European Politics Thread.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

All I hear from you people are slogans, do you have any dignity and a plan of action?

PtaNg8c8OtU&t

This Summer is going to be spectacular.

[Hans Ludwig 0]

NOzR3UAyXao

P.S. Hans Ludwig, always thought of you being European, somewhere in the Alps mountains, sitting in your house, reading on Austrian economics. :D

I wish I was living Bavaria. But I'm living in the Lone Star State, which has almost the same GDP as Russia. =] Yeeaaaa haawww!

[Heatseeker 0]

[YOUTUBE]NOzR3UAyXao[YOUTUBE]

The least they could have done is look the real numbers up... but its ironic how they take the piss on EU while 1/3 of their own debt is in the hands of foreign countries, "lets ignore our 14 trillion debt and have a go at foreign economic trouble instead"? Internal economic and financial problems dont seem to be taken as lightly hearted though :rolleyes: .

Is that Iran listen under "oil exporters" who own US debt? Thats genious lol :D .

[Hans Ludwig 0]

The least they could have done is look the real numbers up... but its ironic how they take the piss on EU while 1/3 of their own debt is in the hands of foreign countries, "lets ignore our 14 trillion debt and have a go at foreign economic trouble instead"? Internal economic and financial problems dont seem to be taken as lightly hearted though :rolleyes: .

Is that Iran listen under "oil exporters" who own US debt? Thats genious lol :D .

You know those aren't American accents, right?

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Jamon y Baton: Extended Photogallery From A Violent Barcelona

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/jamon-y-baton-extended-photogallery-violent-barcelona

Looking at these pictures from Barcelona one would think this is Tunisia, Cairo, or at best, Athens. Instead, it is from the once incomparably wealthy capital of Catalunia (although they did have Olympics there: an event guaranteed to result in at least one municipal bankruptcy at some point in the future), and before the Barcelona-Man United game. One can only imagine what happens if Barcelona wins (or is that loses).

If things are so bad for them, in fact, as much as many of the socialists in this thread like portray their existence as slavery, they can't seem to be able to find dignity to identify the cause of their supposed troubles and take action.

Do you know how a slave becomes free? By killing his master. Are there any semi-automatic sniper rifles in Spain? What, you say that's too hardcore for you? So, are you a freeman, or a slave, Mr. Spokesperson & vilas?

Were there a cause worthy of my attention, I'd be there in a blink of an eye. ;) Hans Ludwig, say, those people over the other side of the foodchain - socialists, they demand that they are given a guaranteed job, but isn't that's exactly what slaves had back in the old days? ;)

[Spokesperson 0]

We are all wage slaves, but we aren't anarchists.

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

We are all wage slaves, but we aren't anarchists.

When you speak, you can answer only for yourself, unless you have been delegated with the privilege to represent others. I choose freedom and am self-employed.

Take care

[Heatseeker 0]

You know those aren't American accents, right?

I wouldnt have noticed if you hadnt brought it up actually.. English? Autralian? Still poor comedy if you ask me..

edit:

It just struck me how old this thread is and how much better the forum was back in the day.

Edited May 28, 2011 by Heatseeker

[vilas 477]

We are all wage slaves, but we aren't anarchists.

right

country/state/politicians should have following duty :

- work to maximize employment and lowering unemployment (so called free market fails in this cause it leads to situation where there is minimizing costs at any costs, including human costs to maximize profit for small group) and also to make better redistribution of profits (i gave an example some sites ago from manufactory where i had been working for year, it cannot be this way that one boss takes more than whole workers in factory together, it must be regulated by somekind of limits, that director payment is max 50 payments of basic worker in his company or like that, if he has huge profit - workers should get more pay, i know many firms where foreman earn more than whole his team and only thing he do is shouting at them because he is foreman thanx to being from family of owner, he knows nothing, just shout but director is his uncle )

- state should keep eye on important branches to be national , not get in foreign hands (energy , hospitals, weapon factory, mining ) should be in national hands to avoid profits gone abroad (but to support state budget)

- if head/president/director make steps that get company into troubles (look at InsideJob movie) it should be watched by special inspections like somekind of internal economic intel

- wrong privatisation should be put back to state ownership again

- state should force such law , that owner need more workers working in limited time (in some countries 35/week, 40h per week) and strongly punish situation when some people work for 50h/week and others have no work (cause they are not needed, i also gave mathematical example of unemployment dependance in function of working hours)

- free education allowing people from poor families to have education if they are able to learn

- free medical basic care that there wont be like "Sicko"

if state/government would work good, there would be low unemployment and only lazy people would not work

but than few some rich individuals would not have private jets, helicopters and collection of Ferraris

[Hans Ludwig 0]

country/state/politicians should have following duty :

- work to maximize employment and lowering unemployment

Keynesian economics has been debunked. I suggest you read the works of Murray Rothbard, F.A. Hayek and Ludwig von Mises. But what's the point? You and I both know you wont read anything that conflicts with your bias.

If unemployment could be created through Keynesian policies through central planning/banking, why haven't they been able to read full-employment? Why is that when they try, their policies actually create more unemployment?

Once you learn there never can be full-employment - ever. But the markets do a pretty good job at keeping that number down quite well. Unfortunately it seems all countries support a minimum wage law, which prevents even more people from working: Disabled, non-union workers, elderly, minorities and other disenfranchised groups.

wrong privatisation should be put back to state ownership again

Now you are just trolling.

Edited May 28, 2011 by Hans Ludwig

[Spokesperson 0]

I agree with vilas, but it won't be possible to achieve that within the current capitalist system. Free markets require unemployment to stop inflation. In a planned economy this isn't the case. You can have full employment (sure some people are always in the process of switching jobs, but that's not what I'm talking about) and zero inflation at the same time. However, a change from free market to planned economy would take years as engineers and mathematicians would have to implement a system that works alongside modern technology (powerful computers) and fast customer response. Earlier plans had to be reduced from say 100 000 goods to 10 000, because of limits in computational power. Today that is not a problem. What we saw was just a first kind of planned economy, with moden technology plans can be made much more easier and much more flexible.

Unfortunately it seems all countries support a minimum wage law, which prevents even more people from working: Disabled, non-union workers, elderly, minorities and other disenfranchised groups.

You have no experience of the real world.

Edited May 29, 2011 by Spokesperson

[Hans Ludwig 0]

Free markets require unemployment to stop inflation.

LOL That is the dumbest thing I ever heard. Do us all a favor and get an education in economics.

Lets, however, suppose your flawed theory was right that unemployment stops inflation. Then why have we seen an increase in inflation caused by the Federal Reserve and the European Central Banks (to be fair to the ECB, they have been forced to raise interest rates instead of printing more money for the simple fact no one would buy their bonds anymore. EU Central Bank Has a Choice: Inflation or Collapse)? Remember, these central banks are pretty much government organizations that have been given mandates to create conditions for "full or maximum employment" and to create the right conditions for economic prosperity, which in the case of the Federal Reserve have never once achieved. I can't exactly talk about the EU because I don't know much about their new system, which is still equivalent to our Federal Reserve and ran by Keynesian economist.

"Inflation, always and everywhere, is primarily caused by an increase in the supply of money and credit. In fact, inflation is the increase in the supply of money and credit. If you turn to the American College Dictionary, for example, you will find the first definition of inflation given as follows:

'Undue expansion or increase of the currency of a country, especially by the issuing of paper money not redeemable in specie.'"

"In recent years, however, the term has come to be used in a radically different sense. This is recognized in the second definition given by the American College Dictionary:

'A substantial rise of prices caused by an undue expansion in paper money or bank credit.'"

What You Should Know About Inflation

SOURCE

You have no experience of the real world.

