Kia-ora
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Showing posts with label government. Show all posts
Monday, March 25, 2013
Tuesday, August 7, 2012
On Education.
Kia-ora
Anthony Robins in The Standard.
http://thestandard.org.nz/education-and-poverty/
“Claiming that poverty is no excuse for student failure trivializes the damage caused by years of actions and inactions that have widened the gaps between rich and poor communities. Good schools aren’t molded through harsh sanctions, private takeovers, or even soaring rhetoric. They emerge from healthy, stable communities. That is, they emerge from a commitment to justice.”
Teachers can only do so much. A society that does not value and encourage all their children will fail
Anthony Robins in The Standard.
http://thestandard.org.nz/education-and-poverty/
“Claiming that poverty is no excuse for student failure trivializes the damage caused by years of actions and inactions that have widened the gaps between rich and poor communities. Good schools aren’t molded through harsh sanctions, private takeovers, or even soaring rhetoric. They emerge from healthy, stable communities. That is, they emerge from a commitment to justice.”
Teachers can only do so much. A society that does not value and encourage all their children will fail
Friday, July 27, 2012
Agenda for today.
Kia-ora
It was an accountant who told me once, "do not put an accountant in charge, they know the cost of everything, and the value of nothing".
Then they act surprised when their skilled staff head for Australia, their customers head elsewhere and their business tanks.
The same logic has now been applied to the whole country.
NZ has a whole generation of managers, cannot call them leaders, who have no vision apart from cutting staff, costs and services.
It was an accountant who told me once, "do not put an accountant in charge, they know the cost of everything, and the value of nothing".
Then they act surprised when their skilled staff head for Australia, their customers head elsewhere and their business tanks.
The same logic has now been applied to the whole country.
Saturday, May 26, 2012
House Price Inflation
Kia-ora
House price Inflation
It is a conventional economics axiom that increasing the money supply without a concomitant increase in production causes inflation.
In the last thirtyfive years we have had low inflation in wages.
Essentials, including land , and thence housing and farm prices, have gone up many times the rate of wage rises.
Land inflation is driven by private Banking's incentive to print money. The more money they supply the more interest they can make.
Unfortunately, there is also a strong natural incentive to lend only on solid security, such as land and buildings.
Banks know better than anyone the inherent insecurity and instability of financial instruments, including shares.
Mortgage law in most Western countries favours lending on land. Unlike other investments, or lending, if the value of the security, land, goes down, the borrower is still liable for the full amount of the loan and interest. The bank is indemnified against loss.
For example, in New Zealand, the bank has priority over all other creditors, including contractors.
Lending on business and other assets does not offer the same security. The bank has to wait in line with other creditors and, normally, cannot continue claims in excess of their proportion of the sale.
Banks, while reluctant to risk their own money, are happy to risk small savers investments. Our pension funds, bank deposits and savings.
These schemes, whether shares, derivatives, hedge funds or other financial instruments are designed so that banks can gamble with our money. Win or lose they always get a cut.
De-regulation of banking has removed almost all constraints on lending and the amount of wealth banks can take.
Loses come out of our pensions and other savings. Or, if they really stuff it up, taxpayers are expected to borrow more from them to pay for it. "The bailout".
The total monetary value of financial instruments and debt is now so great that a crash, or super inflation, is inevitable if it is ever fully spent on real production.
Does anyone really think that infinitely compounding interest is possible in a world with finite resources.
While we lose our savings, houses and farms, bankers still get richer.
Given the difficulty in obtaining bank finance without land as security, favourable tax treatments (in Western countries for banks, homeowners, landowners and farmers ), incentives for banks to avoid risks inherent in other investment (The inevitable crash of Banker's ponzi schemes and the likely devaluation of currency denominated investments) it is not surprising that investors prefer land.
The Chinese Government buying up land worldwide with US dollars, before they become worthless, is only a minor example.
Hence land prices rising much faster than wages.
Our economy, along with most other Western economies has been skewed, towards speculation in existing assets, by banks following their own self interest. The "invisible hand" has failed
Sunday, April 22, 2012
What is Neo-Liberalism?
