Comments on: The global return to pre-crisis growth strategies Sat, 03 Jan 2015 16:42:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: pepijndekorte Mon, 26 Aug 2013 08:57:16 +0000 Personally I also liked the pre-2007 situation more. That feeling of “we’re all getting richer” while we were all sinking deeper into debt was great.

By: TocoToucan Tue, 30 Jul 2013 12:50:14 +0000 Good point @Urban_Guerilla, considering that the government promised a “fairer system”, and that they would get rid of the “benefits cliff” when elected, they have actually done nothing but cut welfare – largely with the support of the press.
Meanwhile they have done nothing whatsoever to slash agricultural payments which in many cases go to wealthy land-owners (including some prominent Conservatives), yet the press have largely remained silent.
And the minimum wage remains well below a “living wage”.

It seems that the massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich continues unabated, and may get even worse with the return of pre-crisis inflationary policies.

By: reality-again Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:31:25 +0000 Yawn.
There is no going back to that exuberant model, not because it failed miserably, but because the failure is still fresh in the minds of too many people.
People do learn, they’re just a bit slow at it, and it usually takes some pain to engrave the memory in their minds.

By: MoneyObserver Mon, 29 Jul 2013 07:55:17 +0000 Anatole got it all wrong on the 2008 crash, a bit like the 1987 weather man who said there wasn’t going to be a hurricane when it had already started.

By: GrahamLovell Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:16:28 +0000 More Keynesian hope based on maxing out the credit card. I hope Anatole is right about the virtues of funding the economy based on increased credit, but I doubt it.

On the other hand there is a fix that doesn’t require just a hope that more demand will fix the developed world’s economies. Unfortunately, this solution is on the banned list at the moment. There is a topic that is totally off the agenda, and anyone who suggests action on this line is dismissed as a reactionary. Dare I mention it?

All the western countries have been living beyond their means, as most commentators on this blog seem to recognize. This overspending by governments has been done over the last 20 years to ensure the standard of living has been maintained even though all of these countries have been shipping jobs overseas at an ever-increasing rate.

I am all for trade, especially the trade that helps impoverished people lift themselves out of poverty, but it probably time for a rethink.

Let us face the facts: there is a problem of a global imbalance in wage rates. Now that imbalance has been exacerbated for western countries by demographic changes that mean we no longer have a massive education advantage over developing countries. It is virtually a level playing field now.

The fix is easy, but who will recommend it? A small tariff, across the board in every trading block, at the Doha allowed rate of 15%, would allow local industry in each nation to flourish.

Too simple? Too easy? Too dangerous? I don’t think so.

By: AZreb Sun, 28 Jul 2013 13:20:00 +0000 So we should all max out our credit cards, buy homes we can’t afford, buy big TVs, the latest cars and trucks – in order to get the economy back on track? Most do not have the good credit to purchase big-ticket items and are barely making it in the first place. Cities are going bankrupt – pensions unfunded – most jobs now are part-time with minimum wages – but we are supposed to spend money we don’t have?

Please, Sir – send me a pair of your rose-colored glasses or some of that wacky-tobacky the “economists” are smoking.

By: OUTPOST2012.NET Sat, 27 Jul 2013 18:31:09 +0000 I am sorry. But what difference does it make with traditional Keynesian and (neo)liberal economic tools? Which were available to governments for decades?
“Business as usual” in macro-economics is a combination of “heating” spending (demand end) and tax reducations/austerity (supply end.)
I don’t see any new ideas from either side of the political spectrum.
We have a new reality without new economic concepts.
We observe global corporations in great shape; stable high profits; sweet executives’ salaries and stakeholders’ dividends. We even see huge investments into rationalization.
There is a problem: the economy lies flat. It is still depressed.
I am not sure that spending will help. This time. Austerity did not.

By: OneOfTheSheep Sat, 27 Jul 2013 08:23:30 +0000 So the “new economic policy” is to spend, spend, spend, and cross your fingers that there are enough “bigger fools” to sustain this “perpetual motion economic model” long enough that everyone responsible is safely retired and out of the public eye before it comes crashing down?

What is the foundation upon which this illusion is to be built? Please explain in simple, clear terms how “winners” and “losers” emerge from a process in which the whole world is passing around the same pocket change?

At least the Germans understand that you can count and measure the production and sale of their widgets. I fear no good can come of all nations placing their hopes and dreams for the future in the same basket of smoke and mirrors.

By: Urban_Guerilla Fri, 26 Jul 2013 10:30:45 +0000 The growth model has returned, but here I the UK our government is still using the crisis as an excuse to cut back on welfare.

Thus punishing the poorest for the crisis caused by the excesses of the rich.

Same is true across Europe. The European social model is being sacrificed on the altar of austerity, even though it is dead as an economic policy.

By: Benny27 Thu, 25 Jul 2013 19:30:51 +0000 I don’t think additional de-regulation of financial institutions follows from needing to expand credit. I think that is a good way to make the financial system crash again. Growth policies, yes. Corporate giveaways, no. How about giving money to consumers for once, rather than directly to the banks?