Yeah, you are correct. I only have a B.A. in Communications with a strong point in Public Relations with a minor in Business Admin. I have worked as legislative aide researching and crafting, you guessed it, legislation. I'm working currently for a large commercial litigation law firm (prior to that for a plaintiff's law firm) as a paralegal with a degree in paralegal studies, and now working on a Masters in Economics.

Edited May 29, 2011 by Hans Ludwig

[Spokesperson 0]

It's very logical. If there is competition about workers rather than jobs, wages increase.

-> http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/NAIRU-SR-and-LR.svg

So, there's statistical evidence for this too, unlike for your neo-liberal dope theories which have nothing to do with reality (and where nobody has been able to confirm anything). Other theories, even the labor theory of value has been verified statistically as well.

No, the goals of the european central bank is to minimize inflation, not unemployment. The central banks are independent i most countries.

Edited May 29, 2011 by Spokesperson

[st_dux 26]

A planned economy will never work. The problem is not one of computational power -- it's more fundamental than that. Even if we had access to the most powerful computer imaginable, we still wouldn't have the slightest idea as to what to input.

The economy is based on billions of constantly changing variables. It cannot be planned efficiently; to think otherwise is the pretense of knowledge.

[Hans Ludwig 0]

I love how some finds some random graph on the internet, not having the slightest idea of what it means, and then claiming it proves their point. lol

[gammadust 12]

...

Yeah, you are correct. I only have a B.A. in Communications with a strong point in Public Relations with a minor in Business Admin. I have worked as legislative aide researching and crafting, you guessed it, legislation. I'm working currently for a large commercial litigation law firm (prior to that for a plaintiff's law firm) as a paralegal with a degree in paralegal studies, and now working on a Masters in Economics.

That is the authoritative argument, not the wisest at this point in time, since in retrospect (and imo) the most conspicous influence, in the society, a Communications (on Public Relations) degree have is Manufacturing of Consent/Dissent, in other words, plain opinion mediation/manipulation.

Business Admin? What for unless you're the big fish (read: unless you have the big capital/investors behind)? Or do you really believe the market we have is free?

Economics? Even a blind man sees the direct responsability they share in current state of the system:

- political subjugation to economic interests (corruption), terribly related to law making and law execution, and their mixing up

- mass bancrupcy, bail outs (privatize profit & socialize debts => "Look look, how liberal I am, lets nationalize this bancrupt bank" LOL - red scare does not apply now!)

- deregulation lobies (further exacerbating the problem, this is actually in its genesis "Glass-Steagal Act" revocation)

- etc... etc...

The blind man is in fact only as blind to these issues as he is to the extent current Public Relations firms are successful in their task, conceal/divert from what is happening in politics/economics/finance/war.

In my country we have a saying:

"Worse than a blind man is the one who refuses to see."

I would add "... or that lets himself have his eyes patched."

Fortunately people in general are awakening [brzezinsky dix it "Global Political Awakening"], REALITY is hiting them directly and gaining more importance in their truth criteria (forming own opinions) more than any perverse mediation their're injected. PR firms are evermore failing, powers-that-be are getting nervous with the lack of effectiveness.

Overall... those PhDs in those areas of knowledge don't convince me at all. They have for decades been failing their examinations, consistently! Unfortunately, as a terribly biased product of the current education system they're part of the problem... not the solution. They have been totally falsified by Reality, not even they'r own peers.

"I have a PhD guys, humble down, I know what I am talking about!"

Does not stick with me! I see it happen first hand, bring up whatever courtain words you might, just smoke and mirrors at the current state of affairs.

This is nothing personal Ludwig, for all I know you could even be dissenting from the mainstream, and pointing the system flaws objectively, even following the only "Authority" I actually respect - scientific method - to reach your conclusions, but you accidentaly tickled a nerve there.

