Tuesday, January 29, 2008

The Current Hipe

I thought to respond to the Bush State of the Union Speech this morning, but then considered that Everyone and their Dog would have their own Take on it. I will only say that the same mistakes of the Administration will be continued to the End, and whoever is likely to replace him will likely adopt the same Mistakes for him or herself. We will still be operating in Deficit, still covering Problems which do not exist, while leaving the political spectrum to deteriorate. We have had several years of hectic growth of the Economy, and some degree of slowdown is expected; but a spread Evaluation of GDP numbers sees no Recession over four years. Spastic attempts to stimulate the Economy is much like whipping a dead horse. All should just accept the current advance as the best accomplishment possible, until a retrenchment drives false Profits from the bloated system.

I chose instead to examine the ridiculous role of Drugs in the current economy. I stated, accurately or not, last night that the vast majority of Drugs designed in the last decade replaced already existent Drugs treating the same Conditions with 98% of the Drug effectiveness, and the earlier Drugs carried only One-Quarter of the Cost. I called for a 45% reduction in Research Budgets for Medicine, in response to Bush’s Call for increased Funding. I even vindictively suggested that Researchers actually Pass their Medical Boards, and try attempting to treat Patients personally for Profit–We need more Doctors, not more Medical Patents. I may have made permanent enemies in the American Medical Association.

Here We have a real battle of the Numbers, with Durable Goods up a solid 2.6% in December, but with the ISM (Institute of Supply Management) manufacturing index reading of 47.7, detailing potential Recession. What is Right? I will adopt the irreverent attitude which suggest that the ISM indexes show greater aptitude for evaluating the viability of recent economic trends, than it calculates long-term economic performance. This means that the ISM does better at evaluating the effectiveness of current initiatives over the long-run, than it is at examination of economic funding of long-term economic performance. Study of latest industrial trends and their survival factors remain easier than Crystal Ball research of total economic performance. It still might not explain it to Readers, so I will say that ISM indexes adequately express the survival characteristics of recent Investment Capital, leaving economic Brownian movement to evolve as it will. lgl

No comments: