Frogm4n: And then explain to me how supply side economic policys will benefit the average american?
Supply Side economic would, if it were conducted.
The only way to increase real wages/income is to increase production per person which means to increase productivity per person and the only way of increasing productivity per person - at least untill we start genetic modification of human beings - is to increase the amount of productive capital per person (not just physical capital, intellectual capital such as education and knowlege base too).
In order to accumulate/create capital one needs to promote investment which comes from saving rather than consumption.
When talking about saving and investment I am talking of course about real funding - real goods directed towards labor working on creating capital factors - rather than paper money created from the thin air.
So Bush's talk of stimulating consumption is a polar opposite of the Supply Side - for which his father George Bush the elder coined the term "woodoo economics" when he ran against Reagan. His policies is another matter as well. If increased government spending diverts more resources from productive use in capital creation, what good are tax cuts paid with money printed by federal reserve?
Also, Greenspan's policies are not monetarist in the slightest.
Big business does more to fetter the markets then government regulations ever did.
Name me a case and I will show you that it was government that enabled it to do so. No business or labor union ever shied from using the power of government to restrict the competition. If the government was separate from economy, they would not be able to do so.
I also think our GDP is overestimated through waste, and our inflation and unemployment rates are jokes when you look at how they determine those numbers.
Here is how:
1950: A man earns $100 making widget, a woman stays home, raises 4 children, cooks dinner.
GNP is $100. One widget and 4 good children are produced.
2000: A man earns $100 making a widget. A woman earns $100 making a widget. She buys the same dinner for $50 and pays babysitter to raise her 2 children another $50. ($300 now)
A government bureaucrat administers new regulations for the salary of $100.
An accountant and a layer are employed by the widget producer to help deal with the new government regulations for 2x$100.
A correction officer is employed for $100 prividung valuable services of guarding a fellow that is serving time for smoking pot which became a crime since 1950.
A welfare caseworker is employed for $100 - her work is counted as a service too.
GNP is $800 (forget inflation for a while). Two widgets and 2 screwed up children are produced.
Are we really 8 times better off? Twice as well? Worse? You tell me.
miko
