The US Economy Has Not Recovered And Will Not Recover

Tyler Durden's picture

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

The US economy died when middle class jobs were offshored and when the financial system was deregulated.

Jobs offshoring benefitted Wall Street, corporate executives, and shareholders, because lower labor and compliance costs resulted in higher profits. These profits flowed through to shareholders in the form of capital gains and to executives in the form of “performance bonuses.” Wall Street benefitted from the bull market generated by higher profits.

However, jobs offshoring also offshored US GDP and consumer purchasing power. Despite promises of a “New Economy” and better jobs, the replacement jobs have been increasingly part-time, lowly-paid jobs in domestic services, such as retail clerks, waitresses and bartenders.

The offshoring of US manufacturing and professional service jobs to Asia stopped the growth of consumer demand in the US, decimated the middle class, and left insufficient employment for college graduates to be able to service their student loans. The ladders of upward mobility that had made the United States an “opportunity society” were taken down in the interest of higher short-term profits.

Without growth in consumer incomes to drive the economy, the Federal Reserve under Alan Greenspan substituted the growth in consumer debt to take the place of the missing growth in consumer income. Under the Greenspan regime, Americans’ stagnant and declining incomes were augmented with the ability to spend on credit. One source of this credit was the rise in housing prices that the Federal Reserves low inerest rate policy made possible. Consumers could refinance their now higher-valued home at lower interest rates and take out the “equity” and spend it.

The debt expansion, tied heavily to housing mortgages, came to a halt when the fraud perpetrated by a deregulated financial system crashed the real estate and stock markets. The bailout of the guilty imposed further costs on the very people that the guilty had victimized.

Under Fed chairman Bernanke the economy was kept going with Quantitative Easing, a massive increase in the money supply in order to bail out the “banks too big to fail.” Liquidity supplied by the Federal Reserve found its way into stock and bond prices and made those invested in these financial instruments richer. Corporate executives helped to boost the stock market by using the companies’ profits and by taking out loans in order to buy back the companies’ stocks, thus further expanding debt.

Those few benefitting from inflated financial asset prices produced by Quantitative Easing and buy-backs are a much smaller percentage of the population than was affected by the Greenspan consumer credit expansion. A relatively few rich people are an insufficient number to drive the economy.

The Federal Reserve’s zero interest rate policy was designed to support the balance sheets of the mega-banks and denied Americans interest income on their savings. This policy decreased the incomes of retirees and forced the elderly to reduce their consumption and/or draw down their savings more rapidly, leaving no safety net for heirs.

Using the smoke and mirrors of under-reported inflation and unemployment, the US government kept alive the appearance of economic recovery. Foreigners fooled by the deception continue to support the US dollar by holding US financial instruments.

The official inflation measures were “reformed” during the Clinton era in order to dramatically understate inflation. The measures do this in two ways. One way is to discard from the weighted basket of goods that comprises the inflation index those goods whose price rises. In their place, inferior lower-priced goods are substituted.

For example, if the price of New York strip steak rises, round steak is substituted in its place. The former official inflation index measured the cost of a constant standard of living. The “reformed” index measures the cost of a falling standard of living.

The other way the “reformed” measure of inflation understates the cost of living is to discard price rises as “quality improvements.” It is true that quality improvements can result in higher prices. However, it is still a price rise for the consumer as the former product is no longer available. Moreover, not all price rises are quality improvements; yet many prices rises that are not can be misinterpreted as “quality improvements.”

These two “reforms” resulted in no reported inflation and a halt to cost-of-living adjustments for Social Security recipients. The fall in Social Security real incomes also negatively impacted aggregate consumer demand.

The rigged understatement of inflation deceived people into believing that the US economy was in recovery. The lower the measure of inflation, the higher is real GDP when nominal GDP is deflated by the inflation measure. By understating inflation, the US government has overstated GDP growth.

