If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   Spain's labor unions "have enjoyed a social prestige and power that was not seen anywhere else in Europe." Yet Spain's unemployment rate is over 24%, highest in the eurozone. Can you explain that?   (usatoday.com) divider line 153
    More: Interesting, Spain, Europe, Francisco Franco, Spanish Civil War, protectionist, public good  
•       •       •

1255 clicks; posted to Politics » on 11 Jun 2012 at 4:04 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



153 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-06-11 06:42:49 AM

Ablejack: Scandinavian countries have the strongest unions in the world. They also have strong and stable economies. Perhaps there are some other factors.


It's always nice to use Scandinavia as an example to show the reality of how a fair amount of socialism can actually help your country do better overall, and doesn't necessarily lead to some nightmarish dystopia from 1984, but when you talk with a conservative about this their only response is "The numbers don't really matter, America is still the world's #1 superpower, just look at how we enjoy all the freedoms that they don't!"... there is a reason why Finland is #1 in Education and we are something like #17, and I'm pretty sure it's not because they focus on cutting school programs and teacher pay in the name of "freedom". And just look at how batshiat insane Texas is when it comes to writing textbooks... creationism? removal of Thomas Jefferson? They don't care about facts or history, they've manufactured their own fantasy world they want everyone else to live in. It's insane.
 
2012-06-11 06:43:30 AM

Shadowknight: o5iiawah: Then it sounds like Spain needs more industry, less government workers that cripple the private sector, reduced public benefits and a higher retirement age.

Industry, maybe, but how the hell would taking the social safety net away really help anything? The reason people have been able to survive unemployment brought on by austerity and lacking export industry (itself brought on by generations of stagnating and uncaring extremist facism). Even as desperate as the situation is for some, life is still enjoyed and able to be lived.


Because if we don't make the poor pull themselves up by their bootstraps, Marx wins.
 
2012-06-11 06:47:40 AM

NobleHam: Chimperror2:
The real world is that the Chinese workers get paid a lot less than US and European workers and until the stability in China makes the risk worse, capital will continue to flee. The more socialist and "Keynesian" a country is, the faster it's economy will collapse. The bubble today is that Spain an Greece are riskier places to invest in factories than China.

They are not farked because of unions and socialism, they are only farked faster because of unions.

Governments cannot spend their way to prosperity. Capitalism is egalitarian and until the standard of living in China and the west come be on par, the west is fooling themselves about being able to "stimulate" the economy. All they will do is increase orders in china, not create jobs in the west. In the end, that debt has to be paid and it goes to one place.

BTW, if you saw the article on all the warships being sent to APAC, it was to make western companies raise the risk level of investing in those countries. That's hardball economics.

First off, you do realize that China is arguably the most Keynesian country out there, right? Their government has stimulated their economy with massive spending in construction, infrastructure, etc. Most companies in China are still at least partially government owned. We can argue the wisdom of that for China, if you want, but it sort of makes your "Keynes bad because China" point moot.

Furthermore, if you're right then austerity is still a bad policy. Government may not be able to make up for the loss of capital to China, but stimulus spending can provide a buffer until things are equalized. While private capital flees, the government can make up some of the difference.

Lastly, "that debt" does not go only to one place. China hardly owns more of our debt than Japan, and Americans still own most of our public debt.


I just took the train from tianjin to shenyang. At a modest clip of 119 mph.
In fact there is a thousands year old saying in China that if you want prosperity you gotta fix the roads first. You do realise, Mr. Chimperror, that China's heavy investment in education essentially subsidizes any US industry that needs smart people.
The current popular narrative that somehow things will be more egalitarian if we allow our domestc markets to dry up is pure onanism. You cant grow withou investment in people and the things that sustain them. Once the US has been exhausted as a "human resource," you will see the wisdom of ignoring the demand side.
 
2012-06-11 06:48:34 AM
Spain's labor unions "have enjoyed a social prestige and power that was not seen anywhere else in Europe." Yet Spain's unemployment rate is over 24%, highest in the eurozone. Can you explain that?

