• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Battered Britain hovers on the edge of double-dip recession OFFICIAL: Double dip!!!

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
2
0
I don't think austerity was ever going to fix it, rather try to put off greater pain down the line. I'm surprised they've (and we) have stayed out of recession as long as we have, but of course as I am so happily oft to mention the only reason either of us are out of recession is because it's a technical measure that gives a positive to government spending and no negative to government deficit. If the US government or the British operated even close to a balanced budget we'd be head over heels in recession.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,658
136
Austerity just enhances the position of the Wealthy over everybody else. Being rich when everybody else is broke is the best time to be rich. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
Austerity doesn't mean everything is going to get fixed right away. At best, you are going to face a lot of short term pain (years) to avoid much much worse pain that will last much longer down the line. Basically, it's a lot like chemo therapy. Yes, it makes you feel like shit and miserable, but in the end it's critical to your survival. Other countries like the US are simply in denial and hoping that the cancer will just kind of go away on its own.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
Spending money like the drunken sailors doesn't fix the economy. Ask Greece.
So, this debate isn't going to be any higher quality than 'austerity doesn't work' and 'spending money like a drunken sailor doesn't work', is it? Useless. Ideology again.

Why don't we just go back to only land-owning white males can vote, repeal every law in the last century, increase poverty and starvation and call it utopia? No drunk sailor there.

To have a discussion you can't just say 'Greece sucks therefore we should adopt the Ryan budget' to make the rich richer. That's clueless and harmful.

Let's see, the last time we had such a bad economy, we had the New Deal, which build massive Dams (the biggest things the world had ever built), the Golden Gate Bridge, energy, infrastructure, sidewalks, all kinds of things that paced the way for prosperity - that we 'couldnt afford' and should have just not spent the money and left the country in dire straits, hungry, sick. So, let's try THAT approach this time. Good plan. Greece sucks!

This is a good example of when democracy is limited by ignorant, gullible citizens who are vulnerable to the propaganda of the wealthy interests, to prefer bad policy.

People don't understand that the wealthy always want to shift more wealth from the people to themselves.

If the US were a third world country, the rich would still be singing the same song about those greedy citizens asking for a bit of rice to eat, the selfish pigs.

Problem is, the wealthy are able to MISSPEND the money we spend by controlling the government and elections with their money - so people say 'government sucks'.

Plays right into the hands of the wealthy who don't want the people to have any power against them.

How has austerity worked historically? Well, it's a decades-long policy the IMF and World Bank used on countries - that they now admit was very destructive. Hmm.

I can point you at countries who spend a hundred times on their interest to foreign lenders as their education budget - money borrowed under pressure from the powerful countries to hire those countries for needless projects to enrich politically powerful companies and industries, such as Bechtel. Done them a lot of good! But hey, better than spending the money on the people of the country. Austerity, good idea!

You know what I can't remember from one right-wing poster here in a long time? One single post saying 'hey, this trend we're on benefiting the wealthy is a bad one, let's change it'.

All you have to do is show a right-winger a picture of a poor black buying a steak on food stamps, and they'll scream for more right-wing policies. SCREW THOSE PEOPLE!!

One of the news channels pointed out how the $800,000 GSA scandal - and it is a scandal - was awfully tiny compared to the literally billions stolen by Halliburton/KBR.

Which is the public hearing more about, which are they being told to be worried about? So they'll scream 'I hate the government' instead of 'I hate corrupt interests controlling the government'? Because the people behind the Halliburton/KBR billions ARE the right-wing policies that are put in power when they hold up the poor person buying the steak.

And call for austerity - by the people. No need to invest in the people - just give the money to the corrupt interests. The job creators hoarding record-setting wealth.

But you can't talk to so many of these right-wingers. They think 'Greece Sucks' is a valid position to our economy. Put the wealthy in charge!

Reminds me a little again of how street gangs turn these members into little more than people obsessed with hating and killing the other gang, who is very much like them.

No talking sense to such people, and no talking sense to the 'austerity' crowd who hate other citizens and don't want them getting 'any free money'. Irrational.

$800,000 or billions, which is larger? They sure think the $800,000 is larger. It seems to have had a lot more press and Congressional hearings. Who resigned over the billions?

I'm not defending the $800,000 waste, I'm pointing out how public opinion is so absurdly misguided when it ignores the billions - and supports austerity for the people over good investments in the country. During the Great Depression, the explosion of infrastructure; in the 1960's, we created Medicare, Medicaid, permanently lowered the poverty level by a third in the War on Poverty, had a major tax cut fought for by the Democrats as good Keynesian economics (propsed by Kennedy, passed by Johnson), increased education and much more, all while spending up to 5% of the budget on the Moon project and Vietnam - with a roughly balanced budget.

Which party has brought us the prosperity and balanced budgts, and which has brought us economic crashes, massive shifts of wealth to the wealthy and huge debt?

Save234
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,658
136
Austerity doesn't mean everything is going to get fixed right away. At best, you are going to face a lot of short term pain (years) to avoid much much worse pain that will last much longer down the line. Basically, it's a lot like chemo therapy. Yes, it makes you feel like shit and miserable, but in the end it's critical to your survival. Other countries like the US are simply in denial and hoping that the cancer will just kind of go away on its own.
So what sort of shared sacrifice would you suggest for the World's wealthiest? Or should they be spared in that regard, even rewarded for creating catastrophe, even as the weakest among us are beaten down further? Give 'em a tax cut, again, like our own Repubs want, expressing faith in the magical yet failed idea of trickledown economics?

Even parties allied with Repubs on other matters have expressed dismay wrt their own version of austerity-

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/catholic-bishops-protest-house-budget/?nl=us&emc=edit_cn_20120418

I doubt that the efforts in the UK are much different, or any less counter productive.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
It's about time, like the time we opposed getting involved in WWII, to stop demanding no one but the wealthy can defend class warfare, and admit there is one by them.

The choices are surrender or to stand up for the American people and prevent the defeat of the American people by the 'economic royals'.

It's common wisdom in the *Democratic* party that 'wealth issues are a loser politically', so they appease the wealthy interests by giving them what they want - recall Boehner's 'I got 98% of what I want' for example - and hoping to get votes by being the slightly more sane (birth control is ok) right-wing party.

Don't fix the domination of our elections by the wealthy, instead try to get the wealthy to back your party by selling out the American people, like the 'other guys'.

With two parties agreeing to ignore class warfare and call it a dirty phrase not to be mentioned and let the wealth win it, how is the country going to protect the people?

It's not. And we're not. And it gets harder to fix things the more they get broken.

The very phrase 'class warfare' is propaganda - designed to portray not letting one small group rape the country is unfair 'war' on them. Just like accusing the Democrats of 'war on Christmas' if they defend the principle of not allowing one religion to get special priviliges over others. It's not about 'war on the rich'.

The left's view is to have the rich very well off, al kinds of legitimate freedom (non-legitimate meaning things like to pollute the environment terribly or massive animal cruelty for profit of turning the finance industry into a casino to take wealth from others instead of produce wealth), the rich still getting a lot more rewars - just not plutocracy.

The rich weren't some victims of a French revolution in the 1960's, when the left had control of policy. They prospered. They prosper if the left gets their way.

Difference is the right's plan is to enrich the rich by moving to plutocracy - harming the people as they have for decades.

Time to say the politicians of the rich have declared war on the US, and vote against them. When you hear 'class warfare', it's 'class warfare by the rich'.

Save234
 

mammador

Platinum Member
Dec 9, 2010
2,128
1
76
Austerity in our country was necessary.

the fiscal deficit needed urgent reduction, as it was at 10% of GDP.

And with the Eurozone issues, and banks still not lending, little else could be expected IMO. I feel for the next few years, most advanced economies will have slow economic growth. What's more is that Western geo-political dominance is coming to an end, that will define the 21st century IMO.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
Austerity in our country was necessary.

the fiscal deficit needed urgent reduction, as it was at 10% of GDP.

And with the Eurozone issues, and banks still not lending, little else could be expected IMO. I feel for the next few years, most advanced economies will have slow economic growth. What's more is that Western geo-political dominance is coming to an end, that will define the 21st century IMO.
Such a sad story. Explain your sad story about advanced countries when the top 1% are not having a sad story at all - no need for 'austerity':

 
Last edited:

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
Such a sad story. Explain your sad story about advanced countries when the top 1% are not having a sad story at all - no need for 'austerity':

And government spending as a percent of GDP has also consistently risen over the same period as your graph. The deficit game is pretty much over. The Fed is imposing negative real interest rates which is the same thing the Chinese do. We've taken Keynsianism to it's logical end and it hasn't gotten us very much.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
And government spending as a percent of GDP has also consistently risen over the same period as your graph. The deficit game is pretty much over. The Fed is imposing negative real interest rates which is the same thing the Chinese do. We've taken Keynsianism to it's logical end and it hasn't gotten us very much.
You need to learn what you're talking about. Hint: Keynesian economics was the drive behind the 1960's large tax CUT. Keynesian economics is not what we've had.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
You need to learn what you're talking about. Hint: Keynesian economics was the drive behind the 1960's large tax CUT. Keynesian economics is not what we've had.
The policies of the last 3 years are the definition of Keynesian economics. We've had massive deficit financed spending, zero short term interest rates, and the manipulation of long term interest rates by the Fed.
 

bononos

Diamond Member
Aug 21, 2011
3,733
70
91
And government spending as a percent of GDP has also consistently risen over the same period as your graph. The deficit game is pretty much over. The Fed is imposing negative real interest rates which is the same thing the Chinese do. We've taken Keynsianism to it's logical end and it hasn't gotten us very much.
Deficit spending was not something Keynes advocated. It was a necessary compromise to get the reactionaries on board. This strain of Keynesian economics is derided as bastard keynesianism by those who consider themselves the true disciples of Keynes.
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,658
136
And government spending as a percent of GDP has also consistently risen over the same period as your graph. The deficit game is pretty much over. The Fed is imposing negative real interest rates which is the same thing the Chinese do. We've taken Keynsianism to it's logical end and it hasn't gotten us very much.
It sure as hell wasn't Keynesian policy that put us into this mess, but rather trickledown economics & self regulated banking in a global free trade environment coupled with top tier tax cuts & waging war at the same time.

Righties luv to preach "fiscal responsibility" & balanced budgets, except when they're running things, and then everything is "different". Reagan/GHWB quadrupled the debt, and GWB doubled it again. Federal revenues as a % of GDP are at their lowest point since 1950, but the answer isn't to raise taxes, but rather to cut spending- not on the sacred cow of military contractors, but on the weakest members of society, and on enforcement of the services, rules & regs that help make this country a nice place to live.

Cut, cut, Cut! Their avid supporters don't realize that they're cutting off their own nose to spite their face, and that current Repub tax proposals will further reduce revenue.
 
Last edited:

Anarchist420

Diamond Member
Feb 13, 2010
8,645
0
76
www.facebook.com
The OP is full of fail. Below-market interest rates and deficit spending has been going on in the UK so it's quite the opposite of Austerity. If they hadn't eased the monetary policy and if they had balanced their budget, they'd be a lot better off than they actually are.

The policies of the last 3 years are the definition of Keynesian economics. We've had massive deficit financed spending, zero short term interest rates, and the manipulation of long term interest rates by the Fed.
Americans have suffered from Keynesian economic policy for most of the time since George Washington was President.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
345
126
It sure as hell wasn't Keynesian policy that put us into this mess, but rather trickledown economics & self regulated banking in a global free trade environment coupled with top tier tax cuts & waging war at the same time.
He ignored my telling him to learn what he's talking about.

As usual, there's a simple and wrong myth in the right to push their ideology.

Funny, what period in US history is the longest without major financial crashes?

Hm, the same period the US had the strongest financial regulation, passed by FDR.

Clearly, we need more tax cuts to solve the financial industry.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
3
0
Best write-up on current austerity measures I've come across:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/15/1083315/-The-cruel-stupidity-that-is-economic-austerity

Joseph Stiglitz said:
"It reminds me of medieval medicine," he said. "It is like blood-letting, where you took blood out of a patient because the theory was that there were bad humours.

"And very often, when you took the blood out, the patient got sicker. The response then was more blood-letting until the patient very nearly died. What is happening in Europe is a mutual suicide pact," he said.
 
Last edited:

Matt1970

Lifer
Mar 19, 2007
12,320
2
0
Such a sad story. Explain your sad story about advanced countries when the top 1% are not having a sad story at all - no need for 'austerity':

Wholy crap, look what the Clinton Tax Hike did for the upper class!!!!
 

Doppel

Lifer
Feb 5, 2011
13,306
2
0
Such a sad story. Explain your sad story about advanced countries when the top 1% are not having a sad story at all - no need for 'austerity':

You're trying to make this into a rich vs poor. I have put up links showing how absurd the change in wealth is now, but we both know that even with a 100% tax rate on the rich we still need austerity. The poor are simply taking more wealth than exists and the deficit can only be eradicated by giving them less.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
3
0
You're trying to make this into a rich vs poor. I have put up links showing how absurd the change in wealth is now, but we both know that even with a 100% tax rate on the rich we still need austerity. The poor are simply taking more wealth than exists and the deficit can only be eradicated by giving them less.
And austerity in a recession breeds even more poor people because it stifles broad economic growth.
 

the DRIZZLE

Platinum Member
Sep 6, 2007
2,956
1
81
Deficit spending was not something Keynes advocated. It was a necessary compromise to get the reactionaries on board. This strain of Keynesian economics is derided as bastard keynesianism by those who consider themselves the true disciples of Keynes.
Can you provide a source? Either way it doesn't really matter because most people believe in Keynesianism the way I defined it and have used it as a rational for policy decisions.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY