Public debt: bankruptcy of Greece ... who's next?

Current Economy and Sustainable Development-compatible? GDP growth (at all costs), economic development, inflation ... How concillier the current economy with the environment and sustainable development.
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 14/07/15, 09:55

chatelot16 wrote:
Did67 wrote:You forget that individually, each company has every interest in automating! [as it is in its interest not to bear the ecological costs of its activity, which are "shared" - see health!]

And that if a government would force them, they relocate ...!


it's not as technical reason was that grow automate ... it's also because tax! manual labor is heavily taxed ... the electronic equipment made in china to automate happen without tax by ebay or aliexpress


I did not say it was technical.

All the opposite. If you read, you'll see that I'm doing a macro-economic comparison, as I just rewrote it!

Each company has interest - point bar: for economic reasons (costs) + for political reasons (robots do not strike) + for regulatory reasons (labor law: they work day and night and holidays) + for fiscal reasons (no charges on robots - remember that Rocard had analyzed that there is more than 20 years, maybe 30, by creating the CSG!)

And I repeat, as a consumer, we all benefit: there would not be the over-abundance of products without it.

But as employees or retirees, we lose: our job, our retirement stagnates or decreases in relative value ...

Yet it's the same people!

And I don't think that these are "management errors" in the sense that no government can, for the moment, escape the "system".

Should be rich as Swiss, Monegasque or Lichtensteinois! [In passing, the observers will notice that Monaco uses the euro: it is not the euro the problem, but how one is on the world chessboard; tax havens in euros, there have been; Luxembourg too ... Fools are all on the back of the euro, and put it in the c ... to the elbow!]
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 14/07/15, 10:01

bamboo wrote:Not 80% of businessmen ...


I have written it :

- there are those who are really to stay in Europe, especially businessmen, to circulate freely their capital [they know very well that if they want to buy a BMW, they would need a wheelbarrow of drachmas and with that, in Munich, we will laugh at them!]

- and there is the "people", who want to eat tomorrow; aid from Europe is the only way for banks to reopen quickly without losing value in the short term (otherwise, it is a virtual drachma, which will be worth 50% of the euro); I don't think they are "for" (or maybe "against" for that matter); they want the banks to reopen so they say they want to ...

So I don't think 80% of Greeks are really "for".

There is a majority who accept ...

Besides, it can go wrong tomorrow! Let's wait and we'll see the "pros" ...
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 14/07/15, 10:47

Yes, the value of each commodity decreases as well as the human labor it incorporates ... which leads to an increase in the mass of merchandise to compensate for this unit loss of value ... except that in the end the number of consumers ends up decreasing ...
The same pattern is observed, as you have noted, between the immediate interest of the company and the general interest, in frontal contradiction.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
chatelot16
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6960
Registration: 11/11/07, 17:33
Location: Angouleme
x 264




by chatelot16 » 14/07/15, 11:09

Ahmed wrote: the immediate interest of the company and the general interest, in frontal contradiction.


this contradiction is proof that liberalism is incapable of managing the future

every free enterprise must optimize are immediate interest to survive

It is therefore absolutely not necessary to let all bosses govern: it will lead us to disaster by force of good management limited in the short term

it is imperative that powerful governments think of the future

and alas the current democracy is worthless: the election too raproché do that the elu think too much about their election: so think short term also

at other times King and dictator thought much longer term than the current rulers

Fortunately, there was still some elected who thinks beyond their election ... but there is not alas enough

a new form of democracy is to be invented, but the current democracy makes so much mistake that it may be a dictator to get there
0 x
The shadow
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 171
Registration: 13/04/08, 15:16
x 2




by The shadow » 14/07/15, 12:09

Attention we are not in a democracy : Shock:
Since when the lie continues : Cry:
0 x
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 14/07/15, 12:15

chatelot16 wrote:
It is therefore absolutely not necessary to let all bosses govern: it will lead us to disaster by force of good management limited in the short term

it is imperative that powerful governments think of the future


Alas, the opposite is happening!

- see the supranational "systems", based on an internet: Google, Amazon and others ... They submit to whom? No one ! And find that normal!

Et we idolize them in more, which will not calm them!

Many, if not most, dream of imitating them!

- cf the "blackmail" for use openly practiced by the MEDEF; with some success ...

- see banks that organize tax evasion (UBS, HSBC, etc ...)

The list is long of "proofs" that the system goes against a regulation granted. How it goes against "happy degrowth" ... In short, it goes against the wall!

I have been developing here for years - sometimes without much success! - the idea that a deregulated economy benefits ... only the rich!

Apart from the Danes (it seems!), Nowhere do people like to submit to regulations or agree to pay taxes, in return for all the goods and services they otherwise enjoy (more or less "equally", but always more equal than if it were the only criterion of "success", "wealth" which commanded ...)

I wrote elsewhere, I do not know where, that "to become civilized" is "to mutualize", "to share" ... The law of success is the law of the strongest, it is savagery ... Go explain that to a savage ready to eat his neighbor!
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 14/07/15, 12:28

A system can only "persevere in its being", that is to say follow what it tends towards and therefore oppose any regulation.
Of course, it is the beneficiaries of the system who embody this desire for deregulation, but they only act as agents of the system since they submit to its inclination.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
User avatar
Did67
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 20362
Registration: 20/01/08, 16:34
Location: Alsace
x 8685




by Did67 » 14/07/15, 16:25

Not sure you understood what you meant! Sorry. My conceptual limits ...

But I am not convinced of the "linearity" of the evolution of human societies ...

There seem to me to be phases of growth of "civilization", phases of decline, cycles ...

As if the man (finally men) was complicated, not clear, agitated, contradictory. I want peace but I let in a terrible war by a schizophrenic barker ... I rebel against a dictatorship to put in place another in the name of an ideal ..; I lock myself into a sect in the name of a need for absolute ... I flee in drugs because freedom scares me ...

Etc., etc...

I doubt a "linearity" kind we go inevitably towards this ... And ej do not say that the state of our society today is worse than that experienced by my father ... Besides, yesterday , I'll be dead already!

But it's just felt.
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963




by Ahmed » 14/07/15, 19:13

Sorry to be clearer, I will try to fix it!

Linearity is expressed, as you have noted, only within the operating time corresponding to a given system and, even within this time different phases can be manifested: formal changes intended to overcome minor contradictions in order to better "persevere" on the substance (eg "sustainable development").
Systems are destined to appear, develop (or abort), then disappear.
So, there is no contradiction between us, except a slightly different point of view of the same thing ... 8)
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Re: Public debt: bankruptcy of Greece ... who's next?




by Christophe » 02/07/20, 11:55

What is unheard of is above all the very foundation of privatized public debts ...

Court of Auditors: "Twenty points of GDP more in the space of a year, it's unheard of"

While the public debt soars, the Court of Auditors calls on the government to "a long-term effort". Our journalist Béatrice Mathieu deciphers the Court report.

Consequence of the coronavirus crisis: the government expects a historic recession of -11% this year, with public debt swelling to nearly 121% of gross domestic product (GDP), before a rebound in the economy next year.

If the government is counting on the rebound in growth next year to reduce the debt and exclude any tax hikes, the Court of Auditors judges that "without recovery action, the deficit is likely to be very high for the long term (.. .). The debt trajectory would then not be under control. "


https://lexpansion.lexpress.fr//lexpans ... 29850.html

Is that so ? Was the debt trajectory under control before the coronavirus crisis? Let's be a little serious two minutes ... : Cheesy:
2 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Economy and finance, sustainability, growth, GDP, ecological tax systems"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 173 guests