I think it speaks for itself.
 
2012-06-11 06:51:24 AM

tony41454: Spain's labor unions "have enjoyed a social prestige and power that was not seen anywhere else in Europe." Yet Spain's unemployment rate is over 24%, highest in the eurozone. Can you explain that?

I think it speaks for itself.


I don't know what everyone is talking about. I can't get a good view of the forest with all these damn trees in the way.
 
2012-06-11 06:59:42 AM

tony41454: Spain's labor unions "have enjoyed a social prestige and power that was not seen anywhere else in Europe." Yet Spain's unemployment rate is over 24%, highest in the eurozone. Can you explain that?

I think it speaks for itself.


It certainly speaks for you.
 
2012-06-11 07:01:35 AM

NobleHam: Chimperror2:
The real world is that the Chinese workers get paid a lot less than US and European workers and until the stability in China makes the risk worse, capital will continue to flee. The more socialist and "Keynesian" a country is, the faster it's economy will collapse. The bubble today is that Spain an Greece are riskier places to invest in factories than China.

They are not farked because of unions and socialism, they are only farked faster because of unions.

Governments cannot spend their way to prosperity. Capitalism is egalitarian and until the standard of living in China and the west come be on par, the west is fooling themselves about being able to "stimulate" the economy. All they will do is increase orders in china, not create jobs in the west. In the end, that debt has to be paid and it goes to one place.

BTW, if you saw the article on all the warships being sent to APAC, it was to make western companies raise the risk level of investing in those countries. That's hardball economics.

First off, you do realize that China is arguably the most Keynesian country out there, right? Their government has stimulated their economy with massive spending in construction, infrastructure, etc. Most companies in China are still at least partially government owned. We can argue the wisdom of that for China, if you want, but it sort of makes your "Keynes bad because China" point moot.

Furthermore, if you're right then austerity is still a bad policy. Government may not be able to make up for the loss of capital to China, but stimulus spending can provide a buffer until things are equalized. While private capital flees, the government can make up some of the difference.

Lastly, "that debt" does not go only to one place. China hardly owns more of our debt than Japan, and Americans still own most of our public debt.


Keynesian economics works only when the private sector can benefit and multiply on the spending. If there is no intrinsic value, then it will fail. Examples such as building rail and road to places that can use it works. Building a new school in a place that doesn't need it or a bridge to nowhere , doesn't work. Keynesian spending has to create something useful, not just create it. Chinese spending attracted capital. Western stimulus spending did not.. Whence, more debt but same unemployment and no growth

China dumped our debt because it wil collapse and they know it. Why hold dollar debt when the dollar will weaken against their own currency? Right now the West maintains it's standard of living through borrowing and It is not sustainable. Eventually the debt will grow too high to support stimulus and we will devalue the dollar and see inflation (i.e.lower standard of living). Inflation is how the debt pronlem gets solved by the market.

The reality is simple: an auto/chip/textile worker in China is just as skilled and knowledgeable as one in the west. Either the west's standard of living for those workers will drop to the level of those in China or the Chinese standard of living will rise. They will meet, though barring some change in the risk/reward ratio.

Spain and Greece are about to face this as their currency will devalue until the above is true. They may evenfall below China if civil unrest makes them even less attractive. They EU can prolong it but not stop it. In the end it will be a race to the bottom and the EU will need to jettison them to survive.
 
2012-06-11 07:01:53 AM

randomjsa: You cannot pay people more than they deliver in terms of profit for a company.


Does this go for investors as well??
 
2012-06-11 07:12:09 AM
Anyone comparing unions between the US and Spain has no idea what they are talking about. They are not even close to the same type of organisation. Labour unions here are more similar to advocacy organisations as worker protection is safeguarded by a special division of the Spanish court system. Workers are just guaranteed to have the right to strike should they want, but the idea of compulsory membership due to working in a certain field is unheard of.

You also tend to join a union based on political affiliation, not job function. UGT (unión general de trabajadores) being generally socialist and CCOO (comisiones obradoras) being very leftist.