/rant over

Edited May 31, 2011 by gammadust

[Hans Ludwig 0]

Where did I say I had a PhD? I don't plan on being a professor. I decided to get a masters because I love economics. The only thing you need to succeed in the US is a bachelors with some type of certification. I know a guy that has an B.A. in English and got his paralegal certificate and is making 60K. That's more than some people with PhDs and professors I know. Then again, I know some people in sales that make over 80K a year. Then again, they do hustle and sales takes a special breed of people.

Sorry I came of as "authoritative" or competitive. Next time I'll just come off as weak and blame everyone for my misfortune in life, much like some of you Europeans do.

[gammadust 12]

"PhD" was symbolic of the academia and any degree therein. It is far from my intention to divert you from whatever you want to produce knowledge on, or any one for that matter. If anything, as much regard as "economics" deserve from me in the present... is a total reform/evolution, change of paradigm.

Don't think you need to apologize for anything, this is a discussion, no one disrespected any normalcy. Don't take the argument on its head either, I am not asking for you to weaken your points, nor blaming anyone per se if not only trying to identify the original cause/event chain.

In truth you just triggered a reaction from me, which I actually recognized as perhaps misplaced if it was viewed as directed to you. Nevertheless I found it still pertinent to this topic not to shread it to the delete key.

Edited May 31, 2011 by gammadust

[Spokesperson 0]

So, instead of discussing the curve and the argument behind it you target the messenger. What do you know? Maybe I've studied economics. One thing for sure is that you haven't studied political economics yourself, and that's the well known Philips curve. This relationship between unemployment and inflation in a market economy is logical and statistically proven. Nothing more and nothing less. You spit out garbage.

@ST Dux:

That's wrong. The planned economy works and worked in socialist countries. And it has worked pretty well. The highest growth rates in history are attributed to the USSR during Stalin.

Big corporations are planned economies internally and sometimes they have bigger internal economies than entire states. Free markets are pure anarchy and there's a big waste of resources. Factories are standing still and unemployment is growing to huge levels. Billions are wasted on ads rather than on the products themselves.

Using real time consumer input and other parameters the economy can be planned efficiently. Modern technology allows for this, especially since the introduction of the internet.

[st_dux 26]

It's astonishing to me that you can disparage capitalism for its wage slavery and exploitation of the working class while simultaneously praising the USSR under Stalin. The rapid industrialization of the USSR was chiefly the result of two things: vast supplies of natural resources, and the systematic exploitation of a massive workforce by the state (not to mention using prisoners as actual slaves). The human cost of this industrialization is unlike anything ever produced by capitalism, and the "prosperity" that it created was not enjoyed by the workers at all: In 1933, workers' real earnings plummeted to about one tenth of what they had been in 1926 (source), and this never improved substantially. Meanwhile, collectivist approaches to agriculture created catastrophic drops in productivity, leading to famine and the starvation of millions.

Real successful.

Using real time consumer input and other parameters the economy can be planned efficiently. Modern technology allows for this, especially since the introduction of the internet.

Nothing does this better than a market. Markets define how resources ought to be used. All any plan can hope to do is get as close to emulating this as possible, and as history has shown, humans aren't capable of getting that close.

[gammadust 12]

Nothing does this better than a market. Markets define how resources ought to be used. All any plan can hope to do is get as close to emulating this as possible, and as history has shown, humans aren't capable of getting that close.

"Any atempt to change the system is futile", "yes" leave it to the inner enthropy of the system to sort it self out, "no" leave it to "invisible hand" to make up for it, "maybe" leave to the cartels to decide uppon, "better yet" let the governments deregulate it totaly. There's a nice trend alright!

"Even better" humans have created a "frankenstein" they have lost control upon, to the point that killing him is the only way out!

Hopeless, impotence is the only things left for economists to study, there can be no better economists than those who exist today! The End of History!

Or all of the above is bullocks, we don't need any of it, Capitalist System is just fine and is perfectly self-sustainable!

