What is the point of having a "good" economy that does not produce income for those risking their capital? The basic fallacy is that the measures we use for th

What is the point of having a "good" economy that does not produce income for those risking their capital? The basic fallacy is that the measures we use for the economy are rigged so that the facilities the gov't has at it's disposal for fixing the economy (printing money) appear to work. What keeps the economy afloat is not the investment of capital (supply side) but the consumer purchases (demand side). Would you advocate investment of capital in areas where a market will not exist? Also, in regards to siphoning wealth and "reinvesting" it, you may want to look at the PHIGS countries which have done just that. Can anyone tell me that in a country like America where most people drive to work that a CPI that does not include the price of gas is accurate? Most things in the CPI are subject to massive gov't subsidies that effectively control the majority of movement in the CPI. If the point of the economy is to maximize economic results as a whole then I can't think of a better measure of the economy than individual incomes adjusted for a real rate of inflation. It's far better than stock market / CPI proxies.