/American working in Spain
 
2012-06-11 07:26:51 AM

randomjsa: themindiswatching: Sounds like subby is butthurt about not having health insurance or a wage that's actually enough to live on.

/if you can't have those, no one can, amirite?

I have both and I'm not in a union.

At one time unions were absolutely needed as liberals will be quick to remind you of the old days of horrific working conditions, hours, and wages while they try to make you forget that was many decades ago.

The idea that people are "entitled" to certain wages and benefits just for working is also stupid. If the best job you can hold down is mopping floors and emptying the trash you are certainly entitled to be paid for that but the idea that your wage should be set higher than your work is actually worth so you can have a "living wage" and "health benefits" is insane and will ultimately drive anything to bankruptcy.

You cannot pay people more than they deliver in terms of profit for a company.


Can we ask Drew if he can put a stupid tag next to the other two?

/woulda clicked it for this comment
//and no I won't explain why, i don't think randomjsa would even try to understand any rebuttal
 
2012-06-11 07:31:36 AM

randomjsa: themindiswatching: Sounds like subby is butthurt about not having health insurance or a wage that's actually enough to live on.

/if you can't have those, no one can, amirite?

I have both and I'm not in a union.


And you're here all farking day. Tell us again how union workers are lazy.
 
2012-06-11 07:37:21 AM

kmmontandon: Yeah, it's because the ECB is demanding harsh austerity measures from a government that, prior to the 2007 crash caused by assholes building a securities bubble, had a balanced budget and was paying down their national debt.

Oh, gosh subby, was that not the reality-based answer that you were expecting? Should I talk about what a Commie Paul Krugman is, and say LOLStimufail, or some other anti-Keynesian bullshiat? Because no.

In the meantime, Germany is doing pretty damned good, thanks to a mix of fiscal sensibility, employer subsidies, and broad-based government investment in the private economy. See also: Sweden. Or don't, subby, because you might encounter the real f*cking world, and the Hayekian dildo you've been riding so hard would break.


Great rant. Some nonsense and of course the requisite left wing failure to recognize the contribution that far left policies contribute to economic stagnation, but still a great rant.

Hint: it's not austerity that is causing hard times now, it's the hangover from the unsustainable boom years.

And Germany is doing well now because they have an efficient liberalized economy that doesnt let unions extract as much economic rent as they do in countries like Spain and Greece.

You can recognize that a balance between social insurance and economic liberalization is necessary, and southern European countries have erred on the side of being too generous to entrenched labor interests, or you can continually stick your head in the sand and blame all economic problems on austerity.
 
2012-06-11 07:39:15 AM

themindiswatching: Sounds like subby is butthurt about not having health insurance or a wage that's actually enough to live on.

/if you can't have those, no one can, amirite?


That's the gist of it all. Oh my god, someone has better benefits and pay than I do. They should lose all that so we are equally miserable.
 
2012-06-11 07:40:39 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Hint: it's not austerity that is causing hard times now, it's the hangover from the unsustainable boom years.


Still Blaming Bush?
 
2012-06-11 07:45:49 AM
It's amazing how the bankers screw up the economies, but the first thing that these countries do is cut off services to poor people, instead of going after the bankers who causes the crashes and economic problems.
 
2012-06-11 07:46:22 AM

weave: Debeo Summa Credo: Hint: it's not austerity that is causing hard times now, it's the hangover from the unsustainable boom years.

Still Blaming Bush?


Was Bush president of Spain? Was bush a 16 year old kid in buttfark Spain who quit school in 2004 to go to work in the construction industry? Did bush go out and buy Spanish property in 2005 at bubble prices?

WTF does Bush have to do with Spain?
 
2012-06-11 07:48:12 AM

Without Fail: randomjsa: You cannot pay people more than they deliver in terms of profit for a company.

Does this go for investors as well??


Investors get whatever the residual profit is after all expenses, including wages, are paid.
 
