Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Politics

The cruel stupidity that is economic austerity

63 replies

ttosca · 18/04/2012 19:59

In the euro zone, Germany, France, Spain and Italy all managed to reduce their structural budget deficits, the latter three thanks to austerity. All are expected to reduce those deficits further this year. But this is not the good news it seems. Austerity, the IMF has found, could be making Europe?s crisis worse, rather than better.


How bad is it?

In Greece, we now have record unemployment, which includes the majority of young workers. Homelessness is up 20 percent, with soup kitchens in Athens reporting record demand, and the usually low suicide rate having doubled.

Portugal has complied completely with the austerity demands it accepted for its bailout deal, but its debt is growing and its economy is shrinking, its unemployment rate continues to reach new heights, there is a crisis in medical care, and a 40 percent rise in emigration, with the Portuguese government acknowledging its own failure by actually encouraging its citizenry to leave.

In Spain, austerity has  resulted in falling industrial output and deepening debt, with record unemployment and a stunning rate of 50 percent youth unemployment. And the Spanish government's incomprehensible response is to impose even more crushing austerity.

Ireland has fallen back into recession as austerity has led to falling economic output. A better future is being sacrificed, as young workers look for work abroad, "generation emigration" expected to number 75,000 this year.

The success of Italy's wealthy technocrat government was concisely summarized in similar terms:

    Italy's austerity measures are stunting activity in the euro-zone's third-largest economy, recent budget and economic data show, suggesting the steps are backfiring.

Italy's industrial production is falling while its rate of unemployment is at its highest in more than a decade, and its priceless cultural heritage is literally crumbling. But the wealthy technocrats themselves are ensuring that they they don't have to share the suffering.

Even in the Eurozone's stronger economies, such as Holland, austerity is hurting the economy, people, and culture, and risks backfiring even more.

The austerity program of French President Nicolas Sarkozy has led to a stagnant economy, with ten consecutive months of rising unemployment and factory output stalled and business confidence in decline.

Even economic powerhouse Germany, while taking advantage of the new flood of migrant workers fleeing Europe's weaker economies, is facing an austerity backlash.

Outside the Eurozone, the austerity program imposed on Britain by the relentlessly mendacious Cameron government has resulted in an economy that keeps shrinking, with the OECD saying it is back in recession, with unemployment soaring, and the overall brunt being borne by the elderly and minorities and the very young. An additional hundred thousand are predicted to be out of work by autumn.

www.dailykos.com/story/2012/04/15/1083315/-The-cruel-stupidity-that-is-economic-austerity

OP posts:
daffodilly2 · 18/04/2012 20:31

I'm undecided on this one.

I'm concerned cutting back on public jobs is just a back door way of breaking down the welfare system that will be too expensive to rebuild once it has gone - NHS particular example.

However, agressive advertising and marketing has meant people want more and more goods and foreign holidays - I think a less consumerist society , more service driven is a better way of living and cultrally the greed for posessions needs to be curbed.

daffodilly2 · 18/04/2012 20:48

What I mean is, growth could indeed be stunted by too much austerity but individual debt as a cultural phenomenon needs to be tackled.

ttosca · 18/04/2012 21:33

I understand what you're saying, daffodilly, but you won't get rid of
consumerism and individual debt without getting rid of Capitalism.

Consumerism is the motive which keeps the economy turning. Debt is seemingly
limitless fuel.

Remove consumerism, and demand will nosedive. What would Nike do if there
wasn't perpetual demand for it's latest model of trainers? Debt was lavished on
consumers for a similar reason: since the Capitalist rate of exploitation grew
so large by forcing down wages, the only way people could continue to consume
and maintain and semblance of a reasonable standard of living was to take on
debt. Now the whole house of cards has fallen, and we have to either dish out
more credit, or start paying proper wages again. Guess what's more likely to
happen?

OP posts:
rabbitstew · 18/04/2012 22:17

In what way is cutting back on public services creating a less consumerist society? I thought the whole idea was the government wanted the private sector to step in and take over and make a profit, and you only make a profit if people are willing and able to consume. Or is the idea actually just to create as much unemployment as possible and to cut back on unemployment benefits so much that the unemployed can't consume anything?

harbingerofdoom · 18/04/2012 22:23

Cuba?

rabbitstew · 18/04/2012 22:25

What about Cuba? Or are you suggesting we rename the UK? Or start making cigars for the US market as a means of making a profit?

