So, apparently EU finance ministers are encouraging Greece to speed up privatization. Which is to say, let themselves be looted faster, and transfer public goods into private hands at firesale prices. Meanwhile, the Greeks themselves continue to riot in all the wrong places. Folks, if you’re going to riot, go riot where the politicians and bankers are. March on their mansions, and have your fights with the cops there. As long as it’s you fighting the cops someplace else, they don’t care. Your master class, who refuse to pay their taxes or to tax each other, will not get serious about anything else other than paying themselves and their foreign friends by looting your country until something more important than money is on the line.
In governmental terms, yes, Greece should restructure. Roll it all over into 100 year bonds at 1%, and refloat your own currency. If investors don’t like that, tell them they can have that or nothing. Slap on capital controls and let everyone know that you will hunt to the ends of the earth any of your rich who try and take capital out of the country. Start actually taxing the rich. If they can’t take it, they can leave, without their capital.
anon2525
Folks, if you’re going to riot, go riot where the politicians and bankers are. March on their mansions, and have your fights with the cops there.
It would be nice if all protesters everywhere took this advice. One complication is that the wealthy have so many houses that they can be far away from any one of them for as long as they need to be.
Relatedly, it has been interesting to see that the effort to eliminate Medicare/Medicaid in the u.s. has been stalled by the experience that (especially repubul) politicians had when they visited their districts. It’s nice to know that yelling in their faces still does have some effect. They all need to be made to be afraid to leave d.c.
someofparts
I’m past ready to see effective resistance over there and over here.
anon2525
In governmental terms, yes, Greece should restructure. Roll it all over into 100 year bonds at 1%, and refloat your own currency.
Or, if you’re going to re-float your own currency, then pay off the debt with interest-free money.
Economist Dean Baker’s proposal The Best Way to Balance the Budget becomes possible for Greece once it has its own currency:
Finally, if the Fed opted to hold the bonds that it has purchased through it various quantitative easing programs it could directly reduce the deficit. The reason is that the interest paid on these bonds is paid to the Fed and then refunded to the Treasury. It therefore leads to no net interest burden to the government. If the Fed bought and held $3 trillion on government bonds, it would leave to interest savings of close to $1.8 trillion over the course of the next decade.
Complicating this scenario is that the Greek currency would be worth less (and so its exports would have a lower price), but this would mean that imports would cost more, especially fossil fuels. Get rid of debt that is going towards unproductive uses (say, gambling and ponzi schemes, AKA, “investing”) and put people to work in productive sectors, especially those that would replace the industrial processes that are polluting the environment and changing the climate, making life on the planet less possible.
Lisa Simeone
Harbinger of things to come in the U.S.?
Ed
The “get rid of Medicare” thing is really puzzling. The Republicans win an election in part on playing on fears that the Democrats are going to reduce spending on a popular program (Medicare), then once they win turn around and propose eliminating that exact same program. And the savings weren’t even going to be used to reduce the debt, since it was going to fund tax breaks to their wealthy supporters! Someone didn’t figure out that you only get to do these things AFTER you get rid of elections, and often not even then (since the public can still riot).
anon2525
And the savings weren’t even going to be used to reduce the debt, since it was going to fund tax breaks to their wealthy supporters! Someone didn’t figure out that you only get to do these things AFTER you get rid of elections, and often not even then (since the public can still riot).
The first part–“reduce the debt”–is perfectly understandable when you realize that it’s a lie. The republs have no objection to public debt (as the six years from 2001 to 2007 under republ congress&executive proved) so long as it redistributes wealth from the majority to the owners of private companies. Everyone should have a clear-eyed understanding of the current proposals that only cut gov’t. programs that do not get run by way of contracts to private companies. Those gov’t. programs that do get run by way of contracts to private companies (primarily weapons programs, consulting for spy agencies, mercenaries) are not being cut. Also, the interest paid on public debt is primarily paid to the wealthy in the country. The median wage in the u.s. in 2009 was $26,200. People living on that amount of income do not have much money to spend on u.s. t-bills.