What I have written is easily ascertained and proven; yet the financial press does not question the propaganda that sustains the psychology that the US economy is sound. This carefully cultivated psychology keeps the rest of the world invested in dollars, thus sustaining the House of Cards.

John Maynard Keynes understood that the Great Depression was the product of an insufficiency of consumer demand to take off the shelves the goods produced by industry. The post-WW II macroeconomic policy focused on maintaining the adequacy of aggregate demand in order to avoid high unemployment. The supply-side policy of President Reagan successfully corrected a defect in Keynesian macroeconomic policy and kept the US economy functioning without the “stagflation” from worsening “Philips Curve” trade-offs between inflation and employent. In the 21st century, jobs offshoring has depleted consumer demand’s ability to maintain US full employment.

The unemployment measure that the presstitute press reports is meaningless as it counts no discouraged workers, and discouraged workers are a huge part of American unemployment. The reported unemployment rate is about 5%, which is the U-3 measure that does not count as unemployed workers who are too discouraged to continue searching for jobs.

The US government has a second official unemployment measure, U-6, that counts workers discouraged for less than one-year. This official rate of unemployment is 10%.

When long term (more than one year) discouraged workers are included in the measure of unemployment, as once was done, the US unemployment rate is 23%. (See John Williams,

Fiscal and monetary stimulus can pull the unemployed back to work if jobs for them still exist domestically. But if the jobs have been sent offshore, monetary and fiscal policy cannot work.

What jobs offshoring does is to give away US GDP to the countries to which US corporations move the jobs. In other words, with the jobs go American careers, consumer purchasing power and the tax base of state, local, and federal governments. There are only a few American winners, and they are the shareholders of the companies that offshored the jobs and the executives of the companies who receive multi-million dollar “performance bonuses” for raising profits by lowering labor costs. And, of course, the economists, who get grants, speaking engagements, and corporate board memberships for shilling for the offshoring policy that worsens the distribution of income and wealth. An economy run for a few only benefits the few, and the few, no matter how large their incomes, cannot consume enough to keep the economy growing.

In the 21st century US economic policy has destroyed the ability of real aggregate demand in the US to increase. Economists will deny this, because they are shills for globalism and jobs offshoring. They misrepresent jobs offshoring as free trade and, as in their ideology free trade benefits everyone, claim that America is benefitting from jobs offshoring. Yet, they cannot show any evidence whatsoever of these alleged benefits. (See my book, The Failure of Laissez Faire Capitalism and Economic Dissolution of the West.)

As an economist, it is a mystery to me how any economist can think that a population that does not produce the larger part of the goods that it consumes can afford to purchase the goods that it consumes. Where does the income come from to pay for imports when imports are swollen by the products of offshored production?

We were told that the income would come from better-paid replacement jobs provided by the “New Economy,” but neither the payroll jobs reports nor the US Labor Departments’s projections of future jobs show any sign of this mythical “New Economy.”

There is no “New Economy.” The “New Economy” is like the neoconservatives promise that the Iraq war would be a six-week “cake walk” paid for by Iraqi oil revenues, not a $3 trillion dollar expense to American taxpayers (according to Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes) and a war that has lasted the entirety of the 21st century to date, and is getting more dangerous.

The American “New Economy” is the American Third World economy in which the only jobs created are low productivity, low paid nontradable domestic service jobs incapable of producing export earnings with which to pay for the goods and services produced offshore for US consumption.

The massive debt arising from Washington’s endless wars for neoconservative hegemony now threaten Social Security and the entirety of the social safety net. The presstitute media are blaming not the policy that has devasted Americans, but, instead, the Americans who have been devasted by the policy.

Earlier this month I posted readers’ reports on the dismal job situation in Ohio, Southern Illinois, and Texas. In the March issue of Chronicles, Wayne Allensworth describes America’s declining rural towns and once great industrial cities as consequences of “globalizing capitalism.” A thin layer of very rich people rule over those “who have been left behind”—a shrinking middle class and a growing underclass. According to a poll last autumn, 53 percent of Americans say that they feel like a stranger in their own country.

