The Economy Fallacy

[PoliticalChic]

Who would you count on more….economists or weathermen?



1.That’s pretty much it…..economics is a fallacy. Lots of pretense that it is a science, they even call it a ‘social science’…..but it ain’t. There are soooo many jokes about economics…..’economists have predicted eleven of the last five recessions’….that only economists take economics seriously.



2. The problem is that it is based on a mistaken idea that is most obvious in what is called Progressivism, that ‘experts,’ also known as bureaucrats, can know everything, control everything, produce mandates and be assured of the outcome.
Whether they are Bolsheviks, Nazis, Socialists, or Liberals/Progressives, the premise is sure to produce, at best, mistakes, at worst, the slaughter of millions of human beings.

Who is best at producing the economic outcomes we all desire? Conservatives….look at the golden age that Ronald Reagan produced. There is a little of that in Trump….compare his economy to the dolt who preceded him.

"It is a great irony of communism that those who did not believe in God believed that godlike knowledge could be concentrated at a central point. It was believed that government could be omnipotent and omniscient. And in order to justify the idea that all lives should be determined by a single plan, the concomitant tendency of communist regimes was to deify the leader- whether Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or Kim Il-sung."
Tom Bethell, "The Noblest Triumph," p. 144





3. Friedrich A. Hayek has posed an explanation based on what is necessary to ‘control’ an economy, to produce a successful outcome, and all of the ‘ingredients’ in this recipe are beyond what the experts are capable of. That is the very opposite of Liberal/Progressive doctrine...that they can do anything. For that political view, there are impressionable groups, collectives that can be manipulated, and hence, their actions predictable. That’s why Hillary won the election….

Hayek: “The peculiar character of the problem of a rational economic order is determined precisely by the fact that the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess. The economic problem of society is thus not merely a problem of how to allocate “given” resources—if “given” is taken to mean given to a single mind which deliberately solves the problem set by these “data.” It is rather a problem of how to secure the best use of resources known to any of the members of society, for ends whose relative importance only these individuals know. Or, to put it briefly, it is a problem of the utilization of knowledge which is not given to anyone in its totality.” "The Use of Knowledge in Society" - Econlib

4. Those experts, bureaucrats, administrators, who Progressive/racist Democrat Woodrow Wilson imagined when he wrote ‘The Administrative State’….they don’t do it because they can’t do it, largely because the belief that Progressives/Liberals have about individuals is short-sighted and false: there is an immutable human nature, not controllable by ‘masters,’ that revolves around lots of judgments, wishes, variations in character, and self-interest.

“The Progressive Era (1890-1920) Early growth of the administrative state occurred as a result of government regulation in the late 19th century. Thus was born the Progressive Era, during which reformers sought to remedy a variety of perceived social ills through an administrative apparatus run by those deemed experts untainted, it was believed, by political ambitions—and freed, in the view of some, from fixed constitutional constraints.”
Administrative state - Ballotpedia



Now, if you are a government school grad, you probably believe that stuff about the Progressives as geniuses….or even, as they called Obama, Jesus, god and the messiah.
Nope....
Just one more lie of the Left.

 

[danielpalos]

We understand economics a lot better in modern times. And, quantum supremacy is already happening to help with the variables.

For comparison and contrast, Jesus the Christ only had morals to work with, not economics.

 

[PoliticalChic]

5. The reason ‘economists’ fail so regularly is the assumptions about how much they are able to know, and about how different each individual is, and, thus, how differently each one acts compared to others.
They think in terms of collectives.
But the continuous flow of goods and services is maintained by constant deliberate adjustments, by new dispositions made every day in the light of circumstances not known the day before, by B stepping in at once when A fails to deliver.



“… the sort of knowledge with which I have been concerned is knowledge of the kind which by its nature cannot enter into statistics and therefore cannot be conveyed to any central authority in statistical form. The statistics which such a central authority would have to use would have to be arrived at precisely by abstracting from minor differences between the things, by lumping together, as resources of one kind, items which differ as regards location, quality, and other particulars, in a way which may be very significant for the specific decision. It follows from this that central planning based on statistical information by its nature cannot take direct account of these circumstances of time and place…”
Hayek, “The Use of Knowledge in Society.”


