Jack Rye wrote:

... Keep telling yourself that VooDoo economics worked for Regan and now Bush....

YAHOO keeps flashing "DOW 10,500 - down 150" then "Gore says it's still
50-50" just to remind us.

anonymous wrote:

Most folks know you can't repeal the law of gravity, but it's amazing how
many are willing to swallow whole the notion that you can repeal the laws of
economics.

That's because the latter are in fact transitory. The ones you are so
enamoured of didn't exist before the advent of capitalism; which only
came into existence when technology made tools too expensive for
individual craftsmen to own, remember? One day that same technology will
replace all workers with machines that can produce everything anybody
could want or need. But people will be unable to buy anything without
wages and without sales there can be no profits, no incentive to invest,
so Capitalism is itself doomed by its creator. Some new method of
distribution will be needed.

This is nothing new. Marx, et al, noticed it over a century ago. Their
"new method" was communism. It was based on the premature notion that
nobody needed to work anymore so it failed miserably; but that doesn't
mean the march of technology has stopped or even slowed, as witness the
ever-present "downsizings" of the labor force as machines become more
productive. The end result of all this "downsizing" should be apparent,
even to an economist who believes that now is forever with religeous
fervor.

Thus you have covered your course in freshman economics. Advance next to a
non-liberal professor who will deal with reality rather than theory.

Understanding the theory allows one to understand multiple
realities. Understanding a reality does not necessarily allow
one to understand multiple alternate realities.

doug

"Rick" wrote in message
...
Thus you have covered your course in freshman economics. Advance next to
a
non-liberal professor who will deal with reality rather than theory.

Doug Dotson wrote:

Understanding the theory allows one to understand multiple
realities. Understanding a reality does not necessarily allow
one to understand multiple alternate realities.

You mean like all the people who were convinced circa 1998 that the stock
market would never go down?

DSK

DSK wrote:

You mean like all the people who were convinced circa 1998 that the stock
market would never go down?

Never occurred to them we'd go back to "Reaganomics".