Most certainly these Americans have no political representation. As Republicans and Democrats work to raise the retirement age in order to reduce Social Security outlays, Princeton University experts report that the mortality rates for the white working class are rising. The US government will not be happy until no one lives long enough to collect Social Security.

The United States government has abandoned everyone except the rich.

In the opening sentence of this article, I said that the two murderers of the American economy were jobs offshoring and financial deregulation. Deregulation greatly enhanced the ability of the large banks to financialize the economy. Financialization is the diversion of income streams into debt service. When debt service absorbs a large amount of the available income, the economy experiences debt deflation. The service of debt leaves too little income for purchases of goods and services and prices fall.

Michael Hudson, who I recently wrote about, is the expert on finanialization. His book, Killing the Host, which I recommended to you, tells the complete story. Briefly, financialization is the process by which creditors capitalize an economy’s economic surplus into interest payments to themselves. Perhaps an example would be a corporation that goes into debt in order to buy back its shares. The corporation achieves a temporary boost in its share prices at the cost of years of interest payments that drain the corporation of profits and deflate its share price.

Michael Hudson stresses the conversion of the rental value of real estate into mortgage payments. He emphasizes that classical economists wanted to base taxation not on production, but on economic rent. Economic rent is value due to location or to a monopoly position. For example, beachfront property has a higher price because of location. The difference in value between beachfront and nonbeachfront property is economic rent, not a produced value. An unregulated monopoly can charge a price for a service that is higher than the price that would bring that service unto the market.

The proposal to tax economic rent does not mean taxing you on the rent that you pay your landlord or taxing your landlord on the rent that you pay him such that he ceases to provide the housing. By economic rent Hudson means, for example, the rise in land values due to public infrastructure projects such as roads and subway systems. The rise in the value of land opened by a new road and in housing and commercial space along a new subway line is not due to any action of the property owners. This rise in value could be taxed in order to pay for the project instead of taxing the income of the population in general. Instead, the rise in land values raises appraisals and the amount that creditors are willing to lend on the property. New purchasers and existing owners can borrow more on the property, and the larger mortgages divert the increased land valuation into interest payments to creditors. Lenders end up as the major beneficiaries of public projects that raise real estate prices.

Similarly, unless the economy is financialized to such an extent that mortgage debt can no longer be serviced, when central banks lower interest rates property values rise, and this rise can be capitalized into a larger mortgage.

Another example would be property tax reductions and legislation such as California’s Proposition 13 that freeze in whole or part the property tax base. The rise in real estate values that escape taxation are capitalized into larger mortgages. New buyers do not benefit. The beneficiaries are the lenders who capture the rise in real estate prices in interest payments.

Taxing economic rent would prevent the financial system from capitalizing the rent into debt instruments that pay interest to the financial sector. Considering the amount of rents available to be taxed, taxing rents would free production from income and sales taxation, thus lowering consumer prices and freeing labor and productive capital from taxation.

With so much of land rent already capitalized into debt instruments shifting the tax burden to economic rent would be challenging. Nevertheless, Hudson’s analysis shows that financialization, not wage suppression, is the main instrument of exploitation and takes place via the financial system’s conversion of income streams into interest payments on debt.

I remember when mortgage service was restricted to one-quarter of household income. Today mortgage service can eat up half of household income. This extraordinary growth crowds out the production of goods and services as less of household income is available for other purchases.

Michael Hudson and I bring a total indictment of the neoliberal economics profession, “junk economists” as Hudson calls them.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
ThrowAwayYourTV's picture

As the  ONE WORLD CONSUMER IN THE WORLD... We must be taken down, lest we consume the world. Signed... The One World Odor.

Future Jim's picture

"The US economy died when ... when the financial system was deregulated."

So PCR thinks the solution to government is ... more government.

