The election results in Greece and France sent a clearer message about austerity: Voters don’t like it. That sentiment isn’t hard to fathom; massive spending cuts and pay cuts aren’t fixing the problems in their economies–they’re making things worse. Media coverage seems to be clearer these days about what the public thinks of austerity. But the assumption that austerity is mostly “good” still seems firmly in place. Like this Washington Post lead (5/7/12):
Voters in France and Greece redrew Europe’s political map Sunday in a powerful backlash against the German-led cure for the region’s debt crisis: painful austerity.
It’s not a “cure” if it makes things worse, is it? The New York Times (5/4/12), in a piece prior to the French election results, wrote that Socialist candidate Francois Hollande could press for a growth agenda “which would challenge the German medicine, or at least try to dilute it.” Again, it’s not good medicine if it makes you sicker.
And in today’s Washington Post (5/8/12), a piece begins:
The shrill anti-incumbent message that has emerged from a pair of European elections…
At his Beat the Press blog, economist Dean Baker wonders why the Post thinks the election results are “shrill”–it might indicate the paper doesn’t like the how the vote went. He points out other problems with the article:
The piece also includes the bizarre assertion: “A new round of political paralysis that delays Europe’s recovery or calls into question the austerity agreement reached this year to help bail out Greece would probably lead to an immediate slowdown of U.S. economic growth and job creation while confusing bond and equity markets.” Actually, Europe is not on a path to recovery. It is on a path to recession because of the austerity being imposed by the European Central Bank and the IMF. If this austerity is reversed and Europe starts growing again, that would help the U.S. economy.
But one of the clearest examples of this which-side-are-you-on reporting came from the CBS Evening News on May 5, courtesy of correspondent Mark Philips:
Francois Hollande would become only the second Socialist president of France in more than 50 years, a man committed to free-spending policies that are making the markets and the governments in Europe and the U.S. extremely nervous.
Hollande has said he wants to raise taxes on the wealthy and spend more to grow the French economy. Perhaps those are “free-spending policies,” but there are other words for it. As for other markets and governments, it’s not clear there’s a verdict yet. The New York Times has a piece today arguing that Hollande’s economic policy ideas are somewhat closer to Obama’s than Sarkozy’s were. But the overriding assumption in much of the coverage is that austerity was doing what its proponents said it was doing. Here’s CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley last night (5/7/12):
France and Germany got other European countries to slash their budgets to solve their debt crisis. But the incoming French president has vowed to unravel that deal.
Unraveling a solution to a crisis sounds bad, doesn’t it?
I imagine Hollande’s plan is closer to Obama’s.
Which is why, when it comes to the label “Socialist”, we must ask, as did Juliet …
What’s in a name?
The reply here must be …
Not too bloody much.
Of course, that goes for “Democrat” over here, doesn’t it?
Austerity is imposed by the USA upon nations designated as its enemies, such as Iraq and Iran, in the form of sanctions, embargoes, and the freezing of accounts. This is done with the stated intention of destabilizing enemies.
Alternatively, we are to believe that austerity imposed domestically will improve the economy.
So austerity is imposed to hurt enemies and to help friends. I question how the same treatment is given to friendly and enemy nations with the stated expectation of different results?
Or, are the people of the USA really just another enemy of the political insiders that rule this nation in the manner of a private sector corporation: that is, for the private accumulation of profits for political insiders and for externalizing costs on the political outsiders, otherwise known as the citizenry.
In my sight, Europe need austerity to get over the actual crisis. But not an US imposed austerity, an original and local austerity.
Banks ruined the economy. So why has blame shifted to the Greek people? The media has shifted the blame very neatly. Why is Greece not Wall Street, the scapegoat for this economic mess? Shouldn’t the banks that cause it be the ones to blame?
Good point Glen,
“So austerity is imposed to hurt enemies and to help friends. I question how the same treatment is given to friendly and enemy nations with the stated expectation of different results?”
Glenn
You are right! I saw that and I must thank you for putting those pieces together for me.
