.asp

WAKEY, WAKEY! The Government Budget (2016) pie-chart* shows that spending upon Education is just 3% of the Total. Otoh, Defense (of the Universe) eats up 21%. Yes, the Education Spending is minimal because, in fact, Primary through Tertiary education is mostly the responsibility of the states. Given the circumstances of inadequate Tertiary Educational qualifications of far too many young and older** Americans, isn't it time we had a major restructuring of National Priorities? Do we really 'n truly need a DoD-mechanism that swallows 20% of the National Budget? We must rethink National Priorities, and there is no more opportune a time to do so than a PotUS election. Wakey, wakey, America ... ! *http://www.usfederalbudget.us/budget_pie_gs.php **An older class of Americans, since the Great Recession having found themselves wholly excluded from jobs that left the US need badly vocational training as well.

WHERE IS THE PROBLEM? {But we are still living in a world awash with excess savings and inadequate demand, where interest rates can’t fall (or at any rate not much) because they’re already near zero. That is, we’re in a liquidity trap. And in that kind of world it’s true both that trade deficits do indeed cost jobs and that there are basically no benefits to capital inflows — we already have more desired savings than we are managing to invest.} There's not a day that goes by, it seems, that economist - out of some sort of National Angst - do not join in to the "wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth" as regards the economy. And yet, the economy is indeed mending. We are almost back to 5% (at 4.9%), down from nearly 10% in 2009/2010. It was between 4.5 and 4.7% in 2006 - two years before the "fit hit the shan". So, what are we complaining about? That wages are not back to where they once were? Not true either. See Employment Compensation - Wage and Salary Disbursements (FRB), here: https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/A576RC1 So, WHERE IS THE PROBLEM ... ?

A FRAMEWORK OF SOCIAL VALUES {Putting the Client Last: A Former Investment Banker Explains How Clients are Being Systemically Sucker-Punched:} Serves them right, some would say. The world does NOT revolve around the value of money. Most people who accumulate wealth do not seem to understand that simple Rule of Life. There are so many other things/ideas that are worth far, far more - they are measured not in dollars/cents. The value of life (or lifestyle) depends upon the point-of-view from which you regard/esteem it. See "A Framework for Social Values (R. Payne)": https://qph.is.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-339270fb5d13db49f2c7648e0e6c098e?convert_to_webp=true

{ But I do not remember the macro-economic elite pointing out an incoming financial crisis.} In Economics, it is easier to look in the rear-view mirror to see the past than with binoculars to glimpse the future. But when you want to predict the future, there is only the past as an indication. And that is mostly where the mistakes are made, because the past does not systematically predict the future. Much to our chagrin ...

{The productivity gains from the computer and information revolution should be explosive.} Yes, but they affect only a tiny portion of the population that works in IT. In terms of jobs, there are perhaps as many people lost in brick-'n-mortar retail that have lost their jobs as jobs created in IT (due uniquely to the Internet). Don't believe all the Great Merriment coming out of the Silicon Valley. Only a few have found true-gold, and that has set a good many into a Wannabe-Frenzy ...

{How does anyone know what will happen with any politician.} True enough, and few inspire any confidence whatsoever. But the reins of the country must be placed in the hands of the person that we think best deserves to direct it. Trump scores zilch in my book, but my book alone certainly does not count for much. Anyway, if he does get elected the American voters* - after what they did to Obama - will "richly" deserve Trump ...

What I think most relevant is that economists take period of inflation/deflation or expansion/contraction for granted, as a "given problem" - for which there is ostensibly always a correct solution. In that quaint little educational world they live in. They should try running a country in order to understand that economics is not the most important element to getting reelected. Bad unemployment did not prevent Obama from getting reelected. What prevented his exit-solution to the Great Recession was an impossible HofR owned/run by Replicants promoting Asinine Austerity Budgeting. And who was responsible for that? Now you jess look ina mirror, y'all. Particularly those who did not get off their backsides to vote, but simply spectated the elections from the sidelines ...