Isn't that exactly what the NWO also wants?

OrangeJews's picture
OrangeJews (not verified) palmereldritch Feb 19, 2016 11:33 PM

O/T Tylers, can you please do a story on Silver, Gold, Platinum, and Palladium? I'm interested to know if adding the latter two would be worth it.

ebworthen's picture

Anything tangible is worth more in the long run than fiat, especially in this debt ridden Ponzi.

Platinum and Palladium are more industrial versus monetary metals. 

I'd say Platinum is closer to monetary, but remember the Olympic Medals.

zhandax's picture

I hope all you idiots that blame all your problems on the boomers read this twice.  I am not Jamie Dimon and neither is your grandpa.  Live with it.  We have all been had.  Except for Jamie, Lloyd, all their cronys and all their K Street lobbyists.

Sudden Debt's picture

The day "globalisme" was introduced, it was a death sentence.

And whenever I talked to somebody, they all called me crazy because at first it actually created the boom of 2000 to 2007.

And now the damage is done and it can't be reverced. America will slide down to you average South American country which are all run by elites.

You can like it or dispise it but that's a fact. And globalisme is a pure form of capitalisme where the cheapest contractors build the rockets. And that's NOT America by a longshot.

And to keep the costs high, you all voted for Obama and Obamacare as you all tought it was another free ride.

And you'll pay for all those free rides of the past. That's another fact.

And the debt will have to be repaid. That's another fact. Not now but in the future.

But do the young guys need to complain? HELL NO!! First they need to do something by themselves. All they'll miss out are the free rides, and that might piss them off but hey, that's life. I never took any free rides and refused them all. I would not be the man I am today if I did.

RiverRoad's picture


You bet "the debt will have to be repaid."  And by everybody but the globalist banksters who make it a rule to NEVER eat their own cooking.

The Alarmist's picture

Taxing economic rents is a fine, well-reasoned academic recomendation, but if someone doesn't do something soon, there will be masses calling for guillotines or worse.

Father Thyme's picture
Father Thyme (not verified) The Alarmist Feb 20, 2016 8:21 AM

And still Lew Rockwell won't print the best of PCR.

Fukushima Sam's picture

I like Paul; he states truth to authority.  But his toxoplasmosis infection is showing in his writing and he comes off as a crazy old white guy.

Also, he fails to acknowledge that the "new economy" is here in terms of the Internet and related industries.  But to his point the new economy of the Internet does not provide much in the way of blue collar employment and so furthur reduces the middle class.

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Yes, Paul is rapidly slipping away from us. Whether it is from disease or creeping senility is not particularly relevant; any way you slice it, he is making less and less sense. Notice how he cites Michael Hudson as some sort of authority on economics. Do a little digging on Michael Hudson, and you'll quickly discover that he is a neo-Marxist. Hudson's idea of taxing "economic rents" sounds great until you realize it completely undermines the right to Property. The taxing authority becomes the de-facto property owner of any income-producing real asset. Sound familiar? Just replace the words "taxing authority" with "proletariat" and "income-producing real asset" with "means of production", and there you have it.

Future Jim's picture

I don't think PCR's increasingly obvious attempts to take us to marxism is from senility. I think it has been his role all along.

All Risk No Reward's picture

"The US economy died when ... when the financial system was deregulated."

Absolutely backward.

The US economy was destined for death when it was regulated...  BACK IN 1913 UNDER THE DEBT-MONEY FEDERAL RESERVE REGULATIONS!

The ignorance of history and of money is simply astounding.  People talking like they know something when they are completely ignorant of the big picture.

BTW, the economy was MURDERED by the Debt-Money Monopolists.  It didn't just die. 

And debt-based money is more to blame than deregulation, but Krugman said it best when he warned establishment players to "never touch the money system" or else the "goodies" will stop falling from "on high."

Krugman "never touch the money system"


Future Jim's picture

"The US economy died when ... the financial system was deregulated."

"neoconservative hegemony now threaten Social Security and the entirety of the social safety net"

Is PCR actually Bernie Sanders?!

Doesn't PCR know that both parties work for the same people?

Doesn't he know that neocons are Republican progressives?

Doesn't he know that progressives have been in charge since about 1913?

Why does he want us to believe that the soluton to government is ... more government?

Some of what he says is truth rarely spoken by the MSM. That is the hook he uses to slip us the poison pill of progressivism. PCR is a Psyop.

bbq on whitehouse lawn's picture

Its amazing how so many can see things so backward like this statement "John Maynard Keynes understood that the Great Depression was the product of an insufficiency of consumer demand to take off the shelves the goods produced by industry."
The logic is that one should never be able to afford a shoelace forceing them to takeout a loan and simply rent the shoelace.
Demand has everything to do with labor hours, how many should it take to buy a shoelace? John Maynard Keynes wants prices to forever rise forceing government to keep riseing prices beyoned the pont justified by labor-hour costs.
Going so far as to force you to buy buggywhips with 30year loans offered by the banks of course.
Its not just Krugman who is demon it is the whole of those who follow this Supply-side dogma.

junction's picture

Game over, man. In 1980, New York City had a thriving garment industry.  In factory buildings and lofts 60 or more years old, sewing machine operators knitted clothes, showrooms in the garment district in Manhattan's West 30s sold garments to buyers from everywhere and maybe half a million workers made a living (good, bad, horrible) from the manufacturing of clothing.  Within 15 years, most of those manual labor jobs vanished.  ILGWU top executives allowed garment manufacturers to offshore their production in return for "liquidated" damages - payoffs.  The Koch administration changed zoning laws to allow loft apartments in industrial areas.  Complaints by factory owners that electrical submetering led to overcharges in electricity rates were met with mumbles from politicians but no action. Office space replaced factory space, with many of the occupants of the new offices, stock brokerage businesses and the like linked to a booming Wall Street, going belly up by the end of the decade. The Feds did their part, looking the other way as false flagged garments from mainland China came to the USA on other countries' quotas.  The end result was a larger balance of trade deficit, the loss of unionized better paying jobs and the creation of loft apartments near Canal Street selling for multi-million dollar prices to the rich and the famous, to live in the most air-polluted part of Manhattan.  I would not call this change progress. 

jeff montanye's picture

markets make change. the u.s. won the second world war and had by far the most efficient manufacturing system in the world in 1945.  much of europe and asia was destroyed and, by 1950, from vienna to the sea of japan was locked out of the world economy by communist command economies producing very little globally-traded manufactured goods.

so for twenty or thirty or forty years, depending, the u.s. had nearly a monopoly position in manufacturing and it was sweet.  however europe and japan rebuilt and came to have even more efficient manufacturing systems.  in the 1980's and '90's the communist countries were thrown into the world market by revolutionary political change.  now they too have efficient manufacturing systems and much lower wage scales. 

much of this would have happened no matter what policies were followed in the high wage u.s., once invented manufacturing technology spread via those change-making markets and profit-seeking entrepreneurs.  no doubt the change could have been made less calamitous but it was coming sooner or later.  you only get to win ww2 once.

as for the evils of financialization, imo much of that is criminal capture of government and monopoly perversion of markets.  widespread shaming and jailing of perps is called for.

Buckaroo Banzai's picture

Jack Lemmon starred in "Save the Tiger", a wonderful movie about a garment factory owner struggling to stay afloat in Los Angeles in the early 1970s, and eventually getting overwhelmed by a financial and cultural environment that was hopelessly turned against him. Lemmon apparently understood what was happening when it was happening, and pushed hard to get this movie made, even though Paramount was dead set against it. Lemmon won a Best Actor Oscar for his lead role, but you'd never know it today as this movie has slipped down the memory hole.

shovelhead's picture

Look at the bright side.

