> C. Only so many investments are good investments, because in the end, there's only so much consumption, but the unnatural levels of capital driven by US monet

> C. Only so many investments are good investments, because in the end, there's only so much consumption, but the unnatural levels of capital driven by US monetary policy push banks to make bad investments (see every financial crisis since the Fed was founded). If the US government in 2008 had let Goldman Sachs (and others) to get what they really deserved, possibly keeping afloat tiny investors/victims for social reasons, I think investment would be pretty balanced. I would argue that the problem is a revolving door between Goldman and the US Gov that benefits very specific ppl and not the FED's policy.