2012-06-11 07:49:01 AM
OK, back on topic:

The banks' problems are losses in a real estate crash, but Spain's job woes are due largely to labor laws that protect older workers at the expense of younger ones, business experts say. Things won't change until Spain fixes the problem, they say.

"The unions have enjoyed a social prestige and power that was not seen anywhere else in Europe," said Mariano Guindal, a business analyst and author of a book on the pitfalls of the Spanish economic system, The Days We Lived Dangerously. "They were very politicized and were very protectionist of those who had jobs, but they didn't think about the jobless."

...When the [Franco] regime fell in 1975, Spain began passing laws to protect worker security and make it difficult for companies to modify the jobs of employees or lay off workers to survive poor economic times.

Governments also required companies to provide boosts in pay and benefits. As a result, older workers keep their jobs with high salaries in industries that can't modernize and compete, and younger workers aren't being hired because companies fear they cannot afford them in the long term.

The numbers tell the story. Spain's unemployment rate for younger workers, many with college degrees, is nearing 50%.


The only way a system like this can work is if there's a shiatload of explicit and implicit government subsidies for it. But if the money for those subsidies goes away...
 
2012-06-11 07:49:59 AM
I don't see what those two topics in the headline have to do with each other. Neither causation nor correlation.
US (no unions to speak of across huge areas of different businesses) = high unemployment
Germany (worker representation on the board of every company, very strong unions) = very low unemployment
Spain = well you know
 
2012-06-11 07:54:01 AM

AverageAmericanGuy: The way to get people off the government teat is to attach more people to the government teat.

Makes perfect sense.


And the alternative (ripping the government's teats out) is any better?
 
2012-06-11 07:55:28 AM

randomjsa: You cannot pay people more than they deliver in terms of profit for a company.


But you can always pay them less. And let's face it, we've been paying them less since at least the 1970's. The only people who don't think this are the ones profiting from it.
 
2012-06-11 08:00:42 AM
Taft-Hartley
 
2012-06-11 08:11:36 AM
Ok, runaway unions with unchecked power = BAD
Removing all unions until companys have nothing to keep them in check = ALSO BAD

Why cant you farking people understand? The concept of Balance is farking lost on this species.
 
2012-06-11 08:17:42 AM
done in farking one.


when you live inside your little fox news bubble, submittard, you don't get all the facts. this is why when you leave the bubble to spread your bullshiat, you get smacked down.
 
2012-06-11 08:19:09 AM
orclover

Ok, runaway unions with unchecked power = BAD
Removing all unions until companys have nothing to keep them in check = ALSO BAD

Why cant you farking people understand? The concept of Balance is farking lost on this species.



How do you get them to give up even some power?
 
2012-06-11 08:20:01 AM
This may be the most immediately satisfying thread I've ever posted in.
 
2012-06-11 08:25:45 AM
I can explain the difference between correlation and causation, if that helps.
 
2012-06-11 08:28:04 AM

randomjsa: themindiswatching: Sounds like subby is butthurt about not having health insurance or a wage that's actually enough to live on.

/if you can't have those, no one can, amirite?

I have both and I'm not in a union.

At one time unions were absolutely needed as liberals will be quick to remind you of the old days of horrific working conditions, hours, and wages while they try to make you forget that was many decades ago.

The idea that people are "entitled" to certain wages and benefits just for working is also stupid. If the best job you can hold down is mopping floors and emptying the trash you are certainly entitled to be paid for that but the idea that your wage should be set higher than your work is actually worth so you can have a "living wage" and "health benefits" is insane and will ultimately drive anything to bankruptcy.

You cannot pay people more than they deliver in terms of profit for a company.


Here's the problem with that mindset. If walmart pays someone $7.25 for 30 hours a week of work there is no way they can live and survive off that. Do you know what happens? WE make up the difference with welfare and food stamps. The federal government is subsidizing wal-mart's payroll. doesn't seem fair to me.
 
2012-06-11 08:32:29 AM

Shadowknight: Yeah, I live here in Spain, and pretty much what this guy said. Austerity measures combined with no real main export (olives and sherry, I guess) and only seasonal tourism has led to a lot of unemployment.


