Earlier quoted context omitted.
Explain why the EU (and countries like Germany) impose tight limits on budget deficits.
Sure! First you will have to support your claim that they do so.
Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
191–200 of 273 posts
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Class warfare is pointless. The position of the capitalist class, built on successful class warfare first against the pre-capitalist aristocracy and then against the working classes within capitalism, proves this to be false. As, for that matter, does the (arguably modest, but still very real) progress of the working class from the height of the system first described as “capitalism” in the late 19th and early 20th…
>The position of the capitalist class, built on successful class warfare first against the pre-capitalist aristocracy and then against the working classes within capitalism, proves this to be false. Name me a socialist/communist gov that did any better. Each implementation grew the class divides even more. So far China, I would say, is the most economically viable model due to their opening to international market pr…
> Name me a socialist/communist gov that did any better.
America has done everything in their power to destroy democratic populist movements. If you do your research you'll find that anytime a South or Central American country attempted democratic socialist movements they were destroyed by the CIA. This pattern has been repeated throughout the world.
So, yeh, it is rare to find a successful socialist example because the largest capitalist economy destroys emerging socialist movements.
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#193Earlier quoted context omitted.
I guess I'm not seeing the difference between "the social safety net" and "money in people's hands." Technocratic means-tested programs are no substitute for giving people money and letting them spend it organically. Isn't that the point of a "free market" anyway? To let the market decide what is valuable? It's hard to accept any claim that constructing barriers makes social safety nets more effective. Giving people…
>The only way they can be different is if you think economic output would be significantly different if people weren't "forced" to work by making wages the only avenue of income. I do think economic output would be significantly different, regardless of how you "spread it around." A broader base of consumers will consume more. A broader base of entrepreneurs will expand economic development. Spreading the money aroun…
... I referenced very specifically which part to me is Randian. The sentiment that if we give people free money they will be lazy and sink into a life of dependence.
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#194Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It's not like that's the only solution that's been floated. Stimulus checks would have kept people out of poverty too. You're right, but the implications of the GGP comment's phrasing imply they wouldn't have liked that solution. IMHO, in some quarters, the weeping and gnashing of teeth about the costs mandatory social distancing (up to and including stay at home orders) directly flows from the rejection of governm…
That's not the only choice. Focusing protection on the vulnerable while allowing the rest of society to function could've spared us both from the worst of the pandemic's destruction and the economic destruction -- "economic" is a bit of a misnomer too. There is a greater cost to lockdowns than just economics. Mental and physical health also suffer. Those that can't get preventative care they need suffer. Depressed pe…
> That's not the only choice. Focusing protection on the vulnerable while allowing the rest of society to function could've spared us both from the worst of the pandemic's destruction and the economic destruction --
That's an unrealistic idea. You can't have unchecked community spread and "focus protection on the vulnerable," without literally imprisoning them in an isolation bubble for a year or more, which is far longer than the successful lockdowns have lasted. There are places in the world that have already opened up, virus free.
The rule with this pandemic seems to be: the more half-ass you are at controlling it, the more pain and expense you get.
> "economic" is a bit of a misnomer too. There is a greater cost to lockdowns than just economics. Mental and physical health also suffer. Those that can't get preventative care they need suffer. Depressed people and those with anxiety who turn to drugs, alcohol and suicide suffer.
If you really cared so much about people's "mental and physical health," why are you advocating a policy that wouldn't lessen it, but rather concentrate the damage and increase the burden to on the vulnerable?
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where in my comment did I say the federal government should have enacted a national lockdown? My complaint was the lack of a real plan. They left the states to fend for themselves without the level of guidance, coordination, or financial support that was needed for a proper response. >State governments have the power to pay people to stay home. They might have to shift funding from other areas or raise taxes in order…
> Most states are run on a deficit This is not true. All the states except Vermont have a legal requirement of a balanced budget. https://www.ncsl.org/research/fiscal-policy/state-balanced-b...
I phrased that poorly. However there is also a difference between what these rules require and what you are stating. A proposed balanced budget isn't the same as a balanced budget in practice. And to quote your linked article:
>State balanced budget requirements in practice refer to operating budgets and not to capital budgets. Operating budgets include annual expenditures--such items as salaries and wages, aid to local governments, health and welfare benefits, and other expenditures that are repeated from year to year. State capital expenditure, mainly for land, highways, and buildings, is largely financed by debt
It is much easier to balance the budget when you ignore all those capital expenses.