NOPE!

Once humanity relied on the belief that the earth was flat, static and orbited by the sun...

"Eppur si muove!" - "And yet it moves!"

[st_dux 26]

Or all of the above is bullocks, we don't need any of it, Capitalist System is just fine and is perfectly self-sustainable!

Capitalism is directly responsible for the greatest and most rapid rise in the standard of living for the greatest number of people in all of recored history. It's certainly not perfect, but it is vastly superior to anything else that has ever been tried.

Every historical attempt at a society where the economy is planned and the state owns the means of production entirely has resulted not only in failure, but massive, millions-of-people-were-killed-in-the-process failure.

[gammadust 12]

Capitalism is directly responsible for the greatest and most rapid rise in the standard of living for the greatest number of people in all of recored history.

Debatable of course... Allow me to prioritize other standards of measure on succesful policy (Gini Coefficient):

(click for full size - shall I also add "lower is better" no pun intended)

Note US and China, curiously...

It was also during Capitalism expansion that humanity endured 2 World Wars, add to that, that here and there its main centers promoted one major local conflict per year since the 1945 (poetic license, yes, but something in that order of magnitude nevertheless).

For something which "It's certainly not perfect" is not doing bad at all but in the opposite side of "Perfection"!

Every historical attempt at a society where the economy is planned and the state owns the means of production entirely has resulted not only in failure, but massive, millions-of-people-were-killed-in-the-process failure.

Who verifies that? Current economists/political/social scientists, those who have failed miserably, those who are hostage to the system itself, and brought us where we are today? I wouldn't expect any less of them!

"Eppur si muove!" - "And yet it moves!"

[Hans Ludwig 0]

Gammadust, I wouldn't be so bold to call the US a "capitalist" state in the late 20s to the late 40s. Yes, I'm sure if you compared it to the USSR then one could see a resemblance to Capitalism.

It also shows you know zero about U.S. history. The Federal Reserve created the Stock Market Crash of '29 and Hoover and FDR prolonged the recession that ultimately turned into the Great Depression through public policy (government intervention).

Edited June 1, 2011 by Hans Ludwig

[gammadust 12]

Gammadust, I wouldn't be so bold to call the US a "capitalist" state in the late 20s to the late 40s. Yes, I'm sure if you compared it to the USSR then one could see a resemblance to Capitalism.

It also shows you know zero about U.S. history. The Federal Reserve created the Stock Market Crash of '29 and Hoover and FDR prolonged the recession that ultimately turned into the Great Depression through public policy (government intervention).

Where was I ever so specific in stating that US was "capitalist" in those decades? The pulled up graphic stretches back to 1945. You felt the need the bring up USSR as term for comparison? Don't follow me... I am also lost.

But since you mention those decades, right in the middle of them you have indeed FDR signing the infamous Glass-Steagall Act. Which actually brings us to where I am trying to focus the discussion, the present, or 1999 when it was repealed, and its 2008 consequence.

Here's a bold one:

Would 2008 result, disputably, in the biggest capitalist burst ever to happen - Greater than the Great Depression one, was it not for this Act repeal. Having present that it insured Commercial Banking was safely separated from Investment one?

It was this blind neo-liberalism, under which Clinton repealed this Act (while his constituency was happily diverted with THE bubblejob "of the century" by some fine a lady) that busted... (shall I name them all or only part?) Lehman xxx, Bear xxx, etc, etc..

Not only that, but with irreversible global consequences in foreign economies. And that's even bolder in terms of responsability! Damage is done and has a name on it... it isn't Clinton! It was the bubblejob, of course!!

Was then this the kind of "public policy (government intervention)" that was so bad for the economy? I call that a self-preservation belt! I am afraid to crap out if not wearing it while flexing muscles...

I "know zero" about so many things even myself have no idea! US history, a large chunk of it indeed! Might my conclusions be so mitigated by that fact that we should just garbage it?