People words mean something.Austerity is not a word of choice.There is no “choice” in the word austerity.When you are broke.Flat busted and broke, your choices are few.Your first move is to stop spending,stop borrowing,.Those with the least in reserve will now suffer the most.Those who did not, or could not save for a rainy day.Dems the breaks people.It sucks.It is not the failure of the rich to share their wares folks.it is the fault of governments run amok.Now some idiots would say ‘just tax those few that still have money more, and all will be well.They actually consider that growth.Yeah lets give the same government that lorded over spending us into oblivion- more power,and what few reserves we have left to recreate independence and wealth.To refund the economy.Idiots!It is the same one trick pony of any socialist ,failed,bankrupt movement,that one sees rear its head over and over in this countries left.
I have no doubt the establishment media is biased, but all I see here is a countering of one bias with a different bias. Claims are made that “austerity” measures are making the French and Greek economies worse-off, with no supporting data. Is having a growing portion of national government budgets dedicated to paying interest on debt a good thing? Is a retirement age of 60 condusive to economic growth? Does raising taxes on the rich really increase government revenues, or does it simply chase those same rich people out of their homelands and into tax havens, or else induce them to invest less on growing businesses and more in U.S. Treasuries or gold?
People need to know that saying Obama is trying to make the US more like Europe is bogus. The real paradigm is that if the Republicans get to enact austerity measures here, as done in Europe, that it will be the Republicans who will be making the US more like Europe. If this happens, we’ll never get to do this:
People need to know that saying Obama is trying to make the US more like Europe is bogus. The real paradigm is that if the Republicans get to enact austerity measures here, as done in Europe, that it will be the Republicans who will be making the US more like Europe. If this happens, we’ll never get to do this: http://youtu.be/KqVNv-rzxcA
Shokai I believe that Obama is “Eurocentric”.I do not see that in any way,shape or form in the Republican party.Just the opposite.In fact too much does the right poo poo aside Europe as Americas slightly slow parent.As if we can learn nothing from them.
Scott Bieser
Good to hear from you
the uk, after taking on an austerity plan, is now experiencing a double dip recession.
the confidence fairy failed.
Scott–Read Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine. Also, google “Dean Baker”. I make these suggestions in good faith, and assume you are unaware of both Baker and Klein, among many others.
You ask, “Does raising taxes on the rich really increase government revenues, or does it simply chase those same rich people out of their homelands and into tax havens, or else induce them to invest less on growing businesses and more in U.S. Treasuries or gold? Answers–yes; no, especially under penalty of a long stay in a Federal penitentiary; no (call Tom Hartmann and ask him about that one), and maybe, but irrelevant.
Italics meltdown in lines one and two and three. It should read, “Scott–Read Naomi Klein’s The Shock Doctrine. Also, google “Dean Baker”. I make these suggestions in good faith, and assume you are unaware of both Baker and Klein, among many others.
I forgot the end quote there, after “others.” . . . . That is all.
Massively ironic quote of the day: “People(,) words mean something.”
Austerity is the poison not a cure but a death knell for Democracy. In its place will be put a fascist type right wing govt. Now imagine it happening here too. Martial Law after austerity is put in place. We have seen it on a smaller scale in Michigan where city after city has been put under a “crisis manager” who rules by fiat while your elected officals are dumped. Your votes have been canceled. Done under the auspices of “economic necessity” to accomplish it. And under Republican rule who still claim they are doing to “save this state from ruin” and any savings they get they automatically spend it on the wealthy of their state. So economics isn’t the key to it but subjugation is.
Unfortunately, both the current leaders and apparently the media here have not lived through the austerity of the 1930’s in Europe, Or I suspect never read about the consequences. The horrors of deprivation , war and strife, can be avoided, only by helping the poor and taxing the wealthy!
The only way we can get ourselves out of this mess is to stop sending all the jobs overseas so the corporations can make ever increasing profits and then keep them all hidden in banks not even in the U.S.
America will work when American work, not when the corporate mosquitoes finally suck the last drop of blood out the land and then crap on it and leave.
All austerity means is that the corporation will take the money and keep it, because they don’t want to spend a dime unless it instantly returns a million dollar profit. Look at folks like Henry M. Caroselli in his book “The Cult of the Mouse”, where he points out investors want only ‘quick, high and safe returns” on all investments, and will not even try anymore. That is what Austerity means, it’s not a fix, or a solution, it’s the final snap of the mouse trap as it closes, breaking the economic neck of the country.
padre’s point is…point on! Austerity is meant just for the working class. The 1% never experience it.
