Picture the President of the United States having an intellectual discussion on supply and demand with a leading business reporter from the foremost financial journal in the world. Would it go something like this?
And I repeat to you, one of the interesting benefits of free trade is that our consumers have more choices. I believe consumers benefit when they have additional choices to make. I believe that one of the reasons why we've had lower inflation is because consumers have had more choices. If you eliminate consumers' choice, it's more likely to cause there to be inflationary pressures. If supply outstrips demand, it's -- there's a -- that helps ease inflationary pressure.
Can you see the reporter querying the President on elastic vs. inelastic supply and demand curves? What if he threw in monopolies or oligarchies? Would George throw up his dukes? What if the reporter lived in West Texas and shared his recent experience with additional choices in the energy market. Despite over two dozen companies to choose from, electricity is well above the national average. Regulated parts of the state haven't seen the same price inflation as those under Texas Electric Choice. This reality calls into question the "benefit of free trade" mentioned in the interview. One failure of a theory requires its revision, Mr. President.
What did the reporter do when George Bush offered himself up for the economic guillotine? He moved on the Doha Round of trade talks. I bet the President was relieved to not have to back up his economic theory, supplied by Al Hubbard. The Journal also won't tell you about Al's $1 million sale of huge health insurer, WellPoint's stock after his appointment.
People understand the new American economics. High dollar donors and rich companies buy influence, which the government then uses to enact policies and purchases favorable to aforementioned firms or individuals. That Bush could easily explain, if he were truly transparent. We already know he's not fair...
And I repeat to you, one of the interesting benefits of free trade is that our consumers have more choices. I believe consumers benefit when they have additional choices to make. I believe that one of the reasons why we've had lower inflation is because consumers have had more choices. If you eliminate consumers' choice, it's more likely to cause there to be inflationary pressures. If supply outstrips demand, it's -- there's a -- that helps ease inflationary pressure.
Can you see the reporter querying the President on elastic vs. inelastic supply and demand curves? What if he threw in monopolies or oligarchies? Would George throw up his dukes? What if the reporter lived in West Texas and shared his recent experience with additional choices in the energy market. Despite over two dozen companies to choose from, electricity is well above the national average. Regulated parts of the state haven't seen the same price inflation as those under Texas Electric Choice. This reality calls into question the "benefit of free trade" mentioned in the interview. One failure of a theory requires its revision, Mr. President.
What did the reporter do when George Bush offered himself up for the economic guillotine? He moved on the Doha Round of trade talks. I bet the President was relieved to not have to back up his economic theory, supplied by Al Hubbard. The Journal also won't tell you about Al's $1 million sale of huge health insurer, WellPoint's stock after his appointment.
People understand the new American economics. High dollar donors and rich companies buy influence, which the government then uses to enact policies and purchases favorable to aforementioned firms or individuals. That Bush could easily explain, if he were truly transparent. We already know he's not fair...
No comments:
Post a Comment