Sorry to say but you are extremely far south. Similar to judging the US by Mississippi. There is a fair amount of industrial activity in the North. Asturias, Cantabria, and Basque Country are actually fairly productive.
 
2012-06-11 08:40:27 AM
Germany certainly had a different way of dealing with its labor issues.

I'm not sure that would work (or be welcome) anywhere else...
 
2012-06-11 08:41:17 AM
Back in the day, lots of Spanish workers were paid under-the-table by bars, restaurants, etc.

They would collect unemployment, but then work for cash on the weekend.

Is that still going on?

/Salgan de mi cesped.
 
2012-06-11 08:48:47 AM
Unrelated,but I've been staring at the picture for days now, and haven't seen this done
i.chzbgr.com

/Yes, I have posted this identical post in a bunch of politics threads.
 
2012-06-11 08:51:08 AM

madnessupmysoul: Counterpoint: Supermarket.
If the floors at a supermarket are filthy, people won't be as tempted to go there and buy stuff. The supermarket loses a farkton of money. Therefore, we should be paying the people who keep the floor clean a lot more than they're getting now, because their job is worth a farkton of money.


Counter-counter point: Cleaning floors isn't skilled labor. You can teach pretty much anyone to do at least a competent job at it. Therefore, supply and demand comes into play: There is plenty of supply (people able to clean floors), and a fairly low demand, so the price the supermarkets have to pay to hire someone to do that is low.

Now, look at the flip side of that: Say, someone who manages the store. Not every one can do that effectively. It's a skilled position that encompasses a lot of different areas (accounting, HR, scheduling, etc.). Therefore while the demand is even lower than for floor-cleaners, the supply of workers who can do the job competently is *MUCH* lower. Therefore, you have to pay more to get a competent person in that job.
 
2012-06-11 08:55:30 AM

dittybopper: madnessupmysoul: Counterpoint: Supermarket.
If the floors at a supermarket are filthy, people won't be as tempted to go there and buy stuff. The supermarket loses a farkton of money. Therefore, we should be paying the people who keep the floor clean a lot more than they're getting now, because their job is worth a farkton of money.

Counter-counter point: Cleaning floors isn't skilled labor. You can teach pretty much anyone to do at least a competent job at it. Therefore, supply and demand comes into play: There is plenty of supply (people able to clean floors), and a fairly low demand, so the price the supermarkets have to pay to hire someone to do that is low.

Now, look at the flip side of that: Say, someone who manages the store. Not every one can do that effectively. It's a skilled position that encompasses a lot of different areas (accounting, HR, scheduling, etc.). Therefore while the demand is even lower than for floor-cleaners, the supply of workers who can do the job competently is *MUCH* lower. Therefore, you have to pay more to get a competent person in that job.


But you can't pay more to get a competent person in that job when the damn Unions don't let you fire the incompetent wastrels actively bringing down your company's productivity.
 
2012-06-11 08:59:39 AM

rvabenji: randomjsa: themindiswatching: Sounds like subby is butthurt about not having health insurance or a wage that's actually enough to live on.

/if you can't have those, no one can, amirite?

I have both and I'm not in a union.

At one time unions were absolutely needed as liberals will be quick to remind you of the old days of horrific working conditions, hours, and wages while they try to make you forget that was many decades ago.

The idea that people are "entitled" to certain wages and benefits just for working is also stupid. If the best job you can hold down is mopping floors and emptying the trash you are certainly entitled to be paid for that but the idea that your wage should be set higher than your work is actually worth so you can have a "living wage" and "health benefits" is insane and will ultimately drive anything to bankruptcy.

You cannot pay people more than they deliver in terms of profit for a company.

Here's the problem with that mindset. If walmart pays someone $7.25 for 30 hours a week of work there is no way they can live and survive off that. Do you know what happens? WE make up the difference with welfare and food stamps. The federal government is subsidizing wal-mart's payroll. doesn't seem fair to me.