We have an opportunity to actually do something. We can get others to accompany us to the local officers of members of Congress, or to fundraising events for candidates and ask them where they stand of the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. If they say they support it ask them why. Make them be specific. Make them tell you how many jobs [they claim] it will create in your state, and make them tell you exactly which jobs and where. They won’t be able to tell you, not unless they lie. Why? Because the U.S. will lose jobs if the T-PP is enacted. It is NAFTA on steroids….great for multinational conglomerates and their wealth foreign and domestic stockholders, but lousy for people who actually work for a living.
For more detailed information about the dangers of the T-PP go to http://www.citizen.org/trade/.
Folks, it will take more than keyboard activism to defeat the job-killing T-PP. It will take promises of ballot box revenge on those who dare to go against the majority of the people. “Free trade” agreements are good for the 1%, but bring unemployment to the rest of us.
What little I know of the T-PP ageement is that (according to leaks) it will empower corporations to attack environmental, health,and domestic safeguards of a country in the agreement, will ban Buy American and undermine financial regulations.
I say “what little I know” because the whole agreement is shrouded in secrecy. Not secrecy for the 600 or so corporate lobbyists who have access to negotiators and negotiating proposals but to everybody else who has been barred from the same kind of access.
Michael Lewis has a new book out about the world’s burst economic bubble- he visited Iceland, Ireland , Greece….
Who was the biggest chump/enabler, loaning money for the fraudulence? The non-bubble country, Germany. Estimated losses:
21b$ to Iceland banks
100b$ to Irish banks
60b$ in US subprime bonds
and an as yet unknown amount invested in Greek government bonds
The choice may be between austerity for the debtor countries and austerity for Germans, who also had no decision-making role in the debacle.
This form of ‘medicine’ in analogous to medieval bleeding (later ‘improved’ through the use of leeches) where the ‘bad blood’ was let out of the patient in the belief that he would then get better, but of course it had no positive effect and often hastened their death. Of course it worked out fine for the administrator – – – he could always find some other reason that the patient died and blame that.
People there is this fairy tale being passed around.You need to understand it.There are those who don’t want to turn off the tap.They want to continue spending what they don’t have, to maintain the status quo..They don’t care if the have to beg borrow or steal it(or print it).They don’t care if they have to bang on their neighbors door who has fared better than they have- and demand their money.Cause after all they deserve it.Isnt it after all communal wealth, as everyone had a part in their earning it?Or better put STEALING it!Those people are called progressive liberals in this country.The yoke of negativism/defeatism weighs heavily about their sorry pencil necks.We need to vote them out, and let them rest in green pastures were they can spend their days mumbling about all the worlds inequities.To the rest of us…we need to get to work rebuilding.
michael e’s crap starts in right-wing think tanks. They then rely on dupes like michael to drink the Kool Aid. One trouble is that the “tanks” tank the facts. No wonder! Those bastions of anti-unionism pay their writers starvation wages. The tanks produce shoddy, easily disproven garbage. Mmm, I guess that is what they get for offshoring the creation of right-wing propaganda.
michael e – – – find other ghost writers. At least find ones that write somewhat plausible lies. Your sources are just too obvious…too absurd.
I’d note that looking at the spending budget, everything the government does that isn’t Social Security payments[19.8%], Medicare and Medicaid[25.7%], defense[22.6% and interest on the debt[6.2] is less than 26% of the total. That includes education, science, NASA, energy, transportation, foreign affairs, natural resources, justice, agriculture and all safety net programs. [I’d also note that parts of many of those department’s budgets are defense related. Our actual military budget is in the neighborhood of $1.2 trillion a year.]
Want to do something about the national debt? Cut defense, raise taxes and get serious about the rising cost of health care.
P. Ness –
In the interest of correctness please know that Social Security does not add one red cent to either yearly deficits or the national debt. Social Security is funded via FICA contributions. It is totally self-funded. Although it has been used as a cash-cow by several administrations in order to try to balance budgets or otherwise pay for things like tax cuts for the rich or for wars, the Trust Fund holds Treasury Bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Never, ever has the government reneged on paying off T-Bonds.
