[bishop]

you're wrong on a multitude of items i'm afraid.

Sound economic policy dictates that saving be considered a virtue. Savings allows accumulation of capital which then can be used for industrial production.

a virtue according to who? most small businesses begin with small business loans - credit, not savings.

What we are doing is missing out on the whole point that economic growth is not measured by how much consumers spend but rather the sum of the goods and services produced by the country.

consumer spending accounts for 2/3 of all economic activity. everything about the economy revolves around consumer spending. companies and people would not invest in production if they did not believe that people would consume their products.

the mantra of entrepreneurship is "location, location, location". why? because you have to establish your business in a place where you believe chances are good that people will consume your products. you don't just build it and expect people to magically come.

There are a lot people who buy Govt bond, because of safety of capital. Those who export to us love to buy our bonds too. It keeps the price of the dollar up and because they hope we dont default, things can continue indefinitely or so they think.

the dollar became the world's currency by the simple fact that following ww2, all of europe and japan filled their reserves with dollars. this happened years before nixon floated our currency. every country that fills its reserves with dollars (i.e. every major economy in the world) takes measures to ensure that our currency remains stable.

1. The dollar declines in value so that no one wants to buy Govt. Debt.

this past year, japan bought a record $1+ trillion in bonds. china also bought some $500 billion in bonds. and europe bought a hefty amount themselves. the appetite for buying u.s. debt is higher now than ever before. the primary reason why they do this is to prevent the dollar from declining further.

Can Bush or Kerry even begin to tackle this?

only if they can first balance the budget. my view is that no matter what, you must always balance the budget. if our elected representatives wish to spend into oblivion, then they must raise taxes to fund their expenditures. or, if they wish to cut spending and make government more efficient and less wasteful, then they can cut taxes so long as the budget is balanced. imo, taxes take second stage to the more important goal: a balanced budget.

badnarik's good on some aspects of trade, and bad on others.. so is kerry.. nader isn't serious about the economy imo - he's serious about cracking down on corruption and radically increasing social spending. bush.. he's an oxymoron and a half - spending like a militaristic socialist, but cutting taxes at the same time.

i don't think any of our available options are particularly great.