There are many different ways to confront the rich. Special taxation is one America has a long history of using. Putin might have different ideas. I was using the term in it's most general sense.
I'm no economic theorist, so I'm talking a bit out of school, but austerity implies that the government will limit spending to balance it's budget.. But if it does so during a time of economic hardship, the poor pay the heaviest price. In my limited POV money and the markets exist to serve mankind, not the other way around. A government should never sacrifice its people to balance its books. Like money and markets, the gov should exist for its people, otherwise it's a failure.
Austerity has its place and time. At this time it is not appropriate. Austerity should not be used to bail-out the rich, but leaders who are too weak to make the hard decisions will embrace austerity. What hard decisions? They must confront the rich and do what is best for society. Wealth doesn't do us any good if it's horded.
@hcarter75: That's possible. But don't rule out any number of other reasons. Cost, public appeal, corporate capture come to mind. It would be interesting to find out what the story is. Maybe you should look into it.
Interesting that the French should develop this - a highly social democracy. They will capture the market leaving American capitalism far behind. It is obvious to me that only highly regulated, competitive capitalism (not the slit-your-own-peoples-throat monopoly capitalism we have now in America) will produce productive results beneficial to the society and the country.
I WANT ONE!!!
jesebsp 1 week ago
@DojoNDude "That's possible. But don't rule out any number of other reasons"
It's a stupid con is THE reason
fizzguts 1 year ago
@hcarter75
There are many different ways to confront the rich. Special taxation is one America has a long history of using. Putin might have different ideas. I was using the term in it's most general sense.
DojoNDude 1 year ago
@hcarter75
I'm no economic theorist, so I'm talking a bit out of school, but austerity implies that the government will limit spending to balance it's budget.. But if it does so during a time of economic hardship, the poor pay the heaviest price. In my limited POV money and the markets exist to serve mankind, not the other way around. A government should never sacrifice its people to balance its books. Like money and markets, the gov should exist for its people, otherwise it's a failure.
DojoNDude 1 year ago
@hcarter75
Austerity has its place and time. At this time it is not appropriate. Austerity should not be used to bail-out the rich, but leaders who are too weak to make the hard decisions will embrace austerity. What hard decisions? They must confront the rich and do what is best for society. Wealth doesn't do us any good if it's horded.
DojoNDude 1 year ago
@hcarter75: That's possible. But don't rule out any number of other reasons. Cost, public appeal, corporate capture come to mind. It would be interesting to find out what the story is. Maybe you should look into it.
DojoNDude 1 year ago
Interesting that the French should develop this - a highly social democracy. They will capture the market leaving American capitalism far behind. It is obvious to me that only highly regulated, competitive capitalism (not the slit-your-own-peoples-throat monopoly capitalism we have now in America) will produce productive results beneficial to the society and the country.
DojoNDude 1 year ago