Here is what is startling, and should anger people everywhere. Alan Simpson, of the Simpson/Bowles Commission (AKA the “Cat food Commission”) said the Bonds are just numbers on paper and can be cancelled. Now let’s make sure we understand the context in which he uttered those words. He wasn’t talking about the Treasury Bonds held by China, or rich potentates in Dubai (the very same kind of Bonds held by the SS Trust Fund). He was talking about the Bonds held by the Trust. He was saying that the full faith and credit of the U.S. doesn’t apply when it comes to seniors. That from a guy who has been living off the largesse of taxpayer money for most of his life!
The richest 400 families in the U.S. are worth $1.57 trillion. That is more than the combined worth of 55% of Americans (167,750,000 souls). The wealth of the top 1% exceeds the combined wealth of the “bottom” 90%. Do the rich manufacture that many widgets? Hardly. They make their money off the labor of others. There needs to be a redistribution of wealth! I know michael e. and perhaps others may cry “socialism” but so what? Every single day corporations and their stockholders are the beneficiaries of millions and millions of dollars worth of subsidies. The subsides come from tax revenues. Corporations, therefore, benefit from corporate socialism. Such a deal! The coiffed and manicured money-set gets access to our dough without having to put in one hour of labor.
The road to economic recovery? 1) Cancel job-killing free trade agreements. Bring the jobs home. 2) Make the wealthy pay higher taxes. They’d get to remain filthy rich, just not as filthy rich as they’d like. 3) Enact single payer health care. It would cover everyone for everything, we’d have our choice of doctors and hospitals, and families and employers would save huge sums. How? By taking the profit motive out of health care! 4) Yes, yes, yes. Cut offense spending. Carl Sagan once said that the arms race is comparable to two people entering a gasoline soaked room. One has 5000 matches, and the other has 10,000 matches. Get the picture? 5) End the Bush tax cuts. 6)Defeat Romney, the Paul Ryans and the Jim DeMints. Elect lawmakers who will honor America’s working class (for a change)!
Rich thanx for you last paragraph.A little hyperbole-ish but on the whole I get your point.Stop competing world wide in free trade, and bring all our companies home.Like the 1950s all over again?God I only wish.I just don’t think we are giving creedence to the realities of the instantaneous modern world.We may have to burn our computers to accomplish that.
Make the wealthy pay more….Listen to what Clinton said yesterday on the subject.He said “you can take 100% from me and not balance the budget”It is simply a ploy toward class envy and warfare.The numbers simply are not there.
Single payer healthcare?Lets talk later on that.Too long a discourse.Simply put it wont work as the best design for this country.Your beliefs for its success are pie in the sky.It is a non affordable ballooning cost steamroller.All to cover the 15 million who are without.We can do better for those 15 million with both hands and our brains tied behind our backs.
Of course you want to vote those people out.I would if I were you
Honor Americas Working Class.?Thank you for that .I went to school till I was 30.I worked so many jobs along the way I cant even remember them all.Now I work 14 hour days often 6 days a week and Im on call round the clock.My union friends work 9 to 5 five days a week and hope to get that early pension /retirement.I will work till i cant anymore.So thank you for that.For me and all my associates.
Rich A wrote
In the interest of correctness please know that Social Security does not add one red cent to either yearly deficits or the national debt.
Quite right…I was simply pointing out spending…and how much of it is either defense or mandatory….
What Michael-e has yet to figure out is that at no time is trade free. As long as countries have control over their trade, if their corporations haven’t become free lance entities like Exxon-Mobile there is a chance to stem the flow of their life’s blood—wealth. Austerity is the means by which democracy is destroyed and replaced with something far less free. How do I know? History is very good in that area of education. Even those from before I was born. Germany, Chile and Argentina come to mind. It makes whatever economic conditions far far worse. It breaks the banks, middle class and the economy. The outcome? Only a very feww survive it intact. The democracy is replaced by some kind of authoritarianism (many flavors of that poison to choose from) comes into play. The social safety net is ripped to shreds or is gone. There are essentially three parts to their society. The rich, the military and the poor. In some cases not even that depending on how much damage is done when reaching that state.
However right now in this country the have too much and the rest of us with whatever little is left is as it was in 1928. A free society can’t exist in these conditions. So we could lose everything without our adversaries firing a shot. That is one of the many dangers assaulting our Democratic-Republic.