Things are going to get bad eventually because of the tax structure. Money flows uphill due to profit and interest payments from the working class to the rich, so my question is: where will the money come from?
They say the problem with socialism is that we eventually run out of other people's money, but the irony is that it's the opposite: it's capitalism where we run out of other people's money because if the rich are in the business of getting richer, then where is the money coming from??? Are people dying and giving up their money to the rich? Who is giving up their wealth?
The only way someone can get richer is if someone else is getting poorer or else new money is being created via the issuance of debt.
Without the redistributive taxes of the 50s , 60s, and 70s, the working class had to go into debt to replace that lost money ever since Reagan cut taxes on the rich. And since money flows uphill via profits and interest on the debt, where will new money come from when their credit is finally tapped?
What caused the 2008 meltdown was oil and food prices getting so high that consumers couldn't pay their debt and then the whole house of cards came down. Essentially, they ran out of money.... we ran out of other people's money to give to the rich.
That was the prime cause of the Revolutionary War according to Franklin. King George demanded taxes paid in gold, but no one had gold because they were using Colonial Scrip. People were starving, so they went to war.
Parliament hurriedly passed the Currency Act of 1764. This prohibited colonial officials from issuing their own money and ordered them to pay all future taxes in gold or silver coins. In other words, it forced the colonies on a gold and silver standard. This initiated the first intense phase of the first "Bank War" in America, which ended in defeat for the Money Changers beginning with the Declaration of Independence, and concluded by the subsequent peace Treaty of Paris 1783.
For those who believe that a gold standard is the answer for America's current monetary problems, look what happened to America after the Currency Act of 1764 was passed.
Writing in his autobiography, Franklin said: "In one year, the conditions were so reversed that the era of prosperity ended, and a depression set in, to such an extent that the streets of the Colonies were filled with unemployed."
Franklin claims that this was even the basic cause for the American Revolution.
As Franklin put it in his autobiography: "The Colonies would gladly have borne the little tax on tea and other matters had it not been that England took away from the Colonies their money, which created unemployment and dissatisfaction."
https://archive.org/stream/TheMoneyMasters/Money_Masters_djvu.txt
Likewise in the Civil War the South was reliant on cotton and commodities, but the North had some spat with France over tariffs and the South had enough and wanted out because people were starving. The Civil War had nothing to do with slavery and Lincoln himself said if he could end the war without freeing a single slave, he would do so. The SCOTUS had already ruled before the war even started, so slavery was a nonissue.
Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), also known as the Dred Scott case or Dred Scott decision, was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on US labor law and constitutional law. It held that "a negro, whose ancestors were imported into [the U.S.], and sold as slaves",[2][3] whether enslaved or free, could not be an American citizen and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court;[4][5] and that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in the federal territories acquired after the creation of the United States. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford
So why would they be fighting over slavery 4 years later? They weren't. The fight was about individualism vs collectivism... states rights vs national rights... the same fight that is going on today in nationalism vs globalism.
There may have been a war in the 1930s as well since people were starving once again, but FDR saved the day. The first thing he did was ban gold 1 month after taking office and 2 months later he started the FDIC which guaranteed banking deposits. Then he jacked up taxes on the rich and started Social Security. Unfortunately we had a World War in the 40s, but afterwards the US saw an unprecedented spurt of economic growth and birth of a Middle Class which endured until Reagan planted the seeds of its demise.
Trump is simply repeating history, undoing what FDR did, and returning us to conditions that existed before wars began. He may have good intentions, but he's just too ignorant of history to avoid repeating it.
I doubt we'll see a war or mass starvation, but conditions will deteriorate one day and probably very quickly like a tornado from nowhere on a bright sunny day. When consumers run out of money to give the rich, that will be the breaking point, just like 2008.
The fed has the tools to fight downturns as a result of legislation from 2008, but all they can really do is buy bonds, which does give money to the middle class through military spending and other gov programs if they buy directly from the treasury, but last time they bought bonds it was from Goldman Sachs. Ideally they should print money and send it to the lower classes, but that would be a hard pill for people to swallow. Not even the BOJ has done that! Only the rich can have welfare and everyone else gets the scraps that fall from the table in trickle down.
When prices and interest rates go up, that will be the end because consumers can't bear it.