So how can government control by setting policy, produce what it wants?

It can't.

 

[DGS49]

You are wrong, PC. There are inviolate economic principles that one ignores at one's peril. The problem with predicting the future of the Economy is that there are too many "moving parts," and no economist can possibly account for all of the vital factors until they come to light.

Absent outside interference, Price is determined by Supply & Demand. When there is an international glut of oil, the price-per-barrel goes down; when there is an international shortage, the price goes up. Same for EVERYTHING ELSE that is sold in a free market.

Activity that is subsidized will increase; activity that is penalized (taxed) will decrease. Put an outrageous tax on luxury yachts, and people will stop buying luxury yachts. Pay people to have babies without a husband, and they will have babies without a husband.

When the Sovereign dictates prices, the market will react in rational and predictable ways. Raise the Minimum Wage to $15, and (a) employers will use less of it, (b) employers will find alternatives to human labor to get the job done, and (c) a "black market" of under-the-table employment will proliferate. It is as certain as daytime following the night.

 

[DGS49]

One of the many inexplicable economic perversities of recent history is that the incredible increase in government borrowing and spending has not resulted in either inflation or higher interest rates. Indeed, with the Federal Government spending money RIGHT NOW like a tsunami of drunken sailors, mortgage interest rates are at historic lows, and inflation does not appear to be a significant problem.

I have not heard ANY explanation of how this is even possible

 

[danielpalos]

Nobody takes the Right Wing seriously about economics, the law, morals, or political fortitude.

 

[bluzman61]

Who would you count on more….economists or weathermen?



1.That’s pretty much it…..economics is a fallacy. Lots of pretense that it is a science, they even call it a ‘social science’…..but it ain’t. There are soooo many jokes about economics…..’economists have predicted eleven of the last five recessions’….that only economists take economics seriously.



2. The problem is that it is based on a mistaken idea that is most obvious in what is called Progressivism, that ‘experts,’ also known as bureaucrats, can know everything, control everything, produce mandates and be assured of the outcome.
Whether they are Bolsheviks, Nazis, Socialists, or Liberals/Progressives, the premise is sure to produce, at best, mistakes, at worst, the slaughter of millions of human beings.

Who is best at producing the economic outcomes we all desire? Conservatives….look at the golden age that Ronald Reagan produced. There is a little of that in Trump….compare his economy to the dolt who preceded him.

"It is a great irony of communism that those who did not believe in God believed that godlike knowledge could be concentrated at a central point. It was believed that government could be omnipotent and omniscient. And in order to justify the idea that all lives should be determined by a single plan, the concomitant tendency of communist regimes was to deify the leader- whether Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or Kim Il-sung."
Tom Bethell, "The Noblest Triumph," p. 144





3. Friedrich A. Hayek has posed an explanation based on what is necessary to ‘control’ an economy, to produce a successful outcome, and all of the ‘ingredients’ in this recipe are beyond what the experts are capable of. That is the very opposite of Liberal/Progressive doctrine...that they can do anything. For that political view, there are impressionable groups, collectives that can be manipulated, and hence, their actions predictable. That’s why Hillary won the election….

Hayek: “The peculiar character of the problem of a rational economic order is determined precisely by the fact that the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess. The economic problem of society is thus not merely a problem of how to allocate “given” resources—if “given” is taken to mean given to a single mind which deliberately solves the problem set by these “data.” It is rather a problem of how to secure the best use of resources known to any of the members of society, for ends whose relative importance only these individuals know. Or, to put it briefly, it is a problem of the utilization of knowledge which is not given to anyone in its totality.” "The Use of Knowledge in Society" - Econlib

4. Those experts, bureaucrats, administrators, who Progressive/racist Democrat Woodrow Wilson imagined when he wrote ‘The Administrative State’….they don’t do it because they can’t do it, largely because the belief that Progressives/Liberals have about individuals is short-sighted and false: there is an immutable human nature, not controllable by ‘masters,’ that revolves around lots of judgments, wishes, variations in character, and self-interest.

“The Progressive Era (1890-1920) Early growth of the administrative state occurred as a result of government regulation in the late 19th century. Thus was born the Progressive Era, during which reformers sought to remedy a variety of perceived social ills through an administrative apparatus run by those deemed experts untainted, it was believed, by political ambitions—and freed, in the view of some, from fixed constitutional constraints.”
Administrative state - Ballotpedia



Now, if you are a government school grad, you probably believe that stuff about the Progressives as geniuses….or even, as they called Obama, Jesus, god and the messiah.
Nope....
Just one more lie of the Left.

Absolutely fantastic post, PC. Thank you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You are wrong, PC. There are inviolate economic principles that one ignores at one's peril. The problem with predicting the future of the Economy is that there are too many "moving parts," and no economist can possibly account for all of the vital factors until they come to light.

Absent outside interference, Price is determined by Supply & Demand. When there is an international glut of oil, the price-per-barrel goes down; when there is an international shortage, the price goes up. Same for EVERYTHING ELSE that is sold in a free market.

Activity that is subsidized will increase; activity that is penalized (taxed) will decrease. Put an outrageous tax on luxury yachts, and people will stop buying luxury yachts. Pay people to have babies without a husband, and they will have babies without a husband.

When the Sovereign dictates prices, the market will react in rational and predictable ways. Raise the Minimum Wage to $15, and (a) employers will use less of it, (b) employers will find alternatives to human labor to get the job done, and (c) a "black market" of under-the-table employment will proliferate. It is as certain as daytime following the night.

"You are wrong, PC. "

Really?


In that case, you will be able to explain the following:


6. Government economists are feted and endorsed, not because they are correct, but because they support growing government, demanding more power for government....bigger and bigger government with more an more power.

“The Godfather of the neo-Keynesians, Paul Samuelson, was the lead critic of the supposed follies of Reaganomics. He wrote in a 1980 Newsweek column that to slay the inflation monster would take "five to ten years of austerity," with unemployment of 8% or 9% and real output of "barely 1 or 2 percent." Reaganomics was routinely ridiculed in the media, especially in the 1982 recession. That was the year MIT economist Lester Thurow famously said, "The engines of economic growth have shut down here and across the globe, and they are likely to stay that way for years to come."

The economy would soon take flight for more than 80 consecutive months.

Then the Reagan critics declared what they once thought couldn't work was actually a textbook Keynesian expansion fueled by budget deficits of $200 billion a year, or about 4%-5% of GDP.

Robert Reich, now at the University of California, Berkeley, explained that "The recession of 1981-82 was so severe that the bounce back has been vigorous." Paul Krugman wrote in 2004 that the Reagan boom was really nothing special because: "You see, rapid growth is normal when an economy is bouncing back from a deep slump."

Stephen Moore: Obamanonics vs. Reaganomics

In The Wall Street Journal, Stephen Moore says Ronald Reagan's economic program worked, but Barack Obama's policies have not.

www.wsj.com

Wanna see that again?

"You see, rapid growth is normal when an economy is bouncing back from a deep slump."



And this: Under Obama…..“Yes, this is the slowest U.S. recovery since WWII” Yes, this is the slowest U.S. recovery since WWII



Free markets work.....not government regulations.


Sooooo....no, I'm not wrong.

 

[Care4all]

One of the many inexplicable economic perversities of recent history is that the incredible increase in government borrowing and spending has not resulted in either inflation or higher interest rates. Indeed, with the Federal Government spending money RIGHT NOW like a tsunami of drunken sailors, mortgage interest rates are at historic lows, and inflation does not appear to be a significant problem.

I have not heard ANY explanation of how this is even possible

We are borrowing from overseas entities for the budget deficits.

Before we went head in to borrowing money from foreigners, the gvt had to borrow the money from we the people..... So, interest rates for we the people saving money, sky rocketed... my parents had some CDs paying 14% interest.....

By going overseas, it opened a world of money to borrow at our fingertips, interest on the borrowing stays lower, and we the people no longer are enticed to save money....interest rates on savings dropped, we were encouraged to spend money in the economy or risk stock market investment..... No longer savings....

Is my best guess?

 

[esalla]

Who would you count on more….economists or weathermen?



1.That’s pretty much it…..economics is a fallacy. Lots of pretense that it is a science, they even call it a ‘social science’…..but it ain’t. There are soooo many jokes about economics…..’economists have predicted eleven of the last five recessions’….that only economists take economics seriously.



2. The problem is that it is based on a mistaken idea that is most obvious in what is called Progressivism, that ‘experts,’ also known as bureaucrats, can know everything, control everything, produce mandates and be assured of the outcome.
Whether they are Bolsheviks, Nazis, Socialists, or Liberals/Progressives, the premise is sure to produce, at best, mistakes, at worst, the slaughter of millions of human beings.

Who is best at producing the economic outcomes we all desire? Conservatives….look at the golden age that Ronald Reagan produced. There is a little of that in Trump….compare his economy to the dolt who preceded him.

"It is a great irony of communism that those who did not believe in God believed that godlike knowledge could be concentrated at a central point. It was believed that government could be omnipotent and omniscient. And in order to justify the idea that all lives should be determined by a single plan, the concomitant tendency of communist regimes was to deify the leader- whether Lenin, Stalin, Mao, or Kim Il-sung."
Tom Bethell, "The Noblest Triumph," p. 144





3. Friedrich A. Hayek has posed an explanation based on what is necessary to ‘control’ an economy, to produce a successful outcome, and all of the ‘ingredients’ in this recipe are beyond what the experts are capable of. That is the very opposite of Liberal/Progressive doctrine...that they can do anything. For that political view, there are impressionable groups, collectives that can be manipulated, and hence, their actions predictable. That’s why Hillary won the election….

Hayek: “The peculiar character of the problem of a rational economic order is determined precisely by the fact that the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess. The economic problem of society is thus not merely a problem of how to allocate “given” resources—if “given” is taken to mean given to a single mind which deliberately solves the problem set by these “data.” It is rather a problem of how to secure the best use of resources known to any of the members of society, for ends whose relative importance only these individuals know. Or, to put it briefly, it is a problem of the utilization of knowledge which is not given to anyone in its totality.” "The Use of Knowledge in Society" - Econlib

4. Those experts, bureaucrats, administrators, who Progressive/racist Democrat Woodrow Wilson imagined when he wrote ‘The Administrative State’….they don’t do it because they can’t do it, largely because the belief that Progressives/Liberals have about individuals is short-sighted and false: there is an immutable human nature, not controllable by ‘masters,’ that revolves around lots of judgments, wishes, variations in character, and self-interest.

“The Progressive Era (1890-1920) Early growth of the administrative state occurred as a result of government regulation in the late 19th century. Thus was born the Progressive Era, during which reformers sought to remedy a variety of perceived social ills through an administrative apparatus run by those deemed experts untainted, it was believed, by political ambitions—and freed, in the view of some, from fixed constitutional constraints.”
Administrative state - Ballotpedia



Now, if you are a government school grad, you probably believe that stuff about the Progressives as geniuses….or even, as they called Obama, Jesus, god and the messiah.
Nope....
Just one more lie of the Left.

Does the weatherman earn your income?
What stocks do you own?

If you answered none to both feel free to have the weatherman manage your finances

Grow up you foolish poor little kid

 

[danielpalos]

One of the many inexplicable economic perversities of recent history is that the incredible increase in government borrowing and spending has not resulted in either inflation or higher interest rates. Indeed, with the Federal Government spending money RIGHT NOW like a tsunami of drunken sailors, mortgage interest rates are at historic lows, and inflation does not appear to be a significant problem.

I have not heard ANY explanation of how this is even possible

We are borrowing from overseas entities for the budget deficits.

Before we went head in to borrowing money from foreigners, the gvt had to borrow the money from we the people..... So, interest rates for we the people saving money, sky rocketed... my parents had some CDs paying 14% interest.....

By going overseas, it opened a world of money to borrow at our fingertips, interest on the borrowing stays lower, and we the people no longer are enticed to save money....interest rates on savings dropped, we were encouraged to spend money in the economy or risk stock market investment..... No longer savings....

Is my best guess?

Wages need to go up for the working class. Raising the minimum wage and being legal to our at-will employment laws in our at-will employment States can help improve the efficiency of our economy.

 

[esalla]

One of the many inexplicable economic perversities of recent history is that the incredible increase in government borrowing and spending has not resulted in either inflation or higher interest rates. Indeed, with the Federal Government spending money RIGHT NOW like a tsunami of drunken sailors, mortgage interest rates are at historic lows, and inflation does not appear to be a significant problem.

I have not heard ANY explanation of how this is even possible

We are borrowing from overseas entities for the budget deficits.

Before we went head in to borrowing money from foreigners, the gvt had to borrow the money from we the people..... So, interest rates for we the people saving money, sky rocketed... my parents had some CDs paying 14% interest.....

By going overseas, it opened a world of money to borrow at our fingertips, interest on the borrowing stays lower, and we the people no longer are enticed to save money....interest rates on savings dropped, we were encouraged to spend money in the economy or risk stock market investment..... No longer savings....

Is my best guess?

Wages need to go up for the working class. Raising the minimum wage and being legal to our at-will employment laws in our at-will employment States can help improve the efficiency of our economy.

How about the minimum wage goes down and your pay still goes up?

LOL flip the burger Mr. Burger King

 

[danielpalos]

One of the many inexplicable economic perversities of recent history is that the incredible increase in government borrowing and spending has not resulted in either inflation or higher interest rates. Indeed, with the Federal Government spending money RIGHT NOW like a tsunami of drunken sailors, mortgage interest rates are at historic lows, and inflation does not appear to be a significant problem.

I have not heard ANY explanation of how this is even possible

We are borrowing from overseas entities for the budget deficits.

Before we went head in to borrowing money from foreigners, the gvt had to borrow the money from we the people..... So, interest rates for we the people saving money, sky rocketed... my parents had some CDs paying 14% interest.....

By going overseas, it opened a world of money to borrow at our fingertips, interest on the borrowing stays lower, and we the people no longer are enticed to save money....interest rates on savings dropped, we were encouraged to spend money in the economy or risk stock market investment..... No longer savings....

Is my best guess?

Wages need to go up for the working class. Raising the minimum wage and being legal to our at-will employment laws in our at-will employment States can help improve the efficiency of our economy.

How about the minimum wage goes down and your pay still goes up?

LOL flip the burger Mr. Burger King

Sacrificing the End to the short-term micro-economic Profit means, like usual right wingers?

 

[Care4all]

One of the many inexplicable economic perversities of recent history is that the incredible increase in government borrowing and spending has not resulted in either inflation or higher interest rates. Indeed, with the Federal Government spending money RIGHT NOW like a tsunami of drunken sailors, mortgage interest rates are at historic lows, and inflation does not appear to be a significant problem.

I have not heard ANY explanation of how this is even possible

We are borrowing from overseas entities for the budget deficits.

Before we went head in to borrowing money from foreigners, the gvt had to borrow the money from we the people..... So, interest rates for we the people saving money, sky rocketed... my parents had some CDs paying 14% interest.....

By going overseas, it opened a world of money to borrow at our fingertips, interest on the borrowing stays lower, and we the people no longer are enticed to save money....interest rates on savings dropped, we were encouraged to spend money in the economy or risk stock market investment..... No longer savings....

Is my best guess?

And the lower borrowing rates from foreigners encouraged deficit spending by congress....as with your examples.... actions cause reactions......

 

[PoliticalChic]

The economics elites despise capitalism, with its trust of free-market individual.

1. Paul Krugman, in “The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008,” said that traditional free-market economics are “obsolete doctrines that clutter the minds of men.”
2. Paul Samuelson, Nobel laureate as well: “deregulated capitalism is a fragile flower bund to commit suicide,” and its supporters were “emotional cripples.”
3. Larry Summers, former White House National Economic Council director, explained how we need the government to save “the market system from its excesses and inadequacies.”
4. Capitalism becomes socialism under FDR: “One objective [of New Deal power policy] was to enlarge the publicly owned sector of the power industry…as a means of diminishing private control over the necessities of life.” Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., “The Age of Roosevelt: The Politics of Upheaval, vol.3,” p. 379.

And all of 'em wrong.

That fact seems to have escaped the several posters above.

 

[PoliticalChic]

One of the many inexplicable economic perversities of recent history is that the incredible increase in government borrowing and spending has not resulted in either inflation or higher interest rates. Indeed, with the Federal Government spending money RIGHT NOW like a tsunami of drunken sailors, mortgage interest rates are at historic lows, and inflation does not appear to be a significant problem.

I have not heard ANY explanation of how this is even possible

We are borrowing from overseas entities for the budget deficits.

Before we went head in to borrowing money from foreigners, the gvt had to borrow the money from we the people..... So, interest rates for we the people saving money, sky rocketed... my parents had some CDs paying 14% interest.....

By going overseas, it opened a world of money to borrow at our fingertips, interest on the borrowing stays lower, and we the people no longer are enticed to save money....interest rates on savings dropped, we were encouraged to spend money in the economy or risk stock market investment..... No longer savings....

Is my best guess?

And the lower borrowing rates from foreigners encouraged deficit spending by congress....as with your examples.... actions cause reactions......

Free market capitalism or command and control governance.

The answer will determine your vote in November......and your prosperity.


Choose wisely.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So how can government control an economy by setting policy, and then produce what it wants?

It can't.



7. “…who is to do the planning. It is about this question that all the dispute about “economic planning” centers. This is not a dispute about whether planning is to be done or not. It is a dispute as to whether planning is to be done centrally, by one authority for the whole economic system, or is to be divided among many individuals.

Planning in the specific sense in which the term is used in contemporary controversy necessarily means central planning—direction of the whole economic system according to one unified plan. Competition, on the other hand, means decentralized planning by many separate persons.”
Hayek, Op.Cit.



8. There are two views, based on belief either in the individual citizen, or in the power of a central authority, government, that result in very different economic systems.

a. individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.
or

b. the collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.





And your choice of a. or b. determines not just the economy….but liberty as well.

 

[danielpalos]

The economics elites despise capitalism, with its trust of free-market individual.

1. Paul Krugman, in “The Return of Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008,” said that traditional free-market economics are “obsolete doctrines that clutter the minds of men.”
2. Paul Samuelson, Nobel laureate as well: “deregulated capitalism is a fragile flower bund to commit suicide,” and its supporters were “emotional cripples.”
3. Larry Summers, former White House National Economic Council director, explained how we need the government to save “the market system from its excesses and inadequacies.”
4. Capitalism becomes socialism under FDR: “One objective [of New Deal power policy] was to enlarge the publicly owned sector of the power industry…as a means of diminishing private control over the necessities of life.” Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., “The Age of Roosevelt: The Politics of Upheaval, vol.3,” p. 379.

And all of 'em wrong.

That fact seems to have escaped the several posters above.

Rioters are "free market" individuals not Commerce, well regulated.

 

[PoliticalChic]

The central question….and this is perennial….is whether to honor the only document that the American people have agreed to be governed by, the Constitution, or to simply impose the unfounded whims and wishes of politicians…..and their economists.



9. Walter Lippmann wrote in 1935: The policy initiated by President Hoover in the autumn of 1929 was utterly unprecedented in American history. The national government undertook to make the whole economic order operate prosperously…the Roosevelt measures are a continuous evolution of the Hoover measures.”
Sowell, “The Housing Boom and Bust,” p. 132.


Instead of reversal of Hoover’s policies, which he promised to do, FDR continued to believe in central planning and massive government spending, and this thinking continues among progressive economists today… even in the face of evidence that it doesn’t work.



Consistent with the strategy of liberal politicians, FDR chose to lie to the electorate. From a radio address, July 1932: “Let us have the courage to stop borrowing to meet continuing deficits. Revenues must cover expenditures by one means or another . Any government, like any family, can, for a year, spend a little more than it earns. But you know and I know that a continuation of that habit means the poor house.”
John Steele Gordon, “Hamilton’s Blessing: The Extraordinary Life and Times of Our National Debt,”p.114-115.



Since he took office in ’33, he coul claim he spent only $3.6 billion more than he took in. Note, over his 12 years in office, he never ran a surplus (the same is true of the bogus Clinton surplus).

With his Democrat Congress, the $22.5 billion debt he inherited in 1933 was nearly doubled in seven years.
Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 1900 - 1949

 

[danielpalos]

Our welfare clause is General and must cover any contingency from the Top, Down.

Our political economy should be a welfare-State not an extra-Constitutional warfare-State.

There is no general warfare clause nor any common offense clause.