England UK

In much of the mainstream media, one get`s the impression that the
definition of a "good economy" that is being used is basically: "a good
economy is one that alows maximum return with a wide choice of investments."

They would apear to totally ignore that, even in the industrial nations - it
is often only 4-6% of the population who are in a position to hold any
significant investments.

Even less attention goes to the (for me quite apparent-) fact that
high/excessive profit-taking can mean that the mass of the population is
suffering from the exploitative aspects of such relationships.

When those quoted in the media call for a "reduction in the massive
unemployment" <here in Germany for instance-> but pay no attention to the
fact that often a major reduction in unemployment simply means creating an
army of the "working poor" this is quite transparently disengenious.

Surely the goal of a national/regional economy should be that a maximum
percentage of the total population should be living as well as is possible.

Calls for economic reforms that are thinly disguised calls for "more
exploitability" and/or further transfers of the wealth from the less
well-off into the pockets of the relativly few rich individuals sitting at
the top tables of society, need to be recognised for the sham that they are.

Am I one of a small minority who sees things this way (especially since
1989?)

Alternatively - can you explain to me why my - perhaps rather _jaundiced_ -
assesment of things is fundamentally flawed?

ron b.