Kia-ora
What is Neo-Liberalism.
Neo-Liberalism is a moral and intellectual justification for greed.
A way for those few who accumulate wealth, by impoverishing many, to justify themselves, and keep those they are stealing from docile and compliant.
This purpose for centuries has been fulfilled by religion.
We still see echo's of the religious attitudes. The idea that the poor are poor because of personal defects, American exceptionalism, the banker who reckons, "God wanted me to be rich", Ayn Rands "wealth creators".
Neo-liberals outwardly believe in small Government, minimal regulation, taxation and social security, individual freedom and responsibility and the primacy of the market in fostering economic efficiency.
In fact their leaders and intellectuals believe in anything which enables them to accumulate wealth at the expense of the rest of us.
Neo-Liberalism would be more appropriately called Neo-conservatism. It is an attempt to return to pre-enlightenment times when the idea of "each is born into their proper place" was undisputed.
Neo-Liberalism has become common usage, unfortunately we are stuck with it.
Neo-Liberalism itself has all the characteristics of blind belief and faith inherent in religion.
Despite its only success being in making a very few people wealthier, millions of people, including most politicians, blindly adhere to the faith.
'It doesn't seem to matter that they NEVER get it right. It doesn't seem to matter they are promoting economic theories that are junk. But unlike Ring's quackery, the quackery of neoliberalism is treated with reverence, it is ascribed legitimacy'.
"The first of these shifts was the Great Depression or, more precisely, the feckless response of both American mainstream political parties to the economic collapse that followed the 1929 stock market crash. In the crucial first years after the crash, Democrats and Republicans alike embraced exactly the same policies they are embracing in today’s economic troubles, with exactly the same lack of success, and showed exactly the same unwillingness to abandon failed policies in the face of economic disaster. Then as now, the federal government launched a program to bail out big banks and corporations—it was called the Reconstruction Finance Corporation in those days—and pumped dizzying amounts of money into the upper end of the economy in the belief, real or feigned, that the money would work its way down the pyramid, which of course it didn’t do. Then as now, politicians used the shibboleth of a balanced budget to demand austerity for everybody but the rich, and cut exactly those programs which could have helped families caught by hard times. Then as now, things got worse while the media insisted that they were getting better, and the mounting evidence that policies weren’t working was treated as proof that the same policies had to be pursued even more forcefully." (John Micheal Greer).
"The first of these shifts was the Great Depression or, more precisely, the feckless response of both American mainstream political parties to the economic collapse that followed the 1929 stock market crash. In the crucial first years after the crash, Democrats and Republicans alike embraced exactly the same policies they are embracing in today’s economic troubles, with exactly the same lack of success, and showed exactly the same unwillingness to abandon failed policies in the face of economic disaster. Then as now, the federal government launched a program to bail out big banks and corporations—it was called the Reconstruction Finance Corporation in those days—and pumped dizzying amounts of money into the upper end of the economy in the belief, real or feigned, that the money would work its way down the pyramid, which of course it didn’t do. Then as now, politicians used the shibboleth of a balanced budget to demand austerity for everybody but the rich, and cut exactly those programs which could have helped families caught by hard times. Then as now, things got worse while the media insisted that they were getting better, and the mounting evidence that policies weren’t working was treated as proof that the same policies had to be pursued even more forcefully." (John Micheal Greer).
Their Apostles are Adam Smith, Ayn Rand, Von Mises, the Austrian, and Freidman, the Chicago, schools of economics.
Adam Smith's "invisible hand" is often quoted. Adam Smith's "you should pay your workers fairly because they are the source of your wealth" and "tax capital and land instead of workers and entrepreneurs" is, of course, ignored.