The second part–“cut programs&the public can still riot”–is a mystery to me in that I don’t know what their thinking is, either. Are they expecting that there won’t be protests? Their surprise at the reaction to their vote for ryan’s bill says that they were not expecting the protests. Do they have some contingency plan, or did they just think that the past 30+ years of propaganda would prevent any resistance?
Related:
Synecdoche Wisconsin
Which Way Wisconsin
Lisa Simeone
Given that they’ve been pretty successful in getting people to vote against their own self-interest, I’d say the answer is yes.
Greg L
>>>The second part–”cut programs&the public can still riot”–is a mystery to me in that I don’t know what their thinking is, either. Are they expecting that there won’t be protests? Their surprise at the reaction to their vote for ryan’s bill says that they were not expecting the protests. Do they have some contingency plan, or did they just think that the past 30+ years of propaganda would prevent any resistance?<<<
In war sometimes you hit the opponent merely to see how he's going to respond. His response doesn't change your overall strategic objective, but often can help develop the tactics that can help you get there.
They know full well there will be resistance, they just don't know what form it might take, so they need to see the preliminary responses IMO.
Z
They … the republicans and the democrats that they work hand-in-hand with … don’t care; they don’t think that they are going to pay any personal price for what they do as long as they do as the plutocrats please. For even if they get voted out, they get rewarded with high paying jobs in the private sector … often in lobbying firms … that come without the public scrutiny of being an elected “representative”. That’s no deterrence and until they pay a personal price, and the giffords shooting hasn’t appeared to faze them, they’ll keep merrily selling us out, driving legislation that systematically shortens the life spans of the economically and physically weak so that they can purchase their 2nd yacht and 3rd vacation home.
As Ian wrote, they’re not worried about riots as long as they don’t reach them.
Z
anon2525
Given that they’ve been pretty successful in getting people to vote against their own self-interest, I’d say the answer is yes.
I agree, more or less. Let’s say a few words in behalf of the majority:
When Clinton was elected in ’92, the majority voted in their own interest, not against it, in reaction to the recession. Of course, Clinton continued with neo-liberalism, but that doesn’t mean that the majority didn’t react against those interests that were counter to their own, just that the dlc+republs are against the majority.
In ’94, it is arguable that the republs took control of the House after 40 years because the majority reacted to the passage of NAFTA and the lack of passage of universal health care. The first was against the interests of the majority and the second was in the interest of the majority.
In 2000, the majority voted in their interest but the election was subverted by a treasonous court.
In 2002&2004, a case can be made that both elections were stolen by means of the wide-spread adoption of electronic vote counting. In fact, all elections since 2000 are suspect and will remain so until some form of audit-able election reform is passed.
In 2008, the majority voted in its own interests, but the neo-liberal politicians lied about their positions in order to get elected.
In 2010, the majority told the politicians that had been elected in 2008 that they opposed being lied to, but this has only lead to more lying politicians passing legislation that they were not elected to enact, including the obama tax cuts and the abolition of collective bargaining.
Because representative democracy has broken down, it is arguable that we’re not seeing the result of “the people getting the gov’t. they deserve.” Instead, we’re seeing what was observed several hundred years ago:
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Lisa Simeone
Maybe the population is suffering from a collective Stockholm Syndrome. (I’m trying to be charitable.)
Z
People have overwhelmingly voted for candidates of the two major … and thoroughly corrupted … parties, neither of which have any intention of representing the people’s or the country’s best interests, and that’s why … and how … the people have voted against their interests.
Z
anon2525
Maybe the population is suffering from a collective Stockholm Syndrome.
Unless I’m misunderstanding, “Stockholm Syndrome” means that the captives are coming to agree with their captors. But I don’t see that. The majority wants the gov’t. to “do something” about jobs, foreclosures, and health care, but those in gov’t. do not want to do what the majority wants. The majority (the “captives”) are not agreeing with the politicians and their class (the “captors”)–the “captors” are simply ignoring what the “captives” want, in this metaphor.
The surprise in the repubuls in the House is that they have not been following the usual strategy, as recently repeated by McConnell, namely: Neo-liberals Should Hide Behind “Bipartisanship” (h/t Jon Walker at FDL):
McConnell: “This was the year after the bipartisan agreement between Reagan and O’Neill raised the retirement age for Social Security. I do not exaggerate when I say I was not asked about it a single solitary time. Not once in the course of a whole race. And the reason was that they did it together. When you do something together, the result is that it’s not usable in the election. I think there’s an understanding that if there’s a grand bargain, none of it will be usable in next year’s election.”