You're thinking about it incorrectly. If the fed govt eliminated food stamps/welfare, it wouldn't affect the supply of labor to walmart. In fact, by removing social safety nets, you would presumably increase the supply of labor as people formerly dependent on the government are now forced to seek more employment to survive.

There are negative ramifications to that obviously - I'm not advocating eliminating the safety net, just pointing out the error in your analysis.
 
2012-06-11 09:02:33 AM
[pirates_and_global_warming.jpg]
 
2012-06-11 09:07:53 AM
Haiti exports a lot of coffee. I conclude that coffee causes poverty.
 
2012-06-11 09:10:17 AM
Spain's labor unions "have enjoyed a social prestige and power that was not seen anywhere else in Europe." Yet Spain's unemployment rate is over 24%, highest in the eurozone. Can you explain that?

While I can not do so with the eloquence of kmmontandon, I can probably explain it in small enough words for the Subby to understand.

The unions have elevated power and prestige because the unemployment rate is so high. If everyone had a job, the rold of the unions would be minimized. However, if the only way to get a job you can live off of is through the unions, then the harder it is to get a job the more powerful they become. Kickbacks, bribes, and favoritism all increase as demand for jobs increases. That, in economic terms, is power. They may even be working to artificially keep that unemployment number high, I don't know enough about Spanish labor unions to say one way or the other. It wouldn't surprise me though.
 
2012-06-11 09:10:46 AM

kmmontandon: Yeah, it's because the ECB is demanding harsh austerity measures from a government that, prior to the 2007 crash caused by assholes building a securities bubble, had a balanced budget and was paying down their national debt.

Oh, gosh subby, was that not the reality-based answer that you were expecting? Should I talk about what a Commie Paul Krugman is, and say LOLStimufail, or some other anti-Keynesian bullshiat? Because no.

In the meantime, Germany is doing pretty damned good, thanks to a mix of fiscal sensibility, employer subsidies, and broad-based government investment in the private economy. See also: Sweden. Or don't, subby, because you might encounter the real f*cking world, and the Hayekian dildo you've been riding so hard would break.


Wonderful. I love it!

Done in one.
 
2012-06-11 09:11:51 AM
Rug Doctor

Join? My dear friend, they always were one and the same.
 
2012-06-11 09:16:38 AM
Yes, unions suck because they won us the five-day work week, the 8-hour work day, and gave the United States of America the highest standard of living in the entire world -- for about a generation. And since prosperity and security are such shiatty things, the capitalists decided to start tearing it down. Better to have a nation of fearful serfs who live from hand to mouth.
 
2012-06-11 09:17:02 AM

kmmontandon: Yeah, it's because the ECB is demanding harsh austerity measures from a government that, prior to the 2007 crash caused by assholes building a securities bubble, had a balanced budget and was paying down their national debt.

Oh, gosh subby, was that not the reality-based answer that you were expecting? Should I talk about what a Commie Paul Krugman is, and say LOLStimufail, or some other anti-Keynesian bullshiat? Because no.

In the meantime, Germany is doing pretty damned good, thanks to a mix of fiscal sensibility, employer subsidies, and broad-based government investment in the private economy. See also: Sweden. Or don't, subby, because you might encounter the real f*cking world, and the Hayekian dildo you've been riding so hard would break.


This truly is the Fark I fell in love with ten years ago.

well done sir.
 
2012-06-11 09:17:03 AM

Debeo Summa Credo: Investors get whatever the residual profit is after all expenses, including wages, are paid.


Only if "expenses" are defined as "anything that isn't paid to the investors." Of course, that's not what "expenses" means.
 
2012-06-11 09:18:20 AM

Gunther: kmmontandon: Yeah, it's because the ECB is demanding harsh austerity measures

Hey now, it's a proven fact that austerity is great for an economy! Sure, it's been tried dozens of times and has never worked once, but dammit, the theories the Austrian economists cooked up say it should work, and who are you gonna believe, them or that lying biatch reality?