CoteDAzur · 18/04/2012 22:25

OP - Are you trying to say that that all those symptoms of economic recession (high unemployment, soup kitchens, shrinking economy etc) are because of austerity measures?

CogitoErgoSometimes · 19/04/2012 06:59

Sorry... 'getting rid of capitalism'... simplistic crap.

amicissimma · 19/04/2012 15:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 19/04/2012 16:14

"either dish out more credit, or start paying proper wages again."

That's not a valid either/or. There are other choices as well. Right now, people are very sensibly opting to pay down debt, build up savings, delay big purchases, shop at Aldi, cook at home ... in other words, cutting their cloth and living within their means like we used to do in the good old days. Wages were arguably 'proper' already but ten years of heavily marketed fantasy, 'things can only get better', 'end to boom and bust', anyone-can-be-a-celebrity-if-you-just-buy-the-right-handbag culture a lot (including governments) lost sight of what was genuinely affordable and what was pie in the sky. Few took on debt simply to maintain a 'reasonable standard of living'

Big party = big hangover.

CoteDAzur · 19/04/2012 16:45

Greek's finances didn't get this way because of capitalism.

They went down the hole because the idiots Greeks elected borrowed enormous amounts of money against pretty much ALL future revenues, including national lotto revenues ffs. And they were able to do so, because they LIED for YEARS about their national accounts, iirc stating 3-4% budget deficit when their real deficit was above 15% and there was no money in the coffers.

Greece acted like a banana republic rather than an EU country and fully deserve everything happening to it.

Their downfall has been democracy rather than capitalism - if you choose fools to govern you, this can easily happen, unfortunately.

CoteDAzur · 19/04/2012 16:45

Greece's, obviously. Damned auto-correct.

ttosca · 19/04/2012 19:01

"either dish out more credit, or start paying proper wages again."

That's not a valid either/or. There are other choices as well. Right now, people are very sensibly opting to pay down debt, build up savings, delay big purchases, shop at Aldi, cook at home ... in other words, cutting their cloth and living within their means like we used to do in the good old days. Wages were arguably 'proper' already but ten years of heavily marketed fantasy, 'things can only get better', 'end to boom and bust', anyone-can-be-a-celebrity-if-you-just-buy-the-right-handbag culture a lot (including governments) lost sight of what was genuinely affordable and what was pie in the sky. Few took on debt simply to maintain a 'reasonable standard of living'

Big party = big hangover.

No. This narrative is utterly false. It's not like the populations of the West in the past three decades have been living the high life and living a life of luxury. Life in the UK, especially, has become harder, not easier.

As I've mentioned before, wages in real-term have stagnated or declined for the majority of citizens in the past few decades. Meanwhile, there is less job security, pensions are being attacked, and backdrop of privitisations which have made public services more expensive.

So people took on debts in order to stay afloat and to merely maintain their standard of living. They weren't having a 'Big Party'. The only people who were having a 'Big Party' were the top 5% who enjoyed huge gains in both income and wealth, while everyone else took a hit.

Specter of Years of Stagnating Wages Haunts the Globe

Nearly three years after the start of the economic crisis, a new spectre is haunting the world?s most advanced economies: the prospect that the majority of their citizens will face years of stagnant wages.

Empty Wallet

In the postwar years, there was a belief in developed economies that each generation could expect to have materially better living standards than their parents. Yet the outlook for income growth has rarely looked worse than it does today.

For some middle-income groups, the idea of stationary or declining incomes is not new. Fork-lift truck drivers in Britain could expect to earn 19,068 pounds in 2010, about 5 percent lower than in 1978, after adjusting for inflation. Median male real US earnings have not risen since 1975. Average real Japanese household incomes after taxation fell in the decade to mid-2000s. And those in Germany have been falling in the past 10 years.

