Globalism vs U.S. Investment in Federal Economic Policy--a comment

I think one must be cautious about arguing from the particular to the universal--it is a logical fallacy. In considering what a particular President or Congressional action has done that effects the economy--try to place it within a broader context historically to see how it fits in with the prior and subsequent economic positions of the United States; The same chess movement in different circumstances has different effects.

Here is a list of the worlds top 100 billionaires in 2009, a minority of which are Americans (34)-- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_billionaires

Many of these people invest globally, are centered outside the United States, pursue policies that create a dysfunctional consumerism economy without a renewable ecological economic foundation for the United States. They have no need to be patriots of the United States striving to enrich their fellow Americans if they are Americans.

I have written a lot about this elsewhere. This is not the right place for that.

President Reagan inherited a bad post Vietnam War economy that President Carter mismanaged a little. His policies were designed to end the 'malaise', recession and so forth. The tax cuts and deficit spending were a Keynsianist approach to the max to stimulate the economy. Bush I called it 'voodoo' economics' rightly, if one considers a balanced budget as necessary.

I have written quite a bit about the media being owned by corporatists- and have supported a reallocation of the broadcast spectrum for Internet podcasts on radio frequency bursts. The technological exists already. Each citizen in a local area should be given a fair proportionate slice of dense broadcast data packing that radiowave Internet cheap am-fm digital receivers could select.

On Reagan's economic policy--For a one-term policy it did change the criterion. The trouble is that Americans became conditioned to accept it as a permanent rather than a temporary fix and became like patients addicted to pain killing narcotics piling up debt and so forth.

In the post cold war era there was no economic discipline in the Clinton administration nor Bush II; each outsourced jobs and reinforced a global approach the rich liked that was supposed to indirectly profit Americans. That was not fundamentally an intelligent belief.

The global trickle down trickled down globally--yet was not rational regarding ecological effects on local economies anywhere. The United States continued to borrow money to pay for imports and to purchase cheap consumer goods. 25% of U.S. rental properties were foreign owned. The Wall Street people became irresponsible globally in pursuit of cheap profits, and the basic infrastructure and direction of U.S. economic policy was no longer reinforced to preference of industry and opportunity for ecologically and nationally directly beneficial enterprise.

Corporatism is a political philosophy invented by the Italian Dictator Mussolini who was a socialist before inventing corporatism to synergize with fascism.

The American Eastern elite is heavily globalist via Wall Street and Government/Harvard. They own the media. It makes political, local self-determination rather complicated if not impossible. One's pockets stay empty not signed on board increasingly, and one's moral and political consciousness if subducted by the corporate totalitarian structures of power into working for them.

The administrative leadership of the U.S. Government from Bush I onward has outsourced jobs, invested overseas in China and elsewhere while letting the United States become a place to take profits from while reducing the middle class and poor to rent paying consumers with no savings.