Also there are other complexities involved. You can look at what happened in Illinois a few years back as an example. They basically didn't have an official state budget for multiple years. That didn't stop them from racking up costs and debt. It contributed to a debt crisis that the state is still trying to claw its way out of.
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The only way they can be different is if you think economic output would be significantly different if people weren't "forced" to work by making wages the only avenue of income. I do think economic output would be significantly different, regardless of how you "spread it around." A broader base of consumers will consume more. A broader base of entrepreneurs will expand economic development. Spreading the money aroun…
... I referenced very specifically which part to me is Randian. The sentiment that if we give people free money they will be lazy and sink into a life of dependence.
>... I referenced very specifically which part to me is Randian. The sentiment that if we give people free money they will be lazy and sink into a life of dependence.
I'm not GGP who argued against UBI. Nor did I make any argument for or against UBI.
And I didn't make any argument even approaching "if we give people free money they will be lazy and sink into a life of dependence."
In fact, my argument was that if we make the safety net robust, we will allow people to be more productive and entrepreneurial.
I'm not sure who you're arguing with, but it's not me. Are you sure you replied to the right comment?
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#197Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which Scandinavian countries are socialist? The workers don't own the means of production. In general the Scandinavian countries are capitalist with strong safety nets.
> Which Scandinavian countries are socialist? The workers don't own the means of production. In general the Scandinavian countries are capitalist with strong safety nets. That's what we're calling socialism nowadays (e.g. pretty much anything that's not laissez faire capitalism). That mushiness is what leads some people to think they can condemn social democracy with the example of Soviet central planning.
> That's what we're calling socialism nowadays
It is (and even the more moderate forms found in other parts of the developed West including the US are) also what Karl Marx called “socialism”, though of a subtype (“bourgeois socialism”) of which he explicitly disapproved as doomed to reinforce and revert to, rather than defeat, the dominant system of his day which he labelled “capitalism”.
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#198Earlier quoted context omitted.
>The blame for the situation lies squarely at the feet of the state and local governments. The federal government didn't force any businesses to close. The state and local government had to act entirely because the federal government had no real plan. Someone is going to fill the decision making vacuum, but it is a problem when the people making the decisions don't have the financial power to make the right decision.…
You appear to be laboring under a misconception. The responsibility to act on public health measures has always been primarily at the state and local levels. Under our federal system, the federal government doesn't even really have legal authority to order lockdown measures. Granted the federal response has been an appalling mix of corruption and incompetence, but the federal role is mostly just advisory anyway. Stat…
> State governments have the power to pay people to stay home. They might have to shift funding from other areas or raise taxes in order to do so.
But they don't have the money to do so. Plans like that require deficit spending, which the federal government can do but the states can't.
Your alternative suggestions are not serious ideas. Do you really think the states could find the money to pay people to stay home by levying taxes on basically those same payments?
Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#199Re: Nearly 8M Americans have fallen into poverty since summer
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure! First you will have to support your claim that they do so.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stability_and_Growth_Pact
Those limits exist for the same reason the US can't just spend as much money as we want it to -- the threat of runaway inflation. If one member state spends "too much" (i.e., injects "too much" money into circulation), it challenges and threatens the economic capacity of other member states because it devalues the Euro because the Euro is less scarce than it was. And there are no "EU taxes," only taxes paid to each member state separately. So controlling the monetary policy, and particularly the amount of money in circulation, is a little more complex than would be expected in a homogenous economy. So tolerances for "errant" behavior are a little tighter. But I wouldn't call those limits "tight" in the grand scheme of things.
It's a bit like telling people to stay home during the pandemic -- most people will do it faithfully so that the few that act out can be accounted for and will have a smaller impact than if no controls were in place.
We should note that the economy before the pandemic started is very differently managed to the one after. The economy was relatively predictable compared to today, so the tolerances shrunk somewhat to reflect that. You will note that the EU lifted those limits at the start of the pandemic and have come together to redefine a short- and medium-term policy to account for the circumstances.