>Boy you could make a lot of money cheerleading for CNN or Business
>Week.The thing to do is,in addition to consider that these figurer's
>are politically constructed,
In what sense? In the sense that all conceptual categories in the social sciences are politically constructed, or in the sense that they're cooked?
> to ask :well how did the economy supposedly got there? By virtue
>of what? Which sectors actually grew, where is new employment coming
>from?. etc.,If you do this you easily see that this
>"growth" does not com from the real engine of net investment
>additions that expand productive capacity, employment and income. So
>where does it come from? From consumption growth. And how is his
>possible? Because of the growth of consumer's debt to galactic
>proportion, especially via he housing bubble and low interest rates
>which in turn comes courtesy the Asians' CBs massive buying of UST
>bonds. What about employment? If you examine the data, you'll find
>out most of the anemic growth in jobs resides in the low wage retail
>sector, government and construction, which is fueled by a transitory
>housing bubble.
>Your banker friends are happy? Of course! Finance is the only growth
>industry in the US, but it depends on a shrinking real economy which
>keeps increasing the outsourcing of productive platforms to SEA and
>China. Also make no mistake, 1-the the US government and Trade
>deficits, both approaching a trillion dollars guarantee a future of
>high interest rates and then those bankers won't be so happy, and 2
>- even the most hysterical cheerleader can't avoid facing the somber
>fact that increasing oil prices (an of other commodities} will
>deliver a severe surge in inflation.
Yeah, but people have been saying things like this for 30 years. Know the enemy, man.
Doug