Are you willing to support a small business and hire people who can do the work themselves? If so, you’ll want to look at the factors that affect the likelihood of that happening. This may include the size of the business, the number of employees, the number of employees’ qualifications, the quality of the work, and the cost of the equipment.
As the Federal Reserve’s $85 billion in stimulus has shown, you can’t simply print fiat money. It takes human labor to buy and produce goods and services. You can’t just create money out of thin air.
It takes a lot of energy to create a “sound” money. The Federal Reserve has the power to create money in the future, but they can only create a “sound” money in the present. We’re also talking about a fiat-money that is not backed by anything other than government. This is in contrast to the “sound” money that we have today.
We’ve been talking about sound money recently so we should probably start with sound money. This is what we mean by “a sound money that is not backed by anything other than government.” You might not be able to create it out of thin air, but you can be sure it has no value.
Today the US government is a government, but it’s not backed by anything other than government. You cant create it out of thin air, but you can be sure it has no value. If you have a sound money then you can be sure that its worth whatever it takes to create it, but it cant be worth anything. So its impossible to create sound money from nothing, and if you say it can you are essentially saying its a thing without a soul.
Supply-side fiscal policy is a term for budgeting under a government’s plan to spend like there is no tomorrow. The idea is that the spending is as good as possible, so a government that spends more than it takes is said to be in a supply-side fiscal position. As an example, if your budget bill is for $100,000, you can be sure that what you have in that bill will last for years, or at least until the bill is paid.
The problem with supply-side fiscal policy is that there are many ways to say things that are bad. For example, the current approach to healthcare is to try to use a government’s ability to spend money to increase the amount it is spent, rather than to make it better. For example, if you give people 2.5 hours of your time to watch a video on YouTube that you think will make America more prosperous than it is now, you have a supply-side fiscal position.
I believe it is a fact that supply-side fiscal policy has never worked. In fact, it has actually made us worse. Instead of trying to increase the amount we spend on healthcare, we have made it more expensive. And the result is that people die, even after they get to the hospital.
The problem is that we’ve been spending more time and money on things that have no real effect on the economy. We have spent trillions on useless social programs like Obamacare, and the numbers are still going up. We spend billions on infrastructure, but this doesn’t seem to be making much of a difference. In fact, the opposite is true, as we are spending more on infrastructure (like the SuperTerranean Bridge) than we are on transportation.
So I guess you can think of supply-side fiscal policy as the opposite of what you would normally think of as an anti-poverty policy. For example, we spent more money on infrastructure that didn’t necessarily do anything to reduce poverty (like the SuperTerranean Bridge) than we did on the very things that would actually reduce poverty (like Social Security and Medicare).