Around 1776 Adam Smith published his book "An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" (generally referred to by the short title The Wealth of Nations) in which he declared that manufacturing is what leads to the wealth of a nation. During the time when this book served as the model for most developed counties' economic policy, the living standard of those countries increased dramatically.

Many people today seem to believe that wealth is a bad thing; but it can be used to purchase the things any society needs to benefit its citizens.


What disturbs me is that we are going in two directions that fly in the face of what has worked in the past:

1) the west has decided to abandon manufacturing in favor of service industies
2) During the time of manufacturing "plenty", social programs were enacted because in times of plenty there is money to do that.
3) but now that manufacturing is going away, we continue spending deficit dollars to increase and expand such programs even though it seems obvious to everyone with any sense that the ability to pay for them is declining while the cost for them is increasing.

The left likes to point the finger at the right and presume that we don't care about the needy, which is bull. We care about managing the needs of society in a way that is finacially maintainable. And what we are doing now (and getting ready to do on a much larger scale) is simply NOT sustainable.

It doesn't do anybody any permanent good to get people addicted to services that you cannot guarantee. What will happen to the people who are not self-supporting (for a number of reasons ) when the bottom drops out and there is no more money? You can't tax income that went overseas.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ey71h8ep047758h/AAC12jNM0Hz9Q8zsh5iDeqNHa?dl=0