Von Mises and Freidman advocate a totally unregulated market and a Government as one adherent famously said, "that you could drown in a bathtub". Except for police and military to protect their wealth, of course! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grover_Norquist
Ayn Rand considered the owners of capital "wealth creators" although she had to live off the real wealth creators, the rest of us, towards the end of her life.
http://www.alternet.org/story/154153/how_the_1_destroys_jobs_and_the_real_heroes_are_everyday_people
"So before we consider having another trickle-downer in the White House, let’s talk about the failure of this idea and why if you want to see a real job creator, you should look in the mirror".
In fact they support their own freedom to make money regardless of social, environmental or economic effects. At the same time restricting individual freedom to protest, or co-operate to challenge their primacy.
Supporters do not seem to see the conflict between saying they support individual freedom while at the same time restricting the majorities individual freedom to withdraw their labour or protest. These freedoms are restricted, often violently.
"Let’s recap. You’re rich, and you want to stay that way. So, to protect your ticket; to safeguard your $50 million prize; you need to find a way to eliminate, or at least minimise, the threats posed by taxes, unions, and democracy. What’s your strategy?
Essentially, there’s only one winning strategy. It requires you to convince all those who are not wealthy that whatever status and security they do enjoy is the result of your own superior imagination, risk-taking and skill. You have to paint yourself and your fellow millionaires and billionaires as a “wealth creators” and, more importantly, “job creators”. You have to convince your fellow citizens that any attempt to restrict or redistribute your wealth will not only put their jobs at risk, but that society as a whole will become poorer.
If you can convince people of these things, then they will, perfectly democratically, eliminate wealth taxes, truncate workers’ rights, and reconfigure their entire political system to favour the tiny minority fortunate enough to hold the multi-million-dollar winning tickets"
Neo-Liberalism. Like all religions, is a way for the already wealthy to delude everyone else from rebelling, so they can keep their "winning ticket".
While many followers of religions have the best of intentions, their leaders have no such illusions. The intent is to keep wealth and/or power.
The overall effect of Neo-Liberal economics is to "privatise profits while socialising the losses".
Hugely increasing inequality and economic and social dysfunction.
Country after country adopts Neo-Liberal economics and rapidly goes downhill even by Neo-Liberalism's own measures such as GDP. And we still believe it is the solution!
Compare Argentina and the BRIC countries to the Anglo Saxon countries that are slavishly following the Neo-Liberal religion.
Truly voodoo economics.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Disaster Capitalism
Kia-ora
Disaster Capitalism
Naomi Klein on Disaster capitalism is an interesting book to re-read, especially in light of recent events in Europe. http://www.naomiklein.org/shock-doctrine
One cannot help thinking that National, in New Zealand, (NZ's GOP) and their supporters have taken it to heart. They certainly seem to be keen on precipitating an economic disaster. The only possible reasons are either they have bought into their own propaganda,
OR they expect to gain by it.
It has been obvious for a long time that political parties that support Neo-Liberal economics cannot survive on funding from individual party members. They just do not have enough public support for this to occur. Almost all their funding comes from corporates and a very few wealthy individuals.
Only by bearing this in mind does their determination to socioeconomically wreck whole countries become understandable.
Only by bearing this in mind does their determination to socioeconomically wreck whole countries become understandable.
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Democracy Repris'
Kia-ora
""You’re oversimplifying. MPs in Labour, National and the Greens view the majority of NZ – correctly – as people who have not read hundreds of policy analysis documents, sat on select committees and arrived at informed decisions on issues that affect large numbers of people.
Adults are quite capable of making decisions about their own lives; it’s when they start making decisions that affect everybody else’s lives purely based on their own preferences that it becomes difficult. That is why we have a representative democracy.""
Are you serious. Do you mean these people?
You mean the largely self appointed old boys club of the marginally competent. Who examine all the papers and evidence and then do the opposite because of an irrational faith in free markets and other religions.
The ones who totally ignore expert research, empirical evidence, overseas experiences and advice and follow the failed footsteps of the UK, Ireland, Greece and USA.
There are very few politicians who could even survive in a job where you have to take real responsibility. Hows Brownlee doing in Christchurch. McCully in Auckland.
Couldn’t run a p–up in a brothel.
Since 1984 we havn’t even had the choice to get rid of an economic dogma, which is heading NZ for the third world.