Why do liberals love to demonstrate ignorance? Austerity has worked many times. 1930s Australia for one glaring example, exited the great depression way before the us. Most crashes pre new.deal were much shorter as well. In fact recessions have gotten longer the more government has tried a managed economy.
 
2012-06-11 09:20:57 AM

thurstonxhowell: Haiti exports a lot of coffee. I conclude that coffee causes poverty.


Maybe if they drank some of that coffee instead of selling it, they'd be a little more boot-strappy.
 
2012-06-11 09:21:30 AM

kmmontandon: Yeah, it's because the ECB is demanding harsh austerity measures from a government that, prior to the 2007 crash caused by assholes building a securities bubble, had a balanced budget and was paying down their national debt.

Oh, gosh subby, was that not the reality-based answer that you were expecting? Should I talk about what a Commie Paul Krugman is, and say LOLStimufail, or some other anti-Keynesian bullshiat? Because no.

In the meantime, Germany is doing pretty damned good, thanks to a mix of fiscal sensibility, employer subsidies, and broad-based government investment in the private economy. See also: Sweden. Or don't, subby, because you might encounter the real f*cking world, and the Hayekian dildo you've been riding so hard would break.


*applause.gif*
 
2012-06-11 09:22:19 AM

NobleHam: Chimperror2:
The real world is that the Chinese workers get paid a lot less than US and European workers and until the stability in China makes the risk worse, capital will continue to flee. The more socialist and "Keynesian" a country is, the faster it's economy will collapse. The bubble today is that Spain an Greece are riskier places to invest in factories than China.

They are not farked because of unions and socialism, they are only farked faster because of unions.

Governments cannot spend their way to prosperity. Capitalism is egalitarian and until the standard of living in China and the west come be on par, the west is fooling themselves about being able to "stimulate" the economy. All they will do is increase orders in china, not create jobs in the west. In the end, that debt has to be paid and it goes to one place.

BTW, if you saw the article on all the warships being sent to APAC, it was to make western companies raise the risk level of investing in those countries. That's hardball economics.

First off, you do realize that China is arguably the most Keynesian country out there, right? Their government has stimulated their economy with massive spending in construction, infrastructure, etc. Most companies in China are still at least partially government owned. We can argue the wisdom of that for China, if you want, but it sort of makes your "Keynes bad because China" point moot.

Furthermore, if you're right then austerity is still a bad policy. Government may not be able to make up for the loss of capital to China, but stimulus spending can provide a buffer until things are equalized. While private capital flees, the government can make up some of the difference.

Lastly, "that debt" does not go only to one place. China hardly owns more of our debt than Japan, and Americans still own most of our public debt.


Why is there such a misunderstanding of keynes on the left? It is like liberals see "increased government spending" and stop reading his theory. His theory calls for cut backs.during good times, never happens, and stimulus only at the deepest part of recession, not continued government spending during.the rebuild. What liberals and Europe are doing is not keynesian. They are simply continuously spending.
 
2012-06-11 09:25:08 AM
Religion is the cloak that evil men use to do as they please.
 
2012-06-11 09:25:12 AM

kmmontandon: Yeah, it's because the ECB is demanding harsh austerity measures from a government that, prior to the 2007 crash caused by assholes building a securities bubble, had a balanced budget and was paying down their national debt.

Oh, gosh subby, was that not the reality-based answer that you were expecting? Should I talk about what a Commie Paul Krugman is, and say LOLStimufail, or some other anti-Keynesian bullshiat? Because no.

In the meantime, Germany is doing pretty damned good, thanks to a mix of fiscal sensibility, employer subsidies, and broad-based government investment in the private economy. See also: Sweden. Or don't, subby, because you might encounter the real f*cking world, and the Hayekian dildo you've been riding so hard would break.


Tell us how you really feel.
 
2012-06-11 09:28:05 AM

HotIgneous Intruder: thurstonxhowell: Haiti exports a lot of coffee. I conclude that coffee causes poverty.

Maybe if they drank some of that coffee instead of selling it, they'd be a little more boot-strappy.


But no less shaky! *rimshot*
 
Displayed 50 of 153 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report