my fault...i didnt explain myself well..i do understand that interest rates are not free market driven...i guess my question pertained more to your statement that you thought interest rates should be raised...WHOM should do that and how should the rate be decided...and how long should it be pegged at a certain rate...i see this as regulation...it would be a very interesting case study to look at free market results of interest rates...i remember my father had a 20 yr mortgage at 3.5%...this was prior to lots of govt interference...the rates prior to the seventies were very low if history serves me..(not that i remember the sixties...lol)...
dont you think that the interventionist policies only exacerbated the recession/depression that was already underway?? the impression i get from reading about the depression was that the major factor attributed to its "ending" was complicit agreement by the four "feds" to go off the gold standard??? is that not correct?? i guess one of the problems is that operating on the gold standard leaves you NO room to maneuver if you WANTED to...there was a tremendous amount of pain during the depression...i wonder how much more there would have been had no one intervened...
the thing i find interesting...is that the economy is cycling...DESPITE what people are trying to do...i wonder if the economy is actually stronger (not good strong but overbearing strong) than we give it credit...we can agree that "gubmint" financial/economic experts have handled the entire thing incorrectly...absurdly so...yet...life has gone on...the earth rotated so that it seemed like the sun rose and set...cattle still escape fencing no mater HOW much work you do mending it...and...the world might survive this "recession" despite how badly we have handled it...maybe you are right fransico...maybe the free market is really the entity in control?? vs
dont you think that the interventionist policies only exacerbated the recession/depression that was already underway?? the impression i get from reading about the depression was that the major factor attributed to its "ending" was complicit agreement by the four "feds" to go off the gold standard??? is that not correct?? i guess one of the problems is that operating on the gold standard leaves you NO room to maneuver if you WANTED to...there was a tremendous amount of pain during the depression...i wonder how much more there would have been had no one intervened...
the thing i find interesting...is that the economy is cycling...DESPITE what people are trying to do...i wonder if the economy is actually stronger (not good strong but overbearing strong) than we give it credit...we can agree that "gubmint" financial/economic experts have handled the entire thing incorrectly...absurdly so...yet...life has gone on...the earth rotated so that it seemed like the sun rose and set...cattle still escape fencing no mater HOW much work you do mending it...and...the world might survive this "recession" despite how badly we have handled it...maybe you are right fransico...maybe the free market is really the entity in control?? vs
Comment