Not only does a leading economist explain why a recession is already here, but he shows that politicians can’t be trusted to help.
Here’s economics blogger, Mike Shedlock (“Mish”), not only explaining why he is sure the recession has already arrived (some recovery, huh), but also the consequences of Marco Rubio’s money from Big Sugar and the problem with the Trans Pacific Partnership.
I hardly think Mish’s accusations against Rubio mean that Conservatives can’t vote for him. Only voting for a constitutional, free-market candidate means never voting for a leading candidate. I suspect they all have flaws. You have to weigh Rubio’s liabilities against his assets and compare him to all the other candidates.
But whether the recession is already here, Rubio’s relationship to a sugar billionaire is instructive about economic damage that is normal and endemic in the U.S. government. The sugar price is kept high by government intervention in this country. As a result, American manufacturers who have to use sugar (as opposed to high-fructose corn syrup) can’t stay in business in the U.S. Sugar is far cheaper in almost any other country where the free market is allowed to set the price.
You can read more about how consumers are exploited though sugar by our government here:
The framework for the current U.S. sugar program has its roots in the so-called “Farm Bill” enacted in 1990. The farm bill is the primary vehicle for setting U.S. sugar policy and that policy is currently based on three main pillars: price support through preferential loan agreements, domestic market controls and tariff-rate quotas.
This effectively works as a kind of sales tax on sugar, except the revenue goes to private citizens who can then use a part of their ill-gotten wealth for lobbyist and campaign contributions—to buy politicians.
Meanwhile, candy-makers and other businesses using sugar face one of two options. Perhaps they go bankrupt, in which case the economy is blamed in some vague way without pointing out that the business was being bled for the sake of domestic sugar producers. Or else these manufacturers move to another country where sugar costs less. In that case, they are blamed for being unpatriotic. They are obligated to stay here and go bankrupt it seems.
You won’t hear Bernie Sanders condemning sugar billionaires because that also helps laborers get higher pay. The cost of other workers losing jobs is never blamed on sugar protection so it is never addressed as something that the government causes.
There are many other reasons our economy is wounded. But that’s the point: sugar socialism is one of many paper cuts that bleed the American economy.
The only way we are going to have real prosperity is to reverse the trend of government controlling prices to benefit certain groups.