The problem with our economy based on the almighty dollar.

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
Jul 21, 2004
465
0
0
#1
In the case of the huge market crash in the 1920’s it was made clear to the government what the American people have defined the American dollar: It is the number one resource in determining the fate of the lives of our nation.

The simplest lamest terms I can really identify what happened during the crash is…. a person can not live or produce without the printed dollar sign “$1” on a piece of paper.

The production of products was always there, it just it wasn’t going to make a lot of it. The production of food was always there. Food was still able to be farmed, shipped, and distributed without skipping a beat. If only we could have taught the American people that we can still trade goods and services for other goods and services without having a piece of paper telling us how much anything is worth. It wasn’t that the American industry somehow was wiped out of everything it possessed; it was only that some large group wasn’t buying stuff that paid the “wages” of the people.

The market itself had the resources to still feed, house, educate, and produce product for everyone. The economic industry had the buildings, had the products, had the electrical capabilities, and had the food to sustain the population before some guys thought we were screwed by a number on a piece of tape.

In this desperate need to succeed we’ve limited ourselves by the stack of money we put away. Yet, what was needed to sustain life and economy has always been there to begin with.

The hunger and desperation of 1920’s has created our fear that we can not live without the market telling us what to do with our money, aka with ourselves.

There was no reason anyone should have gone hungry because the day before the nation was running perfectly. Our panic the sheer allusion of the almighty dollar crash, crushed our senses to believe our worth was based on a printed tree mush, dried up, and pressed with ink blotches.

Any future market “crash” will only make us look a fool if our own country can not sustain itself without $1 or 1cent.
 
May 18, 2002
168
2
0
41
#3
i think i'm going to disagree with this one. the actual piece of paper we think of as a dollar is a very useful thing. things WEREN'T running perfectly before the dollar, which is why it was invented. It would be impossible for a nation of our size to rely on a system of bartering. How many bushels of apples is your car worth? How will you get those apples? What good are apples if you have a large amount and can't eat them all before they spoil? How will countries trade with each other without a universally accepted form of currency?

And no, Bush is NOT doing the right thing by going to war. Although going to war results in an increase in government spending, this short term increase will not hold in the long run, and the market will eventually contract. A better investment would be in education, infrastructure, research, etc.
 
Jul 25, 2005
72
0
0
#4
WAR makes our economy run better.
For instance, now every history book needs to be updated for our schools. This provides jobs, which in turn becomes spending which means more tax revanue.

Also our TV stations get more ratings, which get more advertising, because of more viewers, and then the viewers spend what they see being advertised, again in turn, giving the government more tax money.

It's all good in the end.
 
May 18, 2002
168
2
0
41
#5
Tha_Perv said:
WAR makes our economy run better.
For instance, now every history book needs to be updated for our schools. This provides jobs, which in turn becomes spending which means more tax revanue.

Also our TV stations get more ratings, which get more advertising, because of more viewers, and then the viewers spend what they see being advertised, again in turn, giving the government more tax money.

It's all good in the end.
like I said, this is true in the short run (although you could've picked better examples) Assuming books would need to be updated, the government would still have to pay the expenditures on education. Also, this probably would not have a large affect on the job market, as production would be increased, not the amount of labor. NEWS gets higher ratings, so anything sensational would boost ratings. I'm sure that during the whole Schiavo battle, people were tuning into the news. People are getting bored with Iraq these days anyway.

And again, these little jolts to the economy do not provide any real long term sustainable growth. And taking thousands of able bodied Americans away from their jobs and careers is definitely NOT good for the economy. The only reason why this worked in WW2 is because there was a large untapped labor pool (women) which rivaled the already existence one. We have no such thing now.
 
Jul 21, 2004
465
0
0
#8
Joe DiMaggio said:
People are still actually paying attention to this merciedez retard? What an embarrassment.
Our ability to interact with variations of people help to sustain our mental ability to comprehend differences; to hate on anyone you deem unworthy to challenge your mind only proves your inability to go the next level of intellect, be it if I am a retard.

Hope you know what you’re doing, Peasant to Peasant...
 
Jul 13, 2005
171
0
0
#9
Merciedez said:
Our ability to interact with variations of people help to sustain our mental ability to comprehend differences;.
Wrong. Interacting with the intelligentsia is an intellectual exercise. Interacting with unmitigated dopes like you kills braincells.