Presently, National/ACT/Maori party, while accepting an income from us, are actively working against the best interests of the majority of New Zealanders.
The last round of privatisations costs more than 14 billion a year. not to mention the costs of buying back essential infrastructure when the, so efficient, private sector have run it into the ground.
How could democracy possibly make worse decisions than politicians have.
The evidence from the few places that have democracy, Switzerland etc, shows that better decisions result. Their politicians know that poorly researched and explained legislation will be overturned by referenda.
That is why we should have democracy. Why should the fate of 4 million be totally in the hands of whichever 61 incompetents won the beauty contest last election.
""You’re oversimplifying. MPs in Labour, National and the Greens view the majority of NZ – correctly – as people who have not read hundreds of policy analysis documents, sat on select committees and arrived at informed decisions on issues that affect large numbers of people.
Adults are quite capable of making decisions about their own lives; it’s when they start making decisions that affect everybody else’s lives purely based on their own preferences that it becomes difficult. That is why we have a representative democracy.""
Are you serious. Do you mean these people?
You mean the largely self appointed old boys club of the marginally competent. Who examine all the papers and evidence and then do the opposite because of an irrational faith in free markets and other religions.
The ones who totally ignore expert research, empirical evidence, overseas experiences and advice and follow the failed footsteps of the UK, Ireland, Greece and USA.
There are very few politicians who could even survive in a job where you have to take real responsibility. Hows Brownlee doing in Christchurch. McCully in Auckland.
Couldn’t run a p–up in a brothel.
Since 1984 we havn’t even had the choice to get rid of an economic dogma, which is heading NZ for the third world.
Presently, National/ACT/Maori party, while accepting an income from us, are actively working against the best interests of the majority of New Zealanders.
The last round of privatisations costs more than 14 billion a year. not to mention the costs of buying back essential infrastructure when the, so efficient, private sector have run it into the ground.
How could democracy possibly make worse decisions than politicians have.
The evidence from the few places that have democracy, Switzerland etc, shows that better decisions result. Their politicians know that poorly researched and explained legislation will be overturned by referenda.
That is why we should have democracy. Why should the fate of 4 million be totally in the hands of whichever 61 incompetents won the beauty contest last election.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Search and surveillance
Kia-ora
We are a passive lot. Our rights to privacy, and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, have been slowly frittered away by various Governments over the years. while rights to freedom from surveillance without cause have been taken away.
The media have mostly been silent. When they haven’t been actively supporting it, using, mostly, specious excuses about cutting crime.
The skynet bill and the new search and surveillance bill are unacceptable infringements on our rights to freedom from search and seizure.
Already existing laws about surveillance and airport and port security also exceed the rights of search, of ordinary citizens, that authorities should have.
In the interests of corporates and "supposedly" fighting crime, or terrorism, our rights to privacy, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and right to protest are being steadily reduced.
The potential for Government and police, to misuse these laws has already become apparent, with over 50 cases where the police exceeded their legal powers. Instead of charging the police responsible, with breaking the law. The Government proposes to make these acts retrospectively legal.
We are a passive lot. Our rights to privacy, and freedom from unreasonable search and seizure, have been slowly frittered away by various Governments over the years. while rights to freedom from surveillance without cause have been taken away.
The media have mostly been silent. When they haven’t been actively supporting it, using, mostly, specious excuses about cutting crime.
The skynet bill and the new search and surveillance bill are unacceptable infringements on our rights to freedom from search and seizure.
Already existing laws about surveillance and airport and port security also exceed the rights of search, of ordinary citizens, that authorities should have.
In the interests of corporates and "supposedly" fighting crime, or terrorism, our rights to privacy, freedom from unreasonable search and seizure and right to protest are being steadily reduced.
The potential for Government and police, to misuse these laws has already become apparent, with over 50 cases where the police exceeded their legal powers. Instead of charging the police responsible, with breaking the law. The Government proposes to make these acts retrospectively legal.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
New Zealand at the Crossroads
Kia-ora
The NYT on the "success" of Neo-Liberalism.