{Just a week ago I took it off the bookshelf to read parts of chapter 23, "Notes on Mercantilism, the Usury Laws, Stamped Money and Theories of Under-Consumption." Today that chapter would be headed "Protectionism, the Zero Lower Bound, and Secular Stagnation,"} I quite like that quote above, which shows continued relevance in a written work of great competence. In French, one might say: "La plus que cela change, le plus que cela reste la même chose". Or, literally, "The more things change, the more they remain the same". We are now how many years since it was published? 80. How many books remain that relevant (in any science or art) for such a long period of time ... ?

{A few months later, Baucus and Tauzin reached an agreement that Baucus would announce in a press release. Baucus said the pharmaceutical industry had agreed to “accept” $80 billion in cost-cutting measures over ten years — primarily by providing assistance to Medicare beneficiaries who were struggling with the out-of-pocket costs associated with the Part D prescription drug program. } What can you expect from "privatized medicine"? In Europe, National Health Services negotiate the price of both services and pharmaceuticals with the individuals/companies providing them. Which is why average total costs-per-GDP are about half that the US: https://www.flickr.com/photos/68758107@N00/24907902929/ Aside from the fact US healthcare is about twice as expensive than the average in the infographic grouping, note also the difference between private and public expenditure amongst the countries. To put it politely: Americans are getting screwed for the health-care provided. So that HC-providers/practitioners can build million-dollar houses near Florida golf-links. And does anyone think that this Present Clique of Replicant Twerp-Candidates (including the Donald) are going to do anything about it? Hillary tried to pass a "decent" HC-solution - but as I read what was called "Universal HealthCare" provisions, I see none relating to the fact that its provisions mandate costs of services rendered by practitioners and pharmaceutical companies - which is or should be the Key Element to any plan. HealthCare "Supply" is multiple sources, but "Demand" is one whole nation of people who pay taxes for services rendered. That subtle difference has not yet gained currency in the mentality of the American public. And in that sense, one could say that America was "backwards" ... See for yourself here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clinton_health_care_plan_of_1993#Provisions NB: Imagine the Defense of the nation was contracted to two/three (but not more) providers in each state, and not the DoD. That's what we've got in HealthCare!

THE DARK SIDE {"Mr. Cruz has staked out positions on crucial issues that are, not to put too fine a point on it, crazy"} And this is the purported Saviour-from-Trump that the Replicant Party so dearly seeks? The party is the laughing-stock of the nation for its ability to say No, No, No to just about every notion of Stimulus Spending that would have propelled the US out of the Great Recession at least 2.5 years ago. They have made a laughing-stock of themselves with their Asinine Austerity Budgeting. First pocket-war to comes their way and they will forget what the word "austerity" means. Then their dialog becomes one of "preserving American interests" - which keeps them mental-masturbating in LaLaLand on the Potomac on a damn fine salary ... Looking at the history of this party, it reminds me of the Dark Side in the Star Wars series. Darth Vader has become blond ...

Borrrrinnngggg! All of it ...

{other professions have a fiduciary obligation to act in the best interest of their customers, investment banks continue to insist they do not ... hurting your fellow beings as a way to get ahead is not considered wrong} There otta be a law - but this effing Congress is out-to-lunch permanently ...

And I would be eternally grateful to anybody who wants to suggest I deserve a Nobel Prize just because I insist that: *Obama expenditure bills like ARRA (~$870B in stimulus spending) 2009 spiked the employment-to-population ratio at 10% in 2010 before it could rise to Great Depression levels of 15%, and *It was indeed the fact that the 38.5% of the American electorate's foolishness in 2010 to give the HofR over to the Replicants (just because Obama could not walk-on-water and stop-dead the Great Recession) was the real reason that it took an extra two-and-a-half years to get back to 5% unemployment levels. PS: Feel free to nominate me, I've not visited Stockholm in decades ... (;^)