I do, I thought that was obvious by my request. Why waste my time looking for a word in a document that has no relevance to the discussion.
When has the EU (in its entirety) tried austerity?
More austerity - good idea or bad? - the poll
- Thread starter IT Minion
- Start date
When has the EU (in its entirety) tried austerity?
Sponsored Links
OT but someone said on a tv prog last night how many became richer after the 2008 crash (profiteering from the fallout) then the same happened with covid and will no doubt happen during this current cost of living crisis. Yes yes before anyone lectures me, I do understand how economics work and that this can (and usually does) happen. However to me, everything that's going on just now further proves the current economic model isn't working. Correction. It is working ... for those at the top.
I'll use the same example I used in another thread. I distinctly remember in the midst of covid more than one politician stating how lower wages of care workers urgently required review. As one put it 'we need to create a structure whereby the caring sector is seen as a viable career, not just a job, with decent wages.'
How do we think that's going? Do any of us know of any proposed legislation to up the wages of care workers? Or are many of them still on sh1t wages? And will many of them still be on sh1t wages a decade from now?
We get talked at year in year out by politicians, telling us how things are going to improve. And in many cases, they don't. Unless you're in the top 1%, in which case our current socioeconomic model is fantastic
I'll use the same example I used in another thread. I distinctly remember in the midst of covid more than one politician stating how lower wages of care workers urgently required review. As one put it 'we need to create a structure whereby the caring sector is seen as a viable career, not just a job, with decent wages.'
How do we think that's going? Do any of us know of any proposed legislation to up the wages of care workers? Or are many of them still on sh1t wages? And will many of them still be on sh1t wages a decade from now?
We get talked at year in year out by politicians, telling us how things are going to improve. And in many cases, they don't. Unless you're in the top 1%, in which case our current socioeconomic model is fantastic
We've created a flawed model. A country's success is measured by how much it's growing. Growth growth growth. Investment investment investment. Public, do your bit to help the economy, buy stuff, buy stuff, buy more stuff.
Consume consume consume.
No, I don't know what the alternative is. However I do know the way we've structured our socioeconomic model over decades/centuries is flawed ... unless you're at the top of said model, in which case it's awesome.
This is what the political class spend much of their time protecting. Talking at the masses about how good everything is, throwing the lower paid the odd pathetic financial bone. All done to placate us. The sad thing is, it seems to work.
Consume consume consume.
No, I don't know what the alternative is. However I do know the way we've structured our socioeconomic model over decades/centuries is flawed ... unless you're at the top of said model, in which case it's awesome.
This is what the political class spend much of their time protecting. Talking at the masses about how good everything is, throwing the lower paid the odd pathetic financial bone. All done to placate us. The sad thing is, it seems to work.
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 13,116
- Reaction score
- 3,080
- Country
Make stuff.
Sponsored Links
Agree with all that.
As David Graeber said:
. "Every day we wake up and collectively make a world together; but which one of us, left to our own devices, would ever decide they wanted to make a world like this one?"
Your last para is what Gramsci called Cultural Hegemony:
. Cultural hegemony functions by framing the worldview of the ruling class, and the social and economic structures that embody it, as just, legitimate, and designed for the benefit of all, even though these structures may only benefit the ruling class. This kind of power is distinct from rule by force, as in a military dictatorship, because it allows the ruling class to exercise authority using the "peaceful" means of ideology and culture.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 14,492
- Reaction score
- 2,102
- Country
It's common courtesy to cite sources, especially when you copy and paste word for word.
- Joined
- 22 Jan 2007
- Messages
- 14,492
- Reaction score
- 2,102
- Country
Yes, under the heading "What is cultural hegemony?". Were you just checking? There goes another rib, lol...
I imagine they will wait for the rail contracts to end so there is nothing to compensate, and tax the utilities so as to significantly reduce the capitalised value. As a right wing economist said on gb news, the utilities profits have increased five fold year on year, not because of innovation or cost cutting but because of the war in eastern europe. Morally unacceptable they should not be subject of a windfall tax. Simples. State aid is a brexit bonus.
Blup
The 'govt as a household', 'govt needs to balance the books' etc. narratives are dominant and have been dominant for 40+years.
They are rolled out to manufacture consent for spending cuts, "we can't afford it" stories and other such economic terrorism.
Those narratives are boll0x and don't reflect the fiscal reality in any way.
Govt doesn't have a 'debt' that will be passed on to children or grandchildren to 'pay off'. In fact, if more people understood what the so-called National Debt actually is they would be a lot less worried about it and certainly wouldn't be looking to 'pay it off'.
Government is the ultimate authority in the area it controls. There isn't a limited supply of £s to share between the population. £s aren't dug out of the ground or hacked from a mountainside. Govt decides what it will spend, when it will spend it and what it will spend it on aka who gets it. Those decisions are made in line with govt political ideology.
Austerity, spending cuts, call it whatever you like is never necessary. It' always a purely political choice, driven by ideology.
They are rolled out to manufacture consent for spending cuts, "we can't afford it" stories and other such economic terrorism.
Those narratives are boll0x and don't reflect the fiscal reality in any way.
Govt doesn't have a 'debt' that will be passed on to children or grandchildren to 'pay off'. In fact, if more people understood what the so-called National Debt actually is they would be a lot less worried about it and certainly wouldn't be looking to 'pay it off'.
Government is the ultimate authority in the area it controls. There isn't a limited supply of £s to share between the population. £s aren't dug out of the ground or hacked from a mountainside. Govt decides what it will spend, when it will spend it and what it will spend it on aka who gets it. Those decisions are made in line with govt political ideology.
Austerity, spending cuts, call it whatever you like is never necessary. It' always a purely political choice, driven by ideology.
For quite a long time, all the signs have been that this country can no longer afford itself. Long overdue for cutting a few extravagances.
That 's an interesting opinion.
The UK economy has grown enormously since, say 1948.
Could the country, today, afford to build schools, hospitals, maternity homes, social housing, post offices, telephone exchanges, a National Health Service, public transport, welfare offices, labour exchanges, technical colleges, swimming pools, playgrounds, and trains?
Not unless it wanted to.
Which it obviously doesn't.
Of course it could. Anything we can do we can 'afford' to do.
It's never a question of how many £s we need to do it, it's always a case of 'how do we responsibly acquire the resources we need'. Creating the £s is the trivial part.
For example why don't we have the best health care, social care, education, infrastructure etc. that we can possibly have?
The answer, as always, is political ideology.
Like chucking billions at wealthy Tory chums? I hear Smogg has just given one of his wealthy chums a job on 'the inside'. Meanwhile Kwasi K has been seen entertaining his wealth hedge fund manager chums.
Make no mistake, the poor will ger poorer and the rich will keep getting richer, under the latest shower.
If that is the case and money is no problem, why doesn't this government spend unlimited money on the health service, welfare and tax cuts for the rich ect.
All the above would be extremely populari and guarantee relection, your economic theory makes Khazi Kwartang look like a genius.
Sponsored Links
