What makes you think that US elected officials set the economic policy for our country?

I don't think that.

The Fed is not a government agency. It's only loosely considered "a part of government", and it's Chairman is an appointee, not an elected official.

The FOMC sets economic policy, mostly based on what the Chairman wants.

We do make treaties, but they mainly affect trade not the discount rate.

The "market" follows its own internal dynamics, not international laws or treaties anyway, that's how Soros (the man who broke the Bank of England) got rich.

Politicians always claim to be 1000 time more "important" than they are. Without that, who would ever listen to anything they say? Would you listen to Chris Dodd or Barney Frank for more than .001 seconds if they had no importance whatsoever? Balloon juice, right?

OK -- I'm with you on your agenda -- make our own products -- good -- and you did ask a Mentat -- so you do get the truth, here it is:

Cooperatives that specialize in producing certain types of products, food, clothing, lumber, energy, crafts, steelframe parts, windows, educational products, etc could simply drop out of the open economy and set a policy of "never buy anything from anybody who does not buy from you".

These cooperatives would collectively form up into trading circles. Most of what they do would be "in restraint of trade" but it could be arranged as an incentives, or customer loyalty program that would only arguably be anti-trust violative. DOJ would have to exercise discretion to prosecute.

I don't want to spell it all out here, but let's say (1) never write what you can speak (2) never speak what you can nod to, (3) and a wink is as good as a nod.

So, we know that big scale capitalism just screws everybody over all the time, but it's possible that small scale capitalism might be more deserving of public support, or at least non-prosecution, and if these cooperatives do form up and do start trading with each other on a merchantile customer loyalty incentives basis I will defend them if they get in trouble with DOJ. I do win a lot of cases, when they see my name on a brief, they start to think settlement.

A step further, such a circle of cooperatives could even print its own money, good within the circle only.

Banks would go along if they got to sell the NewAgeBucks at a discount, say they pay $9.00 to get $10 NewAgeBucks. The banks would handle the new currency, at least some would, but you only need some, and if there's a problem, starting a bank is extremely easy in USA, so the Circle of Cooperatives could have their own Central Bank to clear all trading between them.

The Circle would operate in a merchantile way, which means seeking to take in more gold bullion every year than it pays out to anybody outside the Circle. This means exports. The Circle will sell to anybody who buys in volume, and who pays on time, and does not complain or make trouble. But it will not buy from anybody outside the Circle unless it absolutely has to.

This conduct is about 1% as greedy sharky as the average big corporation in USA, so if it comes down to a ethics contest between the Circle and the average big corporation, the Circle wins hands down. It exploits nobody. It creates quality, jobs, employment, fulfillment, and happiness.

It needs to be a political porqupine -- don't stick your snout on me unless you want quills in it!

A lot of what happens in Amish Communities pretty much works this way, but without a central bank or special currency or formal set-up.

I call this unplugging from the rapacious greedy evil system. Full disclosure, I'm an old hippie. We are the ones who brought the idea of revolution to modern politics in USA, we never really got tamed, at least not all of us, and here are the ravings of an untamed one, a student of E.F. Schumacher and Hazel Henderson and Amory Lovins, still dangerous after all these years -- a porqupine at law.

Anyhow, good enough question, I earnestly hope you take the answer and do something with it. Your task is not to explain the world, but to change it.

It's called Globalization. You want to buy cheap products with parts made in China, assembled in Mexico, which is then shipped to be sold in Brazil, than you're going to need councils like this.

EDIT:

"I want the US to go back to manufacturing its own products. Its the only way we will have more than 80% employment in our future."

Here's the problem, we have a free-market system here in the USA. A business can do whatever they want to do and build its products wherever it wants to build them. True, the consumer does have a lot of influence over businesses but here's the problem. You, the consumer, are saying, manufacture products here, but then, you go and buy products made elsewhere. Actions speak louder than words.

I'm assuming you are to the right of the political spectrum because this is something I hear all the time from people on the right. I don't understand how people on the right can have this massive discord of wanting to have products be made here but still want a free-market. If you make them build here, there is no freedom.

Pump funds into small agencies. they create about jobs for the unemployed meaning the government would not ought to pay extra funds out and gets extra earnings by way of fact the employes pay a some distance better tax by way of fact they have an earnings. GDP will upward push by way of fact the corporation have extra team so as that they are going to be extra efficient. We additionally pump extra pounds out to weaken the pounds forex cost. This attracts distant places investors to purchase British products by way of fact they are much less high priced as consequently the substitute cost. The low fees of interest additionally in braveness people to bypass out and spend funds. So the main way we can enhance GDP is via becoming corporation and reducing the unemployment cost.

Its about the domino affect. One domino gets knocked over and all the rest come tumbling down as well.

So if their is a financial crisis in Europe or Japan that is going to have a knock-on effect in America, because the economies are now all so intertwined.

Having international discussions makes sense. Its just self interest really, you don't want someone else's problems bringing your country down as well.

Of course our US elected officials set economic policy for the country. Who do you think comprise the G-20?

*

Since 1913 the internationalists have been setting U.S. economic policy. I say the U.S. constituency fire the RNC/DNC & go Constitutionally based third party. Fire the fed & tell the U.N... "ME CHIEF, YOU INDIAN, ME TELL UM, YOU DO UM!"

The TEA party has the right idea but still have failed to see the light. They vote to rotate the current repubs in office but replace them with *RNC APPOINTED/APPROVED POLITICIANS". That's like replacing Hitler with Adolf. Constitutionally based 3rd parties or death to individual liberty/sovereignty, no other way BKTA!

I thought the New World Builderbooger Mason Dudes did that.

The rest of the world is anxious to bring America down to their level.