Consequences of the economic crisis in figures in 2011

[Philippe Schutt]

I find it daring enough to speak of a crisis as we continue to consume like the sick and to favor luxury products over essential products.

[sen-no-sen]

I find it daring enough to speak of a crisis as we continue to consume like the sick and to favor luxury products over essential products.

Indeed, the term crisis is an abuse of language, and even more clearly, a hoax.
By definition, a crisis is an abrupt manifestation.
We find in nature many phenomena analogous to this type of situation: avalanche, iceberg overturning, but also biologically: heart attack, nerves, or socially revolution, coup d'état etc ...
It is therefore a relatively rapid and unsustainable phenomenon.
Now, what do you think of a crisis that has lasted for more than 5 years?

Quite simply that there is no crisis! But a desire to want to perpetuate a situation that can no longer hold.
We are in the same situation as sisyphus, we try again and again to push up growth, while this only tends to drop lower ...

But the crisis has a political advantage, it makes it possible to swallow anything up and remove citizens from real concerns, we did not do the same with "Al Qaida" during the post 11/09 period ...

[Philippe Schutt]

Without going into the conspiracy theory, I think we should determine the "normal" standard of living of a "normal" citizen. (a state president is not, whatever he claims)
We can also decide on our weekly working time, etc. After which, economic policy should be clearly defined, unless we set incompatible constraints, in which case we must discuss.
This discussion would not be made by unions, but only by individuals, by vote, poll, etc.
Moreover, in general, I find that the average citizen should have the opportunity to vote on each item of the state budget. I would be curious to know what the result would be for choices like aid to African countries, Greece etc ... all these billions spent without asking the opinion of people. Do governments act in the interest of the nation ???

[Ahmed]

Of course, the meaning of the word "crisis" has strayed far from its original meaning and we can regret it.
However, for want of anything better, it is used to designate a situation of increasing and lasting distortion between the aspirations of individuals and the functioning of the economy ...

The contradiction does not lie in the pursuit of unrestrained consumption or in the success of luxury products, on the contrary, it is completely in the logic of the system to increase consumption as much as possible and to favor within that these are the more profitable luxury items.

In reality, it is not the examination of this or that particularism that makes it possible to gauge the situation, but rather a global vision; thus, the “glorious thirties”, for example, would appear to be a period of rising wage bill coupled with frenzied post-colonialist extractivism, hence its temporary and local success.
The current headlong rush is only a desperate attempt to escape the logical determinisms to which, however, we cling blindly ...

* What is most regrettable is that this term of "crisis" refers to an observation which wants to be neutral, it would be, at most of an "accident", there is the deception!

[BobFuck]

Moreover, in general, I find that the average citizen should have the opportunity to vote on each item of the state budget.

If only...

You will take me back a little roundabout at 2M €?

[Philippe Schutt]

Oh no, "crisis" remains temporary as far as I'm concerned.
It is in the logic of politicians increase consumption as much as possible to give people the illusion that they are living better. They are the ones who set the operating framework for the production and consumption system. For example, a deterrent petroleum product tax to limit consumption. Or a VAT reduced to 2.1% on the press, for ... er ... opportunistic gift to journalists?

Rushing ahead current is an attempt to reduce the relative effect of debt. If the GDP were to reduce as in Spain, our situation would be even more dramatic than theirs, leaving with a higher relative debt.

The hoax is to have made people believe that everything was fine, with heavily deficit budgets, thus deferring the decisions to the following legislation.

[sen-no-sen]

They are the ones who set the operating framework for the production and consumption system. For example, a deterrent petroleum product tax to limit consumption.

Politicians no longer fix much, they just follow economic guidelines.
In fact, the role of a politician these days is quite simply to mask the constraints of the market with a discreet speech.
This fact is more and more glaring, for example, the current president bet on a rate of 20% growth over the next 5 years! dreamlike!
This is a flagrant offense of lying, since it is impossible to maintain such a course, and that the government knew from the start.

The current headlong rush is an attempt to reduce the relative effect of debt

Indeed, it is a phenomenon of retroactive loop: to boost growth have called on the debt that must be repaid by the only means of growth, which increases the debt etc ...

The big problem is ideological, we could even say religious!
The current concept of limitless growth through ultra-liberalism is nothing more than a new form of messianism, the role of the savior being held here by growth.
However, as history shows so well, utopias always end up becoming totalitarianisms ...

[Philippe Schutt]

Nothing forces politicians to lie like this, except the greed of voters. You cannot blame "the economy" or the "system".

[Janic]

Hello

Nothing forces politicians to lie like this, except the greed of voters. You cannot blame "the economy" or the "system".

it is the story of the chicken and the egg, which started?

[sen-no-sen]

Nothing forces politicians to lie like this, except the greed of voters. You cannot blame "the economy" or the "system".

The economic system "promises" (because it is a belief system!) Better days through rampant consumption, which leads voters to favor the best guarantors of its system.

Politicians try - despite the physical realities - to "stay the course", and those, with great rhetoric and astronomical borrowing.
Passing a limit (for us the "70's"), it becomes impossible to maintain the economy without resorting to doping (debt), thus leading to a phenomenon of negative feedback: debt for growth / growth by threatening debt. balance of society as a whole.

It is clear that the voters - who only elect the agents that are proposed to them - are responsible, but the guilt is above all in the model of development "proposed", is as I repeat it that -this is neither more nor less than a new cult.