Some of this pressure on the middle income households was masked ? at least temporarily ? by the credit boom, which allowed families to spend more than they earned. Now, three years after the end of the cheap money era ? and with developed countries struggling to get their economies growing again ? middle classes around the globe are feeling the squeeze.

www.cnbc.com/id/43558602/Specter_of_Years_of_Stagnating_Wages_Haunts_the_Globe

OP posts:
JuliaScurr · 19/04/2012 19:34

ttosca is that the same spectre that used to haunt Europe?

claig · 19/04/2012 19:37

Do you mean Tony Blair?

ttosca · 19/04/2012 20:41

I think the old spectre is returning, Julia. ;)

OP posts:
minimathsmouse · 19/04/2012 20:41

A spectre is haunting Europe, the spectre of All the powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance............

Maggie, that's what is still haunting us.

minimathsmouse · 19/04/2012 20:42

If only, :)

minimathsmouse · 19/04/2012 22:13

Economist Richard Wolf on the Euro Crisis. Makes the economics behind the crisis really easy to understand.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 20/04/2012 07:43

"So people took on debts in order to stay afloat and to merely maintain their standard of living. "

This is quite wrong. Just in my own circle of friends I knew people (usually younger ones) that took out mammoth amounts of debt to buy all kinds of non-essentials - fancy cars, foreign holidays - simply because it was offered. I also know many that didn't get suckered into debt at all and maintained a perfectly good standard of living. Younger people again overstretched badly on houses making incorrect assumptions i.e. being too optimistic about future earnings and future house-prices. Slightly older people who experienced the last negative equity crash in the nineties were far more cautious.

There seems to be some kind of twisted narrative emerging that all the debt taken on in the last 10 - 15 years was paying gas & grocery bills. If that happened it was only for a very small minority

EdithWeston · 20/04/2012 07:57

"this narrative"?

The debt crisis cannot be "spun" away by telling different stories about it or pretending it doesn't exist.

The reason we have austerity is because the time for story-telling is over. The fiction that you can spend your way out of a debt is known to be just that, fiction.

'Managing the discourse' is merely a form over spin over substance. I think that style of politics is inadequate for the current circumstances, and rejected by all sides. The reason that opposition parties across Europe are in general not opposing effectively is because they don't actually disagree with the need for austerity, and the public understands the necessity too.

minimathsmouse · 20/04/2012 09:19

So why are the banks upping the interest on the Greek Loans? why have the other memeber governments given Greece a crippling bail out package, clearly they think that Greece should borrow more just to pay back it's debt. They clearly think that creating new financial products and getting others to underwrite the loans (people who don't know what they are purchasing, remember the Sub-prime mortgages) will be just the ticket.

I agree, spending your way out of debt whilst it worked in the 30's it's unlikely to work now. Which is why some radical rethinking needs to occur about the system of boom and bust economics.

I don't subscribe to the idea that a rebalancing act can really get at the root causes of the problem.

purits · 20/04/2012 09:30

a new spectre is haunting the world?s most advanced economies: the prospect that the majority of their citizens will face years of stagnant wages.

That makes it sound like it's a bad thing. Has everyone forgotten the 70s inflation nightmare?Hmm
Try describing wages as 'stable' instead of 'stagnant' and, hey presto, it sounds so much better. arf

rabbitstew · 20/04/2012 11:10

purits - at the moment we have inflation without wage rises (and without any of the "benefit" being passed on to savers). And as for usury as a method of keeping the world running smoothly... now we know why it always used to be considered a sin!

ttosca · 20/04/2012 13:13

Cogito-

This is quite wrong. Just in my own circle of friends I knew people (usually younger ones) that took out mammoth amounts of debt to buy all kinds of non-essentials - fancy cars, foreign holidays - simply because it was offered. I also know many that didn't get suckered into debt at all and maintained a perfectly good standard of living. Younger people again overstretched badly on houses making incorrect assumptions i.e. being too optimistic about future earnings and future house-prices. Slightly older people who experienced the last negative equity crash in the nineties were far more cautious.

Your anecdotal experiences aren't really a valid basis on which to make an argument, I'm afraid.

What facts - or alleged facts - do you contest? Do you contest that wages have stagnated or declined for decades for the majority of people? Do you contest that house prices have skyrocketed? Do you contest that public transport costs have skyrocketed?

Instead of saying: "I know people who bought large screen TVs with credit" as some sort of attempt at counter-argument, why don't you try to show how it's not the case that wages have stagnated or declined while the cost of living has increased?

OP posts: