When everything is going well, the role of the state in the economy should be limited. When we are in a crisis, it's different.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
Discussions of the economy, especially during times of crisis, are often framed in terms of lessons we supposedly learned during the Depression of the 1930s. If we are not to endure terrible times like those again, we are told, we must support whatever form of state intervention is currently being peddled.
In a normal time, I don't think economic policy makes a large difference one way or another. But in times of crisis it makes all the difference in the world.
A long-term crisis, after a certain point, no longer seems like a crisis. It seems like the way things are.
The main thing during a crisis is discipline, to begin investing in time again after the crisis subsides.
The lesson of history is that you do not get a sustained economic recovery as long as the financial system is in crisis.
If we have an economic crisis in the Western world it's because the government makes up 50 percent or more of the economy. This is a cancer that is taking away people's freedom.
There is a basic lesson on financial crises that governments tend to wait too long, underestimate the risks, want to do too little. And it ultimately gets away from them, and they end up spending more money, causing much more damage to the economy.
This crisis is not simply a more severe version of the usual business cycle recession, the typical downturn in which economies ultimately adjust and stabilize.
Successful people recognize crisis as a time for change - from lesser to greater, smaller to bigger.
Crises are part of life. Everybody has to face them, and it doesn't make any difference what the crisis is.