06/04/2011 second post / FT: World's Largest Economy Stalled!

____
Please respect FT.com's ts&cs and copyright policy which allow you to: share links; copy content for personal use; & redistribute limited extracts.  [this is from: Saturday Jun 4 2011: US > Economy & Fed]
"
The US added just 54,000 jobs in May, confirming fears that the recovery of the world’s largest economy has stalled.

The rise in payrolls was far smaller than the 165,000 forecast by economists in a Bloomberg poll, and also well below this year’s average monthly gain of 182,000. The unemployment rate rose by a 10th of a percentage point to 9.1 per cent.


[the likelier cause is the] recent rise in oil and food prices – and the resulting damage to consumption and business confidence
"

I have no problem with this. That's right, I don't worry too much. I worry that we refuse to re-organize the economy. It needs re-organizing, but psychopaths tend to be in charge of the thing. The data merely tell us that conditions are changing; so, if conditions are changing --- we need to re-organize. These numbers are the indicator that tells us we need to create jobs. Where is the problem? Create them.

There are all kinds of ways to create jobs, but you would need to go outside of traditional policies. If the leadership of the nation cannot go with non-traditional policies, they cannot fix things. They could "create jobs." But they cannot conceive of new methods. If they cannot conceive it, then they can that much less go ahead and find those methods. The "economy," we call it --- but this all about certain ambitious persons who have made their money. They have already made their money, and it has been their means for obtaining status. Within a status system, persons who have attained status will not accept a basic change of system, Ghaddafi or Bashar being the examples, if you will. Bashar and Ghaddafi do not know another way to live. How can a banker for a large bank suggest an alternative method of economics? ---- when he cannot conceive of any such thing?

The president should simply go with the most radical economist he can find within the profession. Notice I do not say "outside" the profession. But what I do say is that you need to create "capitalism" v.2!

Who wants to do this?