At least you don't have flaming seamstresses falling on your head and cluttering up the sidewalk.

MrButtoMcFarty's picture

I'd rather dodge the occasional mamasan on fire than the daily deluge of methadone junkie homeless dirtbags who populate the old Garment District these days.

Human filth on parade WilhelmDBlasio stylee...

Six more months. Then the whole fucking mess can go up in flames...

Sanity Bear's picture

There was just the right amount of government to crush the small guys and let the big ones grow.

PT's picture

The big guys bought the govt.  Never forget that.

When they didn't like the legislation, they lobbied and got it changed.  You could even call that part "Democracy In Action". 

HopefulCynic's picture

There are certain industries that must be regulated, there is no way for autoregulation to work. 

IPA's picture

Part of the problem is that we as a society value human life too much. Every life is precisious and must be treated with the utmost respect. This will probably not continue. A signle life in the organism of society is irellevant. It will be interesting to see where humanity goes from here. Keep fucking around on this plannet for some reason or start putting our collective will together to acomplish something. Otherwise we will probably get board and start killing eachother again.

It is all a game, who fucking cares, learn to play the game.

wildbad's picture

that is exactly what he thinks.  he did a fab interview with stefan molyneux where he competently defended a rational use of gubbmint compared to a complete absence of regulation.  good arguments. the ablsoute pure libertarian view that everyone will play nice is too absolute.

NotApplicable's picture

Play nice? That's the statist view. Without the support of the politicos legalizing criminal activity, bad actors would quickly dissappear as consumers learned to shun them, instead voting for suppliers beneficial to their well-being with their money. However, in a world of central banking, NO ONE can compete with the evil of free money.
Gresham's Law affects far more than just the money supply.

ThirteenthFloor's picture

When he says deregulated, he ultimately means increased lawlessness. In other words, bankers move from small time criminals, to big time criminals with any recourse - the banking segment is allowed to operate without law.

Robo-signing, MF Global, Reserve requirements, de Glass Stegalled...come to mind.

Read the legal case of the "Wall Street Seventeen" aka US Gov vs. Morgan et. al. where it was shown with reasonable proof some Wall Street firms manipulated, created and profited from depression starting in the late 20's. A great way to eliminate competitors and make also some fine GGs on the side ("so what if a few people died along the way, no one goes to jail for it "). One would be naive to believe having a lawless system ( i.e., deregulated ) for the creators of the "legal tender" would ever work anywhere.

The 17 Wall Street firms named as defendants in the case, later known as the "Wall Street Seventeen" were as follows:

Morgan Stanley & Co.
Kidder Peabody
Goldman Sachs
White Weld & Co.
Dillon Read & Co.
Drexel & Co.
First Boston Corporation
Smith Barney & Co.
Kuhn, Loeb & Co.
Lehman Brothers
Blyth & Co.
Eastman Dillon & Co.
Harriman Ripley
Stone & Webster Securities Corp.
Harris, Hall & Co.
Glore, Forgan & Co.
Union Securities Corp.

JRobby's picture

Hey Jim! Let the banks do whatever they want!

Reversal of the regulations put in place in the 1930's in 1997: it only took 10 years to blow it up.

But it really started in 1980 didn't it?

Stuck on Zero's picture

From my inbox:

This is how bad the economy is:

· My neighbor got a pre-declined credit card in the mail.

· Wives are having sex with their husbands because they can’t afford batteries.

· CEO’s are now playing miniature golf.

· Exxon-Mobil laid off 25 Congressmen.

· A stripper was killed when her audience showered her with rolls of pennies while she danced.

· If the bank returns your check marked “Insufficient Funds,” you call them and ask if they meant you or them.

· McDonald’s is selling the 1/4 ouncer.

· Angelina Jolie adopted a child from America.

· Parents in Beverly Hills fired their nannies and learned their children’s names.

· A truckload of Americans was caught sneaking into Mexico.

