Rodrigo Constantino: Paulinho da Força pede que Lula esconda mais sua essência

Many voters get confused over economic issues when there are political debates. This is not too surprising because we don’t really teach economics in our schools anymore. In fact, we hardly teach anyone how to balance a checkbook, so no wonder people get confused when they can hardly do math, and have trouble reading and writing. All this dumbing down of America in our schools is causing quite a challenge when it comes to our elections. If we don’t have informed and educated citizenry, then they are bound to vote for the last liar they hear on a TV commercial “and I approve this message!”

The recent announcement of a referendum on Scottish independence has reignited the debate about whether Scotland would be better off by its self or as part of the UK. However this is not a simple question.

Sometimes I am amazed what economists say in the media. You see, if you ask economists to predict something or their opinion, typically you get as many opinions and predictions as you had economists in your survey. Each one has their so-called facts and figures behind their reasoning. Each politician gathers up the economists that agree with them, then gets them onto the cable news networks and has these economic political operatives go to work trying to convince the masses.

We are not going to fix our economic challenges in the US without first fixing our trade deficit challenges with China and other Asian nations. Whereas, the Obama Administration has attempted to provide for tit-for-tat tactics to stay in the favor of the big industry unions in the US, all that he’s done is to upset our trading partner, rather than bringing a balanced playing field.

One thing I’ve always found interesting about economics is that the economists, even those who are PhD level professors always have different future and forward-looking projections and predictions than their fellow economic colleagues. They all have the same data to use, but they choose to interpret it differently. Might I suggest that it is not an exact science, and there are many different theories and each economists uses versions of these to propel their best guess. Might I also suggest that much of this data and the results are manipulated in order to achieve a certain predestined answer?