Z
The republicans demanding that something be done with medicare is just the opening act in the kabuki theater between the two parties. obama has already begun the next act, called pragmatism (see here and here: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/16/opinion/16krugman.html AND http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/05/16/durbin-undercutting-democratic-message-on-medicare/), with his personal calls to keep “everything on the table” and through one of his primary proxies in the senate, fellow illini-er dick durbin, talking about the need to reform medicare and social security in order to “save” it. Next act up: compromise.
Bipartisanship is meeting in the middle, the bull’s eye being a solution that burdens the poor and middle class and leaves the rich’s wealth unaffected and preferably enhanced, while each party simultaneously gives cover to the other as they dutifully serve the plutocracy. This sorry and tired theatrical game has been played so many times between the two “opposing” parties that it ought to come with a program guide by now.
Z
ballgame
Controlling capital flight is a desirable objective; are there documented instances of nations doing this effectively?
Morocco Bama
One complication is that the wealthy have so many houses that they can be far away from any one of them for as long as they need to be.
And don’t forget, they have these, as well, where they can live on the seas for months, and years even, stopping at various ports of call for provisions when needed.
http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/wally-and-hermes-yacht#!/photos/53871/3
Z
The imf guy that got charged with rape in nyc was staying at a $3000/night hotel suite.
Z
Sam Adams
Time for a revolution.
Ian Welsh
Most of of the 19th and 20th century countries had capital controls and they worked fine.
Celsius 233
I really like what Iceland did; if I understand correctly, they told England and the EU to go suck an egg regarding payback.
It seems to me that if the banks and other financial organizations can make up their own rules and go rogue: let them clean up their own mess! Ef’im all!
Formerly T-Bear
@ Celsius
Last word about Iceland was the government put the question to the citizens a second time and was met with a resounding NO. The government invited GB and Holland (IIRC) to take Iceland to court where the issue currently stands. Meanwhile Iceland’s economy is beginning recovery after the devastating collapse of trade imposed as a result of the economic boycott towards a non-compliant Icelandic government (non-compliance toward British economic demands for compensation for unregulated international banking fraud).
Iceland’s banks are now under heavy regulation, those of them that are still in business. The culprit bank has been closed and its assets seized as rationalization of their debts created. This is probably the least economically damaging route to resolution yet attempted.
Those who have succumbed to attempts to reinforce their bank’s existence have found themselves holding undeterminable debt and facing the necessity of applying unsustainable social, political and economy destroying austerity; a heavy price is in store for those following the private profit/socialized loss path.
There is a need for a revolutionary new economic paradigm to replace the current ideology passing as theory. Whomever writes that paradigm will place themselves in history amongst the great of economic thought.
Morocco Bama
Most of of the 19th and 20th century countries had capital controls and they worked fine.
See, that’s just it. Countries are so passé.
Suspenders
Countries will never be passé as long as they control armies.
Mandos
The real issue has nothing to do with Medicare or not-Medicare, self-interested majorities or self-destructive majorities. It has to do with the symbols around the issue and the emotions they arouse. Republicans can attack the Democrats on health care reform and then turn around and do the same thing because in the former case, something ostensibly intended to spread health care dollars was being attacked, and in the latter case, something that already spreads around health care dollars is being attacked.
In either case as long as one can identify a notional free rider uncomfortably like “you”, it is really the same policy in every way that matters.
Celsius 233
Formerly T-Bear
May 18, 2011
@ Celsius
Iceland’s banks are now under heavy regulation, those of them that are still in business. The culprit bank has been closed and its assets seized as rationalization of their debts created. This is probably the least economically damaging route to resolution yet attempted.
===============================
Well, there you go. thanks for the additional information.
It’s interesting; since Iceland stopped dancing to the IMF Tango one doesn’t hear too much regarding their “health”.
