Some of this might sound like a repeat, but it all hooks together. Did you ever notice how easy it is for kids to learn how to control the volume on the radio. If they grab the knob and turn it one direction, they notice that the sound volume changes. If it went up with the first move, they try turning in the other direction to see what happens. In less than 10 seconds, they know how to control the volume of the radio. My point is that almost everything follows this simple relationship. You will be surprised how much you already know about economics and decision making. Now, let' try a few simple examples.
We have been hearing for years that the USA economy is based on personal consumption. Many of us accept this as fact because they have heard it so many times. Now, let's give the concept a test. If personal consumption were to go up dramatically, what would you think would happen with the economy? Think about it as a feeding frenzy. You know what the affect would be. Once we were all out of money, we would starve. Sounds bad to me.
Now let's look at high school graduation rates. The drop out rate is going up and is now 40% nationally and higher in many areas. What if it went up to 75% so that only 25% of our kids graduated from high school? The economy would go into the toilet. How about all the cities that now have a graduation rate of just 25%? They are not going into the toilet, because they are alreay there.
How about medical doctor graduation rates here in the USA? In 1975 the number of imported new doctors was 50%. Then we only produced 50% of our new doctors. What is it now? We only graduate 40% of the doctors that we need. If we did not graduate any medical doctors, what would our economy look like? In the toilet, right? That is the direction that we are going.
How about science and engineering? In 1986, the number of new engineers graduating from out expensive universities started to drop after going up since the union was formed. Do we need more engineers or fewer. All growing economies are short of engineers except for the USA.
Prior to the real estate bust, it is estimated that home building accounted for 1/5th to 1/4 or our economy and it was growing. This all happened while most unrelated areas of the economy were declining. When taken as a total, every thing looked rosie. Would building too many homes help the economy or hurt it? What about building too few homes? If you build too few, you can always catch up, but you don't have the same alternative if you build too many. What if the homes built are too big or too small? Which alternative would have the best affect on the economy? See how easy it is to figure out these, so called, complicated things?
How about Obama care? Would spending more help or hurt the conomy? Any one who had completed 4th grade would know that spending more on medical would hurt rather than help the economy. See how simple it is? The problem is that 99% of all the things that are happening are "negative" in regard to the economy.
Pick other items and do this test and see what happens.