As "No Right Turn" says this graphic is "an appalling indictment of Neo-Liberalism".
In New Zealand we have seen the effects just this year. Over 17% increase in wealth for the top few percent while 200 000 children live in relative poverty.
The pattern in New Zealand, since our great Neo-Liberal experiment, following the USA, Ireland and UK, has been the same.
Coddling the rich is destroying the American dream.
"No matter how many times it's said, lowering tax rates for the highest income Americans does not create jobs or stimulate the economy. In fact, a detailed look reveals that the overall economy does slightly better when taxes at the top are significantly higher. This also holds true on the state level, as states with higher top personal tax rates have growth rates and median incomes that average greater than those with low (or even no) taxes. No matter how many times the experiment is repeated, or how long you extend the results, cutting taxes for the wealthy does not stimulate growth."
Most of the wealth earned by Americans went to corporates.
"Corporate profits captured 88% of the growth in real national income while aggregate wages and salaries accounted for only slightly more than 1% of the growth in real national income".
In New Zealand cutting taxes for the wealthy was supposed to stimulate the economy. Since the first round of high end tax cuts, investment in the productive economy, wages and manufacturing, in New Zealand, stagnated, and capital flew to gambles on offshore markets.
Decimation of Union and employee rights, and cuts in Government spending has resulted in huge drops in real income, for all but a few New Zealanders.
New Zealand is at the crossroads.
We can vote for National and ACT, and join the list of failed States like the USA and UK.
Another three years of failed Neo-Liberal policies will destroy the country we know.
Do we want third generation unemployment and riots in the streets like the UK. Or the repressive, unequal, surveillance society the USA has become.
For the first time since 1984 we have a clear choice. Continue down a failed Neo-Liberal road, or Own our Future.
We can vote for the Greens and Labour. For sensible policies, which were middle of the road, before Neo- Liberal religious hysteria took over.
The NYT on the "success" of Neo-Liberalism.
As "No Right Turn" says this graphic is "an appalling indictment of Neo-Liberalism".
In New Zealand we have seen the effects just this year. Over 17% increase in wealth for the top few percent while 200 000 children live in relative poverty.
The pattern in New Zealand, since our great Neo-Liberal experiment, following the USA, Ireland and UK, has been the same.
Coddling the rich is destroying the American dream.
"No matter how many times it's said, lowering tax rates for the highest income Americans does not create jobs or stimulate the economy. In fact, a detailed look reveals that the overall economy does slightly better when taxes at the top are significantly higher. This also holds true on the state level, as states with higher top personal tax rates have growth rates and median incomes that average greater than those with low (or even no) taxes. No matter how many times the experiment is repeated, or how long you extend the results, cutting taxes for the wealthy does not stimulate growth."
Most of the wealth earned by Americans went to corporates.
"Corporate profits captured 88% of the growth in real national income while aggregate wages and salaries accounted for only slightly more than 1% of the growth in real national income".
In New Zealand cutting taxes for the wealthy was supposed to stimulate the economy. Since the first round of high end tax cuts, investment in the productive economy, wages and manufacturing, in New Zealand, stagnated, and capital flew to gambles on offshore markets.
Decimation of Union and employee rights, and cuts in Government spending has resulted in huge drops in real income, for all but a few New Zealanders.
New Zealand is at the crossroads.
We can vote for National and ACT, and join the list of failed States like the USA and UK.
Another three years of failed Neo-Liberal policies will destroy the country we know.
Do we want third generation unemployment and riots in the streets like the UK. Or the repressive, unequal, surveillance society the USA has become.
For the first time since 1984 we have a clear choice. Continue down a failed Neo-Liberal road, or Own our Future.
We can vote for the Greens and Labour. For sensible policies, which were middle of the road, before Neo- Liberal religious hysteria took over.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
On Riots.
Kia-ora
Right wing politicians are quick to distance themselves from rioting, and public revolt, in many countries around the world.
"The responsibility lies with criminal elements".
