It shouldn't be surprising that the Economist, a publication that loves welfare for the rich, tax cuts, and anything that drives profits upward would support Cheetolini. They know he is a blithering idiot and a danger to the nation, but short-term, he promises to trash the economy once again with massive giveaways to corporations and the…
It shouldn't be surprising that the Economist, a publication that loves welfare for the rich, tax cuts, and anything that drives profits upward would support Cheetolini. They know he is a blithering idiot and a danger to the nation, but short-term, he promises to trash the economy once again with massive giveaways to corporations and the wealthy (i.e. their benefactors). Their opinions are less than worthless.
You'd THINK that would be true but the model espoused by (it seems) almost every high-end business school is that profits should be taken as often and as much as can be done, without regard for long-term economic health or any kind of shared, profit-sustaining prosperity across the socio-economic spectrum. In 2016, I was convinced that Big Money would eschew the kind of instability that Trump represented. Now we know they will embrace any potential for rapacious gains, the future be damned.
I'm a chemist not an economist, so when I subscribed when I was avidly reading economics, I was appalled at the absolute tripe it published. Total bullsh!t. I guess you had to be fully indoctrinated in the Chicago school to go along with it. Actually a bit frightening if it represents what policy is based on.
It shouldn't be surprising that the Economist, a publication that loves welfare for the rich, tax cuts, and anything that drives profits upward would support Cheetolini. They know he is a blithering idiot and a danger to the nation, but short-term, he promises to trash the economy once again with massive giveaways to corporations and the wealthy (i.e. their benefactors). Their opinions are less than worthless.
Interesting since with a full economy are the Dems corporate profits are doing "just fine" thank you!
You'd THINK that would be true but the model espoused by (it seems) almost every high-end business school is that profits should be taken as often and as much as can be done, without regard for long-term economic health or any kind of shared, profit-sustaining prosperity across the socio-economic spectrum. In 2016, I was convinced that Big Money would eschew the kind of instability that Trump represented. Now we know they will embrace any potential for rapacious gains, the future be damned.
I'm a chemist not an economist, so when I subscribed when I was avidly reading economics, I was appalled at the absolute tripe it published. Total bullsh!t. I guess you had to be fully indoctrinated in the Chicago school to go along with it. Actually a bit frightening if it represents what policy is based on.
Give me Stephanie Kelton any day.