Quote:
Originally Posted by Noreen1
All fair points.
However, surely you agree that this situation needs to be addressed?
|
Absolutely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noreen1
At the moment, the markets are dictating Government policy, whilst ignoring, or overcompensating for their own errors in the past.
Meanwhile, appeasing the markets has become the mantra for Government policy, while Governments also ignore the mistakes made by markets in the past.
Then there is the other elephant in the room - light touch regulation, by so many Governments - all at the same time!!
(Or, more pandering to a different group of moneylenders, if you like!)
How was it even possible for that to happen?
|
Simple enough, unfortunately. The banks are the creators of money, just as the markets are the distributors of it. More money looking for somewhere to go means more investment means more growth. It's extremely tempting as long as one forgets that cancer is also growth - that not all growth is either sustainable or desirable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noreen1
We essentially have a situation where an entire Continent is teetering on the brink of collapse, and the best thing our Governments can come up with, after four years, is more austerity, in perpetuity - whilst doing nothing to address the control held by either the bondholders, or the Banks.
|
It's no more "austerity in perpetuity" than it was a boom in perpetuity, although the one is a mirror of the other.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noreen1
Keynesian economics has failed the citizens of the EU, helped along by inept Governments.
Therefore, should we not seek to find a better economic model, whether that is adapting Keynesian economics, or introducing a different school of economics, that doesn't rely on perpetual growth, which we all know, cannot happen constantly, and certainly not when austerity measures continue to reduce the spending power of the consumer.
Such an adjustment would be difficult - yet, it is necessary.
Nevertheless, all we ever seem to hear is an analysis on how to attempt, unsuccessfully, for the most part, to appease the markets.
|
That wasn't Keynesian economics! Keynesianism is anti-cyclic, that was pro-cyclic - spend it while you've got it and tomorrow be damned.
cordially,
Scofflaw