Originally Posted by enoch150
Wouldn't production be a better measure of economic health than demand?
As it turns out, and this becomes clear if one ponders it awhile and with some nominal competence, "economic health" is an almost meaningless term. Why? Because predication turns on a set of presuppositions the range of values and perspectives of which are so broad, potentially so non-objective, and therefore so arbitrary that there becomes little hope of settling on an agreed definition between
Updated 12-06-2013 at 08:04 AM by osan
Originally Posted by jmdrake
There's an easy answer to China. Let Japan rearm.
Not anymore. Back in the '20s the Japanese were a refined and well developed people, whereas the Chinese were less than animals - largely thanks to the depredations of the filthy British whose dominion over those people reduced them to so low a state of existence. Much as with the Europeans, the Chinese were a conquered people, well trained to the whipmaster's caprice - far more so than even their western counterparts due to the absence
Originally Posted by A Son of Liberty
I agree with you that human liberty is a "yes/no" proposition; one either is or is not free. That said, from a purely practical point-of-view, safe money is on the state not going away anytime soon. The state is an immoral institution - full-stop - regardless of its size, but it does seem to be the sort of beast one stands a better chance of charming when its more in line with human scale.
My rural and numerically insignificant self is unhappily tied by an imaginary
I am now of a strong suspicion that there is no point in asking such questions as what the Federal Reserve Bank's next move will be because the predictive instruments of economics, such as they may have once proven useful, may have been rendered effectively null and void in the face of the new electronic currency. We are in uncharted "monetary" waters and as such all bets would appear to be off.
Whereas physical currency, even if only worthless paper, cannot be controlled
Free societies are by their nature focused on the individual whereas those of Empire are focused upon the group. Groups trained to function as units constitute what I call "super-organisms" or "super-human organisms" and even "super-human organizations". They are powerful, but almost by necessity un-free because those controlling them generally will not abide the free entry and exit of the cogs, the training of each representing an investment the return on which is