07 May 12
Originally posted by sonhouseThe so called 'socialist' parties these days take their marching orders from the same economists as the 'conservative' parties. Nothing will change. The elite agenda will be carried out one way or another. The elections in Greece will change nothing. As Emma Goldman once said, "If elections changed anything, they'd be illegal."
This has got to have some effect on the Euro I would think, and the bailout packages set for Greece, Spain and so forth. What do you think? The elections in Greece may derail the whole bailout idea.
Originally posted by rwingettThe French result is exciting but it is hardly a socialist triumph to elect a moderate social democrat with a commitment to balance the French budget for the first time in 30 years. The anti-austerity vote in Greece benefitted small parties of the Right and the Left, though it looks like the position on the Left will be stronger, and were really a protest against the two dominant parties.
The so called 'socialist' parties these days take their marching orders from the same economists as the 'conservative' parties. Nothing will change. The elite agenda will be carried out one way or another. The elections in Greece will change nothing. As Emma Goldman once said, "If elections changed anything, they'd be illegal."
It is certainly evident that European voters are not impressed with the shape of austerity packages in which ordinary, normal people are losing their standard of living to a devastating degree while the wealthy are untouched and appear to be prospering. But I am yet to be convinced that the wealthy elite will be seriously bothered by developments so far.
What is pretty apparent is that the Euro in its present form is artificial and unsustainable. One day soon that will be acknowledged and some of the implications will start to work themselves out. It will be messy but not necessarily a bad thing.
It is worth remembering that German and other banks loaned unsustainable quantities of cash to the Greeks when due diligence would have cautioned against this. Again and again, talk about responsibility conceals a greedy determination that the banks will not suffer for their lack of basic good business prudence and the people can be bludgeoned into paying them back the money they have speculated with and lost.
It has been done over and over again. Private banks fed corrupt and unsustainable loans into Egypt and the Ottoman Empire throughout the Nineteenth Century until that whole pack of cards collapsed, then blamed the Ottomans for their lack of good governance. Governance was then and still is undermined corruptly by Western banks hiding behind a facade of respectability, when they are no better than pirates. They often act in direct contradiction to the public policies of elected government but have the power to muzzle democratic scrutiny and secure government support when they are in trouble by appealing to abstract, apple pie platitudes.
Hollande's election is a good thing. I will be more impressed when inarticulate rage against austerity translates into articulate and well directed policies to put an end to the financial speculation that is undermining our societies.
07 May 12
Originally posted by badmoonThere's no real "rise of socialism" in this case. As in most two-party systems, there isn't much difference between Hollande and Sarkozy. It's like in the US where the two candidates differ greatly in rhetoric, but not so much in actual policies. Yes, Hollande has said that he will raise taxes for people who make over €1 mil, but shouldn't that be more like €70k to be more than just a symbolic drop in the ocean?
The rise of solialism while moving austerity aside is certainly a welcome development. One that I would hope comes to the shores my country, the USA.
07 May 12
Originally posted by rwingettAlmost the first thing spoken was a promise to continue austerity, whatever that means. Clearly governments all over the planet have and are overspending.
The so called 'socialist' parties these days take their marching orders from the same economists as the 'conservative' parties. Nothing will change. The elite agenda will be carried out one way or another. The elections in Greece will change nothing. As Emma Goldman once said, "If elections changed anything, they'd be illegal."
It is also clear the revolutions bring greater change than elections, however that doesn't mean they are preferable. Change by political means is usually slow, and change back after mistakes usually slower yet.
07 May 12
Originally posted by badmoonHow can socialism rise in concert with austerity? Socialism is based on government spending. Socialists are always concerned more with goals than with any reality based calculations of how those goals are to be realized, and especially the unseen costs which accrue to the groups other than those specific current beneficiaries.
The rise of solialism while moving austerity aside is certainly a welcome development. One that I would hope comes to the shores my country, the USA.
07 May 12
Originally posted by KazetNagorra"Hollande has said that he will raise taxes for people who make over €1 mil, but shouldn't that be more like €70k to be more than just a symbolic drop in the ocean?"
There's no real "rise of socialism" in this case. As in most two-party systems, there isn't much difference between Hollande and Sarkozy. It's like in the US where the two candidates differ greatly in rhetoric, but not so much in actual policies. Yes, Hollande has said that he will raise taxes for people who make over €1 mil, but shouldn't that be more like €70k to be more than just a symbolic drop in the ocean?
