Are you sure you want to delete this post?
the concept of "the economy" as a separate thing to be examined and tinkered with on various occasions is a recent phenomenon. iirc, keynes is where it evolved from. i happen to be a supporter of much of keynes theories however attempting to separate the economy from politics, biology, sociology, the environment and psychology is a futile and wrong-headed idea. the term used to be political economy as the politics of the state played a major role in how the economy functioned. smith knew this just as he knew capital, he called them merchants which was inaccurate it turned out, would always collude on pricing. he also was a moralist which is lacking in capital's fawning over him.
as for the stock market as chet previously noted its purpose used to be to raise capital for companies. its purpose now is a casino where people are betting. and of course you have "analysts" who can move a stock up or down by their pronouncements. and you have buffoons like carl icahn and other so-called activist shareholders whose only goal is enriching themselves. they are unconcerned with the employees, the public, and the long term health of a company. this is part of financialization which is where all capitalist economies, at least those that are large scale and seek worldwide dominance, end up. it has happened with each empire or dominant nation. see kevin phillips' "american theocracy."
and of course there is the concept of infinite growth. infinite growth is not only unsustainable it is impossible.
so while i support bernie sanders even he does not get the entire picture at least this is what we can infer from his statements. his plans while short-term good really do not address massive long term problems which revolve around infinite growth.
of course the american public is uninterested in the issues that are hiding in the open. they are much more concerned with the newest tech gadget, gays marrying, chanting "we're #1!" and marching eyes wide shut over the cliff.