· A picture is now only worth 200 words.

· When Bill and Hillary travel together, they now have to share a room.

· The Treasure Island casino in Las Vegas is now managed by Somali pirates.

And, finally….
* I was so depressed last night thinking about the economy, wars, jobs, my savings, Social Security, retirement funds, etc., I called the Suicide Hotline. I got a call centre in Pakistan, and when I told them I was suicidal, they got all excited, and asked if I could drive a truck.

Minions's picture
Minions (not verified) Stuck on Zero Feb 19, 2016 9:53 PM

Folks, America is not gonna get better. It's the CURSE >>>

Pickleton's picture

"deregulated financial system "


WTF is this buffoon talking about!?  The financial system is probably among the most regulated things on the planet.


Mr. Universe's picture

If by "regulated" you mean like having the Fed and it's buddies be able to put any amount of currency in any place at any time? Then, yes it is among the most regulated systems on the planet.

City_Of_Champyinz's picture

I think he was referring to the partial deregulation of the regulations, you know, in the wrong direction. Or something like that.

HopefulCynic's picture

Uhu, that is why they can "invest" most of your savings on all sorts of derivatives and otehr BS unsecure investments. Fuck yeah so regulated they can't make any money or lose any money. 

JRobby's picture

Pickle, please do not post again until the chloroform wears off. Thank you.

PS: chloroform and benzos when used together can cause permanent health issues.

Pitiful's picture

And no matter who gets elected this year, we win!!!

Tha fuck are you talkin' about man?! Just for starters, a private bank is responsible for managing the production and supply of money. That alone is enough de-regulation to make my fucking head spin. 

drendebe10's picture

Pitch forks & torches are long over due.

Vendetta's picture

as are feathers and tar.  At least the govt has taught me why these terrible acts were committed against politicians.

Soul Glow's picture

The only thing that can increase GDP is productivity.  The Neo-Keynesian paradigm got it wrong.  Growth can not be forced by the humming of a printer and the addition of zeros on a balance sheet.  The added paper debt'currency will only fuel the fire of a burning economy.

dubaibubble's picture

good luck with increasing productivity

many former hard-working folk have forgotten how to work and like the many 3rd generation project welfare receipients, their only real concern is what is for dinner and what is on TV later, they have lost interest in finding a job

Germany is hoping to put all these refugees to work as cheap labour (now that the Slovaks, Czechs and Poles are demanding a real wage) but they will learn soon enough, none of these guys knows about hard work either, they are experts at sitting around coffee shops, scewing young boys and smoking


Charming Anarchist's picture

It sounds like the Keynesians got it right after all!!!
They succeeded at fooling a lot of people.

There is no doubt in my mind that Keynesians are nothing but crafty hypnotists whose true intentions are to create illusions to fool the general public into traps. What we see overtly as "economic theory" is nothing more than professional academic deceit.

Evil magicians.
The same sort of bullshit goes down in most other fields of academia. There is nothing particularly more malodorous about economic bullshit than any other false science peddled in other fields.

After being away from my Crokonomics degree for a couple of decades, I reject it all in favor of my own economic theory: You do not need me and I do not need you. You either join the party or fuck off.

drendebe10's picture

More like ivory tower academic mental circle jerk with no accountability or responsibility for the real world outcomes of their bullsht theories motivated by their equally bullsht progressive liberal democrap despicable agendas while being overpaid and over entitled without having to perform any actual productive work beneficial to the society. Fukem. Fukem all along w all the corrupt lying cheating elected elite political turds 

Charming Anarchist's picture

There is nothing wrong with ivory tower circle jerks but PLEASE leave it where it belongs:  in the coffee houses open stage poetry night. 

Jug Jugette's picture
Jug Jugette (not verified) Feb 19, 2016 9:37 PM

Sounds good to me. Where do I sign?

moonmac's picture

The best regulation is letting people fail. It teaches millions of others a free lesson on what not to do.