Economic debate turns like loose screw

Nobel prize winner in economics Paul Krugman published an article entitled “Money for nothing” in yesterday’s New York Times.

It’s well written, sounds superificially convincing, but like other opinions on what to do with the economy is fraught with major contradictions.

Taking a few minutes to read it, find the fallacies and have a look through the comments is worth the effort:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/27/opinion/money-for-nothing.html?ref=global-home

Many of the comments are almost poignant in their desperation.

Here is an example:

“Finally the lights came on for me. The reason that we need to worry about debt and get into austerity mode is because the “job creators” have no intention of creating jobs. Our economy has become an artificial world that only involves big player “investors.” They want an already broke populace to pay the bills of the investor class. Were the economy to actually get back to say, 60 years ago with nearly full employment, tax revenues would skyrocket solving the deficit problem. What the top tier wants is a slave class, perhaps in China, that will provide all the nuts and bolts so that they can continue their addictions to Gucci stuff and multi-thousand square foot homes so they can feel all that addictive power”. (comment posted on TNYT web site by Suzanne Wheat. It received a string of approvals).

Most comments illustrate that nobody is able to come up with anything resembling a coherent solution to the global economic challenge.

And we know why: because the problem is much broader than just economic, it is societal, environmental, demographic…The results of the materialist world view are coming home to roost.

Accelerating change on the planet is vibrational. Energies are reaching high noon at a spiritual level. Way above the head of any Nobel prize winner, particularly in a fake science like economics.

Fear not, calmly keep your eyes wide open.

Love,

Leo

Leo Foresta