Well! It does, but mostly with the unpunished criminals who have destroyed cohesive society for their own gain.
Is it surprising that after decades of selfishness, meanness, unpunished theft and blatant tax dodging from the top, that those at the bottom follow the example.
You ruin, destroy and steal everything from people, including any hope for a better future. Then you are surprised they turn as mean and self centred as you.
Right wing politicians are quick to distance themselves from rioting, and public revolt, in many countries around the world.
"The responsibility lies with criminal elements".
Well! It does, but mostly with the unpunished criminals who have destroyed cohesive society for their own gain.
Is it surprising that after decades of selfishness, meanness, unpunished theft and blatant tax dodging from the top, that those at the bottom follow the example.
You ruin, destroy and steal everything from people, including any hope for a better future. Then you are surprised they turn as mean and self centred as you.
Monday, August 8, 2011
Signs of Hope.
Kia-ora
Signs that some of our Government have learnt from their mistakes.
The plan so far. NZ Labour Party.
""Labour will introduce a capital gains tax. It’s predicted the tax will raise $26 billion over 15 years that can be used to pay off
debt, cut taxes for most New Zealanders, save our assets and prepare for the mounting cost of our aging population.
Labour will also put the top tax rate back up to 39 cents for income earned over $150,000.
That’s likely to affect around 2% of the country’s top earners.
A CGT is already in use in nearly all developed countries, including Australia, the United Kingdom and United States"".
I wonder if the money people will allow so big a departure from Neo-Liberal dogma.
They are already trying to smear the leaders of Labour.
Signs that some of our Government have learnt from their mistakes.
The plan so far. NZ Labour Party.
""Labour will introduce a capital gains tax. It’s predicted the tax will raise $26 billion over 15 years that can be used to pay off
debt, cut taxes for most New Zealanders, save our assets and prepare for the mounting cost of our aging population.
Labour will also put the top tax rate back up to 39 cents for income earned over $150,000.
That’s likely to affect around 2% of the country’s top earners.
A CGT is already in use in nearly all developed countries, including Australia, the United Kingdom and United States"".
I wonder if the money people will allow so big a departure from Neo-Liberal dogma.
They are already trying to smear the leaders of Labour.
"Good' and bad Dictators.
Kia-ora
A good Dictator is one who lets the US corporate world burgle his country.
A bad Dictator is one who does not!
Democracy is fine. So long as it meets the objectives of the USA
""Washington and its allies keep to the well-established principle that democracy is acceptable only insofar as it conforms to strategic and economic objectives: fine in enemy territory (up to a point), but not in our backyard, please, unless properly tamed"".
Washington is happy to support radical Islamic Government in Saudi Arabia, repressive dictatorships in Columbia, Indonesia,Tunisia and UAE and governments with scant regard for human rights in other countries.
As Chile, Honduras, Iran, Venezuala, Indonesia and, recently, Libya (and the citizens of the USA) have found the one thing you cannot do is keep some of the local wealth from exploitation by US corporates.
That is the trigger for the USA to replace the Government by one more pliable.
It does not matter that, in most cases, the new Government is a repressive and cruel dictatorship, so long as US interests are served and the Neo-Liberal gravy train for the worlds rich continues.
Gaddafi is no saint, but he was not as bad as many regimes the USA continues to support.
A good Dictator is one who lets the US corporate world burgle his country.
A bad Dictator is one who does not!
Democracy is fine. So long as it meets the objectives of the USA
""Washington and its allies keep to the well-established principle that democracy is acceptable only insofar as it conforms to strategic and economic objectives: fine in enemy territory (up to a point), but not in our backyard, please, unless properly tamed"".
Washington is happy to support radical Islamic Government in Saudi Arabia, repressive dictatorships in Columbia, Indonesia,Tunisia and UAE and governments with scant regard for human rights in other countries.
As Chile, Honduras, Iran, Venezuala, Indonesia and, recently, Libya (and the citizens of the USA) have found the one thing you cannot do is keep some of the local wealth from exploitation by US corporates.
That is the trigger for the USA to replace the Government by one more pliable.