If I wasn’t so entrenched (wife and house) here in the tropics, I’d definitely check out Iceland as a place to re-settle. They seem to have it all; lol or maybe I should say they DON’T have it all; homeland security, TSA, ICE, republicans, democrats, wiretaps, and general government meddling in ones everyday life. Cheers Bear.
Z
In regards to medicare: http://news.firedoglake.com/2011/05/18/gang-of-six-members-were-willing-to-cut-400-billion-from-medicare/#comments
Z
Formerly T-Bear
@ 233 ºC
Also, it should be pointed out that the banking fraud injected a sea of foreign funds into the Icelandic economy, the facile expedient to service (provide interest to) these funds was creating a borrowing (debt) spree where Icelanders would borrow and pay back in these foreign funds (no easy way to convert £ and € directly into Icelandic currency (Kroner ?) at that volume). So the people, being given cheap loans and wise enough to use the offers, refinanced their lives using foreign capital. Lo and behold, when the ponzi scheme collapsed, Icelanders were left with enormous debt in £ and € with only I-Kroner to service the debt. When London and Brussels were refused 100% guarantees by the Icelandic government, they acted to devalue the currency of Iceland in the markets, the very currency which serviced their invested capital, the currency which enabled the return on their investments. The value of the currency collapsed, taking with it the Icelandic economy as well as all foreign trade. These bright sparks in London and Brussels cut off any ability of Iceland to address restoration of its borrowed capital through natural maturation of the loans and sent the country into effective bankruptcy, another case of cutting off the nose to spite the face of the current economic ideology passing as economic theory. This should stand as a serious example of the insanity a “free market” produces. As for Greece, the riots there are constant and are no longer news; political instability has replaced rational economic resolution for the foreseeable future. The harder the EU and IMF try to extract their interests from that collapsing economy, the more is the likelihood of their failure and the greater the Greek tragedy.
Sam Adams
@ T bear, are you Tiresias or Cassandra? The greek tragedy has many more miles to wander until it ends like Oedipus at Colonus.
Morocco Bama
There is no legitimate recovery for Iceland. Recovery implies returning to the status quo before the crisis, and there is no going back. If it appears as a recovery, it’s because it’s a dead cat bounce.
The only future for Iceland is to learn the ways of the Inuit, and even then, it’s a lost cause because soon enough there will be no fish to harvest, and the scant remainder will be glowing with radiation.
Suspenders
I think Iceland is actually in a much better position than most, mainly because of its vast supplies of renewable energy and its tiny, close knit population. That small population and relative geographic isolation means Icelands political elites have a difficult time being disconnected from reality; the place is literally too small for the leadership to live in a Washington-style bubble, which is another big (actually, huge) plus. Also, how many people around the world can say they live in a society without an army, navy or air force? That’s gotta be worth something…
Celsius 233
Morocco Bama
May 19, 2011
There is no legitimate recovery for Iceland. Recovery implies returning to the status quo before the crisis, and there is no going back. If it appears as a recovery, it’s because it’s a dead cat bounce.
The only future for Iceland is to learn the ways of the Inuit, and even then, it’s a lost cause because soon enough there will be no fish to harvest, and the scant remainder will be glowing with radiation.
========================
Ouch! And I thought I was cynical…
========================
Suspenders PERMALINK
May 19, 2011
I think Iceland is actually in a much better position than most, mainly because of its vast supplies of renewable energy and its tiny, close knit population. That small population and relative geographic isolation means Icelands political elites have a difficult time being disconnected from reality; the place is literally too small for the leadership to live in a Washington-style bubble, which is another big (actually, huge) plus. Also, how many people around the world can say they live in a society without an army, navy or air force? That’s gotta be worth something…
=======================
I’m with suspenders on this one…
anon2525
Iceland is actually in a much better position than most, mainly because of its vast supplies of renewable energy and its tiny, close knit population.
There have been a number of news items* mentioning this in the past few months: Iceland’s state-owned energy company is studying the feasibility of laying power lines to Britain and mainland Europe to export their hydro- and geothermally-generated electricity. Given their small population (approx. 300,000), this export could give them a considerable income, especially now that they have killed off the parasitical “financial” “industry.” It appears to be what responsible and intelligent adults should do there. Similar thinking should guide the adults in Ireland and Greece, but it’s possible that the criminals will continue to run the economic machine and will prevent that.