The premise for this has to be that a socialist government is better able to manage money than people who earned it. As that threshold gets lower and lower, and taxes higher, there is little incentive for people to excel, to invent, to succeed. What evidence if any since socialism became popular in the later half of the 19th century, that government expertise is any better than market distribution?
07 May 12
Originally posted by normbenignPlenty of governments with social democrats in them in Europe have had balanced budgets or surpluses. For example the Purple governments in Holland (1994-2002), which were led by the Labour party, reduced government debt significantly.
How can socialism rise in concert with austerity? Socialism is based on government spending. Socialists are always concerned more with goals than with any reality based calculations of how those goals are to be realized, and especially the unseen costs which accrue to the groups other than those specific current beneficiaries.
07 May 12
Originally posted by KazetNagorraIs that the general trend? Or are these aberrations. If government will give me everything I need to live, free, why would I work?
Plenty of governments with social democrats in them in Europe have had balanced budgets or surpluses. For example the Purple governments in Holland (1994-2002), which were led by the Labour party, reduced government debt significantly.
07 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by normbenignAs to your first question, you are basically correct. Perhaps I didn't make my statement clearly.
How can socialism rise in concert with austerity? Socialism is based on government spending. Socialists are always concerned more with goals than with any reality based calculations of how those goals are to be realized, and especially the unseen costs which accrue to the groups other than those specific current beneficiaries.
What we can do is allow medicare to all citizens
Lower the retirement age to 58/62
100% increase in the minimum wage
Regulate the oil industry as we do our other utilities.
The new Fortune 500 shows an increase in profits by nearly 17% but with only a 1% increase in hiring. So you break into the profits (capital gainstax to 35% to start) to create infrastructure investment.
Getting back to the thread I would expect the Euro to first go down as speculators will lose confidence. But I think it will be brief and it will stabilize.....
07 May 12
Originally posted by badmoonThose are all very nice wishes, but how are they to be paid for?
As to your first question, you are basically correct. Perhaps I didn't make my statement clearly.
What we can do is allow medicare to all citizens
Lower the retirement age to 58/62
100% increase in the minimum wage
Regulate the oil industry as we do our other utilities.
The new Fortune 500 shows an increase in profits by nearly 17% but with only a ...[text shortened]... break into the profits (capital gainstax to 35% to start) to create infrastructure investment.
Especially considering that Medicare is going broke just covering people over 65, and is seriously corrupt. People can retire at any age they wish. The question is having enough money to do so.
Increase the minimum wage 100%? And what of people who don't produce enough to be worth $15 per hour?
The trend seems to be toward privatizing the other utilities because of mismanagement by government.
"The new Fortune 500 shows an increase in profits by nearly 17% but with only a 1% increase in hiring."
That has to reflect some serious increases in efficiency and productivity. Eventually, profits can't be made without labor, but forcing matters doesn't do labor any good. Breaking into the profits? I can hardly see how that would encourage hiring. If it were true, then arsonists and burglars could be useful tools to end unemployment. Visiting a foreign dam building project, Milton Friedman asked why no heavy equipment was being used. The government official replied "this is a jobs program". Friedman quipped, "then take away the shovels and issue them teaspoons instead".
07 May 12
1 edit
Originally posted by finneganGreece has had some fantasy economics going for a long time. For instance, the railway system there paid some $450 million US dollars equivalent to its employees per year but guess how much the railway system took in total: $50 million per year.
The French result is exciting but it is hardly a socialist triumph to elect a moderate social democrat with a commitment to balance the French budget for the first time in 30 years. The anti-austerity vote in Greece benefitted small parties of the Right and the Left, though it looks like the position on the Left will be stronger, and were really a protest directed policies to put an end to the financial speculation that is undermining our societies.
The people there have been living off the dole for decades. The problem then is how to reverse that situation, its a cultural thing now, they EXPECT to get that much money for very little actual work or worth of the work they do. They would have to charge ten times the present rates per mile for the above example to just break even much less start showing a profit but with prices 90% lower than they take in, how can they just jump the prices now by a whole order of magnitude? Its a lose-lose situation.