It does not matter that, in most cases, the new Government is a repressive and cruel dictatorship, so long as US interests are served and the Neo-Liberal gravy train for the worlds rich continues.
Gaddafi is no saint, but he was not as bad as many regimes the USA continues to support.
George Monbiot – How the Billionaires Broke the System
Kia-ora
George Monbiot – How the Billionaires Broke the System
"There are two ways of cutting a deficit: raising taxes or reducing spending. Raising taxes means taking money from the rich. Cutting spending means taking money from the poor. Not in all cases of course: some taxation is regressive; some state spending takes money from ordinary citizens and gives it to banks, arms companies, oil barons and farmers. But in most cases the state transfers wealth from rich to poor, while tax cuts shift it from poor to rich.
So the rich, in a nominal democracy, have a struggle on their hands. Somehow they must persuade the other 99% to vote against their own interests: to shrink the state, supporting spending cuts rather than tax rises. In the US they appear to be succeeding".
Sound like New Zealand.
18% rise in the wealth of the top 0.5 % this year. the rest officially minus 5.4 to 2.4 %. (Depending on if you got the 2% wage rise that some strongly unionised workers had or not).
George Monbiot – How the Billionaires Broke the System
"There are two ways of cutting a deficit: raising taxes or reducing spending. Raising taxes means taking money from the rich. Cutting spending means taking money from the poor. Not in all cases of course: some taxation is regressive; some state spending takes money from ordinary citizens and gives it to banks, arms companies, oil barons and farmers. But in most cases the state transfers wealth from rich to poor, while tax cuts shift it from poor to rich.
So the rich, in a nominal democracy, have a struggle on their hands. Somehow they must persuade the other 99% to vote against their own interests: to shrink the state, supporting spending cuts rather than tax rises. In the US they appear to be succeeding".
Sound like New Zealand.
18% rise in the wealth of the top 0.5 % this year. the rest officially minus 5.4 to 2.4 %. (Depending on if you got the 2% wage rise that some strongly unionised workers had or not).
Friday, June 24, 2011
Don't cry for Argentina!
Kia-ora
What happens if a country decides the Neo-Liberal dogma is a load of crap and tell the banks to get fucked.
Argentina Followed the same line as NZ, Greece, the USA and Ireland until 2002.
Watch what happened to their economy after they defaulted and made the banks wear their own greed.
What Happened to Argentina?
Acknowledgements to Paul Krugman.
What happens if a country decides the Neo-Liberal dogma is a load of crap and tell the banks to get fucked.
Argentina Followed the same line as NZ, Greece, the USA and Ireland until 2002.
Watch what happened to their economy after they defaulted and made the banks wear their own greed.
What Happened to Argentina?
Acknowledgements to Paul Krugman.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Kean on the "Roving Cavaliers of Credit" or How Bankers got to Rule the World.
“”In some ways these conclusions are unremarkable: banks make money by extending debt, and the more they create, the more they are likely to earn. But this is a revolutionary conclusion when compared to standard thinking about banks and debt, because the money multiplier model implies that, whatever banks might want to do, they are constrained from so doing by a money creation process that they do not control.
However, in the real world, they do control the creation of credit. Given their proclivity to lend as much as is possible, the only real constraint on bank lending is the public’s willingness to go into debt. In the model economy shown here, that willingness directly relates to the perceived possibilities for profitable investment—and since these are limited, so also is the uptake of debt.
But in the real world—and in my models of Minsky’s Financial Instability Hypothesis—there is an additional reason why the public will take on debt:
the perception of possibilities for private gain from leveraged speculation on asset prices.”"
Kean describes exactly the real world effects of current monetary policy.
Both Cyprus and Greece show how Democracy can be overturned at the wim of bankers trying to protect their income, from pushing up asset prices, with loans they should never have been allowed to make, with money they have produced out of thin air. A power only a democratically controlled Government should have.
Recent moves towards legislation, to take money from us to bail out failing banks, again, by the New Zealand Government , shows who our politicians really work for!