*Iceland to export geothermal power to Europe
Celsius 233
We’ve been snookered into believing false economic models and worse yet; false, imposed, values system on what and how to live our lives.
Iceland is a great example of a country being lead to live beyond it’s resources and they almost bought it lock, stock, and barrel. Their recovery will put a lie to the common “wisdom” being imposed on Greece, Italy, Spain and Portugal by the IMF and it’s pimps.
It’s too late for us; we already drank the kool-aide.
Formerly T-Bear
The Guardian has archival information about Iceland’s current developments:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/iceland?INTCMP=SRCH
to which add searches for: Iceland/economy and/or Iceland/Banks in The Guardian’s search facility.
Like information can be had at BBC through BBC’s search facilities as well as The Irish Times. All seem to contain uncontaminated (by propaganda) archives that remain trustworthy sources (although BBC has become arguably weak when it comes to the Israeli atrocities toward Palestinian peoples and the middle east policy (being recipient of a corrosive attack by the Blair government), some caution is advised).
Morocco Bama
I’m with suspenders on this one…
Of course you are, and I don’t blame you. Most mortals have to be to get through the day…..to wake up the next morning….to convince themselves that there is a bright future and that this experiment called human life has some kind of meaning and is a worthwhile venture.
But to believe Iceland, or the World at large, specifically Humanity and the Ozymandian System it has erected, will recover and sustain this System, is insanity. Deep down, we all know that is foolish, wishful thinking. To believe that you can expect this System to provide a solution to itself, is farcical.
A world that needs exportable renewable energy is a World that is merely a simulacrum of the former destructive World, and we know how that World, this destructive System, ends. It consumes everything in its path, including itself, transforming a sustainable paradise into a toxic, unusable wasteland.
Celsius 233
Morocco Bama
May 20, 2011
I’m with suspenders on this one…
Of course you are, and I don’t blame you. Most mortals have to be to get through the day…..to wake up the next morning….to convince themselves that there is a bright future and that this experiment called human life has some kind of meaning and is a worthwhile venture.
…And the rest as well.
==============================
I get your point. Given that the future is a constant stream of possibilities; nothing is fixed. Your parable is the most obvious result of the present predilection, but hardly the only possibility. Cheers.
anon2525
Iceland is a great example of a country being lead to live beyond it’s [sic] resources and they almost bought it lock, stock, and barrel.
I’m not sure that “they almost bought it”–they bought it. Their economy had become enormously involved in the debt machine (AKA, the “financial” “industry”), but they did not control their currency the way that the u.s. does, that is, they were dependent on dollars and euros. So, their economic system crashed beyond the ability of their criminals to save themselves as was done in the u.s.* This lead to some of the criminals leaving the country. The people who remained have been forced to deal with reality, and, so far, they appear to have been doing that instead of like, say, Ireland, attempting to take on more debt to deny reality (extend&pretend).
It’s too late for us; we already drank the kool-aide.
What is informative is to notice that in Iceland the gov’t. has been putting these (IMF) measures up for vote by the population. In the u.s., the TARP was not put up for vote by the population–it would have been defeated. Likewise, the re-writing of the accounting rules or the fake “stress” tests of Geithner or the multiple trillions spent by Bernanke. We, the people, did not drink the kool-aid. The political&economic machine is being driven/controlled by criminals.
*And the u.s. criminals likely would not have gotten away–so far–with what they have done if they hadn’t had the example of the 1930s to teach them how to continue stealing.
David Kowalski
The “logic” for getting rid of Medicare is impeccable.
1) Medicare, unlike Social Security has no earnings cap. For the truly rich, Medicare is a much bigger burden than Social Security. An individual “earning” $10 million per year pays Medicare of at least 1.45% on the entire amount.Thus, $1,450 for the first $100,000 but a total of $145,000 for $10 million. Or $1,450,000 for $100,000,000 or $14.5 million for a cool billion. Double those figures for the self employed. By contrast, the Social Security individual contribution cap is under $7,000 even if raised for inflation. $7,000 vs. $14.5 million?
2) There is a lucrative sub-market for the insurance of the elderly. Figure at least a 20% overhead.
