Reply #4: I had a thought watching Morning Joe. [View All]

[RandomThoughts]

(Yea that is funny.)

They were repeating the mantra that the election will be about the economy.

They were saying gas prices will define who will get elected.


That means the people believe the elected leaders should be able to keep gas prices low for instance.
That was trumps comment on breaking up Opec like manipulations also, and his comments about going after that, although his bluntness did not translate well, fits with a concept that makes sense.

(Side note there is an argument for higher gas prices to move to better fuel sources, although that should be explained if that is the intended action, and if it was the motive, the move to other fuels would have happened decades ago, so that has not been the motive.)


But the point is, if the people will vote a leader out for economic condition, then the people want leaders to have an effect over economic conditions. Currently most of that is in private sector groups.


But the people want a government to keep the economic factors reasonable, the very statement that leaders should be able to keep the economy running for the people, by such things effecting election outcomes, is a mandate to elected leaders to have a regulating hand over private sector, if those sectors are creating bad economic situation.

Currently a few businesses use economics to manipulate elections, when the fact that it effects how people votes means it is backwards, and government should have controls over groups, that can manipulate economies, when those groups are not elected by society.

The people give to elected leadership, the mandate to reign in economics used against society, not for society