The inimitable Brandon Smith is at it again. Highlighted text is my emphasis.
Basic Solutions To Our Economic Problems That Establishment Elites Won’t Allow
I think one of the great misconceptions about economic crisis is that solutions are always dependent on centralized government action. In truth, most financial disasters are actually caused by too much government action and involvement … One clear way to fix our system would be to first force government to interfere less … there are a lot of deeply rooted problems that government intervention has caused that add up to one big fiscal calamity. Many of these threats require a basic but sweeping return to fundamentals that government elites will rarely address and will try to stop at all costs. Here are just a few examples…
. . .
The US and parts of Europe are facing their own inflationary disasters and this is largely due to the unchecked avarice of central bank stimulus and government spending. The ONLY way to secure the dollar’s existence as a stable store of wealth would be to back it with hard commodities like precious metals (among others). This might kill the dollar’s world reserve status because fiat printing would be impossible from that point on, but I got a news flash for those that hate the idea of grounding the dollar in commodities: We’re going to lose world reserve status anyway, and it’s going to happen soon.
One third of the world’s population including Russia, China and India are already breaking from the dollar in bilateral trade. The US might as well accept this is the reality and prepare to mitigate the coming currency collapse by supporting the dollar with commodities.
. . .
If the dollar was about to collapse due to inflation, oil would be one of the first early warning indicators. With the establishment blocking new oil production and hindering the most cost effective method for oil transport (pipelines), an engineered decline in supply becomes a very effective smokescreen for the death of the dollar. The crisis caused by the government and the Federal Reserve’s currency destruction could then be blamed on supply chain issues and climate “peril.” This is the reason why the establishment will not allow any future growth in US oil production. They cannot allow the public to realize the precarious position our currency is in.
. . .
There are a lot of reasons why manufacturing has left the US, from greedy and corrupt labor unions driving up wages to higher taxes and land costs to extremely cheap shipping from overseas exporters. There is also the theory that US factories were outsourced to places like China in order to deliberately force the public into a global interdependency scheme. In other words we are stuck with the supply chain we have, not because it’s the best system, but because the globalists want it that way.
It’s unlikely that the federal government and the elitist establishment would ever allow real manufacturing to come back to the US in a way that would make us more self sufficient.
. . .
Ultimately, the most clear solutions to our fiscal fate are not pursued because the elites do NOT WANT to save the economy, at least not in a way that ends up with them having less power. They want even more power and centralization that extends beyond national boundaries into the realm of global management. Fixing the system can’t happen because they won’t let it happen.
This means that the fix that will save us in the long run will be the one that allows all others to progress; and that fix is to remove these people from positions of influence and authority.
There’s more at the link.
Mr. Smith knows whereof he speaks. Almost invariably in my experience, traveling extensively through literally dozens of countries, whenever the governments of those countries were more actively involved in “managing” the economy, the economy got worse. Whenever governments kept their interference to a minimum, and/or backed off their previous aggressive interference, their economies improved. There appeared to me to be an almost infallible correlation.
Of course, those doing the interfering – the bureaucrats, the power-hungry, the politicians and those behind them – don’t want to stop interfering, because they’re interfering in their best interests. To hell with our interests. Those don’t count, as far as they’re concerned.
"One third of the world’s population including Russia, China and India are already breaking from the dollar in bilateral trade."
Point of order:
That's 1/3rd of the world's poorest population, but with only about 1/16th of the world's money.
China's overall GDP is #2, India's is #6, (both achieving those ranks by sheer weight of number), and Russia's is #24, and dropping weekly.
The US GDP is bigger, all by itself, than all three of those countries, combined. They may as well use matchsticks for reserve currency: they're three of the poorest, most economically backwards countries on the planet. Russia was better off, on average, under the Czars, and China and India are in the same boat.
Per capita the US is #7.
Russia is 53rd, China is 77th, and India is 128th.
Out of 194 country entities.
(And China's station is huuuuugely subsidized by the success of Hong Kong and Macau, to this day, 20 years after they were returned to Chicomia, which is why they want Taiwan, another monstrous economic exception, back in the fold.)
Thus one American income could support 3 Russians, 4 Chinese, or 10 Indians.
This nonsense is Mr. Smith telling us he doesn't understand economics, without telling us he doesn't understand economics.
Well, thank God we have you to tell us, MASTER OF EVERYTHING.
I cannot remember if I've read rebuttal so eloquent and factual. I am awed by the enormity of practicality yet stated so succinctly. Utterly brilliant!
To Aesop's points I say the positions on the world stage of China, India, and Russia is measured not by population, GDP, or value of their currency.
Yet it is that China and India are powerhouses of industry, and Russia for natural resources. Too, in this global economy everything is connected. What happens in any of those countries – even if only civil strife within – sends vast ripples throughout the world.
Would, say recession soley within India cause regime change within the territories of trading partners?
why manufacturing has left the US, from greedy and corrupt labor unions driving up wages to higher taxes and land costs to extremely cheap shipping from overseas exporters
That's not nearly the totality. There's OSHA, Fair Labor Standards Act, Social Security, health insurance (such as it is), lawyers, patents, workers' compensation, paid vacations, and even more lawyers. And let's not forget EPA!
Chinese labor could be paid TWICE US union rates and the overall cost of production would still be less than here. So yes, the "globalist" angle is viable. Remember that Bill Clinton and GWBush were the principal actors in giving away US manufacturing to China. We all know what Clinton was paid (plenty!! in his first campaign). Remains to be discovered what Bush got out of it.
If the Soviet Union collapsed (again) no one outside there would notice.
India's collapse would be somebody else's problem, but the rest of Asia would benefit.
China's collapse would be rather significant, but mainly for the Chinese, and to the benefit of whoever else picked up where they dropped the ball.
If/when the US collapses, everything in the Northern Hemisphere goes down the toilet.
Good comeback, Potsie.
When you can't argue anything on the merits, go right for gradeschool ad hominem sophistry.
That'll show me!
And please, by all means, don't ever think of using your mouse and keyboard your ownself, and look into things independently. You might learn something.