3) Social Security is running a surplus. In the short term (which is the major concern for these creeps), it may be convenient to keep it.
4)Medicare demands a medium term fix. Any fix would likely soak the wealthiest. The “life span” given out is now 13 years. Raising the rate to say $1.75% for the employee and 1.75% for the employer? Never discussed by the Villagers.
5) Because wealthier retirees live substantially longer, Social Security is actually a good deal for many of the wealthy. This is especially true if the cap is kept intact and the retirement age is raised. The gap would only increase if Medicare is gutted and changed to a voucher program.
Celsius 233
anon2525 PERMALINK
May 20, 2011
Iceland is a great example of a country being lead to live beyond it’s [sic] resources and they almost bought it lock, stock, and barrel.
I’m not sure that “they almost bought it”–they bought it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Agreed; but they didn’t buy the standard IMF “fix”, thereby sucking it up (dealing with reality).
===============================
It’s too late for us; we already drank the kool-aide.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Pardon my all inclusive “we”; but given “we” weren’t given a choice, as you say, then we remained passengers on the bus, so-to-speak. The country was forced to bail out the crooks obviating any chance to change directions and get it right.
Iceland made the right corrective decisions for it’s future; unlike the U.S.
The Icelandic people seem to be a well grounded lot unlike the remaining first world countries and I like that sanity still prevails there. Cheers.
anon2525
Iceland made the right corrective decisions for it’s [sic] future…
I’m hoping that someone can shed some light on how it was that Iceland’s gov’t. behaved differently from Ireland’s. Why did their gov’t. put up for a vote the ECB proposal, which the gov’t. supported? My guess is that it comes back to their small population–corruption of the gov’t. hadn’t gotten bad enough to completely subvert democracy.
The Icelandic people seem to be a well grounded lot unlike the remaining first world countries…
If by “first world countries,” you mean the socioeconomic governing class that doesn’t see itself as having to pay for the bailouts that they will impose on the lower economic class, then, yes, the people of Iceland are more grounded.
anon2525
Most of of the 19th and 20th century countries had capital controls and they worked fine.
For those who are interested, Nicholas Shaxson was interviewed* on Democracy Now! on April 15th (“tax day” in the u.s.) about his new book Treasury Islands:
Shaxon: “And looking at the history of this, Wall Street, after the Second World War, they were—after the Bretton Woods agreement, 1946, there was a cooperative international order set up where capital was tightly controlled around the world. Wall Street was very firmly put in its place. And, you know, there were very high taxes on the wealthy. And for about a quarter of a century, this system more or less worked out, and capital was quite tightly constrained. It was also an era of very high, broad-based economic growth, not just in the United States, but around the world. What happened during that period, though, was that the banks, Wall Street, in particular, didn’t—obviously didn’t like these curbs, didn’t like the Glass-Steagall Act that was separating commercial from investment banking, didn’t like interest rate caps, didn’t like these controls. And essentially, they went off to London. And in London, the Bank of England and the city of London said, basically, “You bring your money here, and you can do what you like. You don’t—we’re not going to worry about Glass-Steagall. We’re not going to worry about interest rate caps.” And so, what happened is Wall Street piled into London from about the ’60s onwards, and that really marked the unraveling of—part of the unraveling of the Bretton Woods arrangements.” (emphasis added)
*Offshore Banking and Tax Havens Have Become Heart of Global Economy
anon2525
about his new book Treasury Islands
Correction: Shaxson’s book is titled Treasure Islands, not Treasury. The full title is Treasure Islands: Uncovering the Damage of Offshore Banking and Tax Havens.
Celsius 233
anon2525
May 20, 2011
If by “first world countries,” you mean the socioeconomic governing class that doesn’t see itself as having to pay for the bailouts that they will impose on the lower economic class, then, yes, the people of Iceland are more grounded.
================================
Yup, them’s the ones!
As to your question regarding the difference between Iceland and Ireland; your answer seems about right.
It’s interesting to note that the country I live in is ranked 84th in corruption according to Forbes; my observation/experience is that it’s so endemic here, that it will never be eliminated. I don’t like it but it is generally acknowledged by all concerned with the tacit understanding; business as usual…
Cheers.
Formerly T-Bear
Chancing a presentation of news that collide with favoured cockamamy, El País (translated to english) reports on the emergence of the 15 M(ayo) demonstrations in Madrid and other cities across Spain, patterned on the Icelandic experience.
http://www.presseurop.eu/en/content/article/663631-spains-icelandic-revolt (h/t The Automatic Earth)
The demonstrations in Greece have the same genesis as well (the return of the current Greek government to power is fraught with difficulties). Ireland’s (more right) Fina Gael coalition (as opposed to centre right Fianna Fail) has a one-off chance at the brass ring of retaining power, failure to address the economy and issues of debt will leave it in the dustbins of history, but that is small spuds to a national economy down the toilet.
Spain is having elections in many of the autonomic regions this Sunday, the public displeasure with the economic crisis looks to damage severely the dominant Socialist party, expected to loose heavily across Spain, the Prime Minister (head of parliament) Zapatero has announced he is not up for re-election at the end of his term (Zapatero is the only socialist Prime Minister of any major European country, all others are in the control of centre-right and rightist political parties – good luck finding an alternative economic model there).
For the more adventurous, follow the “Read More” links at the translation of El País. Otherwise keep repeating the drivel from NYT and Washington.Compost – see how far that gets your comments consideration.
anon2525
Folks, if you’re going to riot, go riot where the politicians and bankers are. March on their mansions, and have your fights with the cops there.
Quick! Somebody buy Ian Welsh a ticket to Spain. They don’t know how to protest effectively, either.
Spain: Protesters defy ban with anti-government rallies
Start actually taxing the rich.
Even better, as economist Dean Baker has argued*, rewrite and enforce the laws so that they don’t get rich in the first place, for example, through monopolistic practices:
A serious long-term progressive agenda must move away from a focus on tax-and-transfer policy and instead concentrate on changing the rules that lead to undesirable market outcomes. We must be as aggressive and creative as the Right in designing new rules that redistribute income downward rather than upward. And, we must bury the concept of “free market fundamentalism.” There are no free market fundamentalists in this debate, just conservatives who want to pretend that their rules are the natural working of the market. Progressives should not help them in this effort.
*The Myth of Free-Market Fundamentalism
Celsius 233
Formerly T-Bear PERMALINK
May 21, 2011
======================
Yeah, that’s what I’m talking about! Thanks for the source; duly bookmarked.
Formerly T-Bear
Final comment this subject: Al Jazeera reports on the Spanish demonstrations and protests. Do note that Spanish law prohibits political activities starting 24 hours before an election through the completion of that election, which puts the demonstrators into a legally precarious position, but not as reported defiance above (shows BBC’s authoritarian environment). However, the governmental authorities are looking away to keep the situation from becoming inflamed through strict application of the law. Terribly good judgment, should my opinion be asked.
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2011/05/20115220573931383.html
Did just cast a ballot in local elections, for i.u. (Izquierda Unida) if that matters, the youth are not going to get any effective answers from the political right for their needs. P.S.O.E (socialist workers party) was my strong second choice, for that matter. Did I ever mention that many countries in Europe, if you are a legal resident you are given the ability to vote in local elections? How is that for civilized society?
Celsius 233
Formerly T-Bear
May 22, 2011
======================
The more I hear about Europe the better I like it. For better or worse; I’ll finish out my time in the Land of Smiles. Cheers.
anon2525
Some of the Spanish understand that representative democracy has broken down there, as it has in the u.s.
Democracy Now! interview
IVAN MARTINOZ: …People feel outraged by the political class. That’s something I’d like to say, because we believe, in our movement, this is not against the Zapatero government or the PSOE. This is against the whole political class. We’ve come to a point in which we don’t feel represented by them, which is what we pay them for. And we have seen that it’s not a matter of asking them to represent us or to tell them to please do what they should do, but we have to force them, because they, on their own, are not going to do what they have to do.
This was repeated several times during the interview. It remains to be seen what it will take for sufficient people in the u.s. to see that the same applies here. Even Democracy Now! appears not to understand the nature of the problem as their headline claims that it is “unemployment” and “budget cuts” that are the cause of the problem rather than the effect of the lack of representative democracy.