Supply v Demand-Side Economic & What is Never Discussed

COMMENT: Usury, first the Fed starves we savers for return for 18 years with their zero percent interest rates and gave us two giant stock market crashes in that intervening period.
The lack of return caused us to cannibalize our savings and trillions of savings lost thru the stock market crashes and ditto home equity. Then property taxes explode.
Now even the cost of funds is still at historic lows credit card rates move from 8/9% to 12% in a matter of months.

What are Grandma and Grandpa to do? Knowing what the Feds original charter was is not an answer because they have become the master manipulator for the wealth transfer from the people to their greedy cohorts.

Have followed your public work since well before your legal problems and greatly appreciate your cycle work but the wealth transfer must stop and some jail sentences applied and claw back enacted.

Or is the wealth transfer already accomplished and the taxpayer/consumer left holding the bag?
Martin, thank you for your efforts.



REPLY: I fully agree. This is the battle between Demand v Supply-side Economics. This age of “New Economics” that was ushered in by Marx and Keynes, justified that government had the power to manipulate society to achieve their goals. The idea of raising and lowering interest rates to influence demand has utterly failed. The 800-pound gorilla in the room is the $200 trillion+ of sovereign debt around the world. Demand-Side Economics cannot possibly work when the biggest debtor is government and the raising of interest rates only increases their deficits that come back as tax increases reducing the net wealth of the people and lowering economic growth.

This is why we are headed into a Crash & Burn. There is no other outcome possible. Government is crowding out the private sector so the annual rate of economic growth has steadily declined. The transfer of wealth is not between the RICH v the POOR. It is between Government v the People. They point the finger at the inequality of income is growing. But this is not wages, it is that assets will always rise against the currency in progressive economic declines. They will point to that gap as the problem. But states like Illinois and California have net migrations outward because of the tax burden – not because some CEOs make too much.

It would help to stop blaming the central bankers and let’s look at the problem from both sides.