"Economists are warning that Trump’s reported idea to eliminate the income tax and replace it with massive tariffs on imports would cripple the economy, explode the cost of living, and likely set off a trade war. And because the math doesn’t come close to working, it would also tremendously increase the national debt.
In other words, Trump’s latest notion is both economically and fiscally illiterate."
In a long, convincing, must-read article, Professor Julia Steinberger (@jks) explains "What we are up against."
She argues that climate breakdown is NOT something we can fix using better science and technology, because the climate crisis was created by and results from "highly unequal and undemocratic economic systems" — and unless we overturn those, the situation will only continue to get worse.
Each of the 10 points below is expanded upon in her full essay. I hope you'll read the whole thing!
Exposing the secret history of the making of the climate crisis should change everything about how we act to stop it.
The cause. We know the climate crisis is brought to us by highly unequal and undemocratic economic systems.
The rise. The recent history of these economic systems, in the Americas and Eurasia, is dominated by the ascendance of neoliberal ideology.
The threat. Neoliberal ideology is antidemocratic at its very core. Its aim is to give free reign over our societies to corporations, not citizens.
The promoters. The fossil fuel industry is a long-time promoter, as well as beneficiary, of the neoliberal takeover of our societies.
The coordination. The organisation of this takeover is not haphazard: it is coordinated through think tanks, lobby groups, public relations and legal firms. These in turn are coordinated internationally, for instance via the Atlas Network, which is involved in more than 500 think tanks worldwide.
The buildup. These think tanks train their cadres internally, and promote them to places of influence in policy and communication.
The influence. One core goal of these organisations is to replace university research expertise by their own materials, influencing the influencers, with journalists and teachers identified as prize targets.
The message. These think tanks replicate their materials and strategies worldwide. Their poisoning of our public sphere runs the gamut from advocating brutally unequal neoliberal economic policies to promoting climate science denial. They also dabble in divisive culture war topics, on gender (against equal rights for women, queer and trans people), race or migration, for instance.
The implication. To counter such centralised and coordinated actors, the climate movement (and indeed all movements attacked by neoliberalism) should change radically, both in orientation and strategy.
The direction. Democracy, the fearsome foe of neoliberalism, should be at the heart of our new direction.
Here Keen picks apart some fallacies regarding of other critics of neoclassical economics in areas of tech (which most people here understand as an enormous consumer of energy and water for starters)
When we look across the wreckage of the UK's economy, wrought by the class warfare & austerity policies of a decade & a half of Tory government, its worth reminding ourselves that Keynes had a solution for all of this... a focus on 'effective demand' - putting money into the hands of those who would actually spend it.
If (and I accept that for many this is itself problematic) the UK's problem is a lack of demand, this has been caused by the Tory impoverishment of consumers!
Singapore’s public broadcaster investigating different social classes negotiate a heat wave. A few measures to provide relief to the urban poor in their housing. What strikes me about the latter’s situation is the payback for smallest of resources offered to them. But for access, their lives could be transformed and it would be intimately related to economy.
@rbreich What the people who say "I worked hard for what I've got" always miss or ignore is that simply having the opportunity to work hard and be fairly rewarded is itself a privilege denied to many. #wealth#economics#inequality
Over the period of Tory government, the number of people in precarious work (zero-hour contracts, casual employment) has risen by around 25% (or one million).
The problem of exploitative labour practices predates the Tories, but (of course) they have made it worse.
If you are looking for the causes of the UK's productivity problem, then treating workers like expendable & cheap components is one place you might find significant evidence!
If degrowth is ever to gain traction as a viable, mainstream policy option — rather than simply as academic theory or as a personal individual lifestyle choice — it must first take hold among a large mass of people who can’t survive without it and who will demand system change.
That’s the view expressed by the author of this essay…
I believe that we have been discussing degrowth in an ass-backward manner. Slowing the economy will never be accomplished via the altruistic sacrifices of the materially privileged classes, but can only happen as a result of a transfer of power.
A coalition of poor, working, indigenous people and other allies will have to be sold on degrowth and be well-organized enough to engage in civil disobedience. Where has political change occurred without strikes, demonstrations, and massive numbers of people willing to take personal risks and be arrested?
Degrowth, I believe, is at a critical crossroad – advocates must now choose to continue to regard degrowth as an unending thought experiment, or to take degrowth into communities of ordinary folks. We have to create natural alliances, engage in civil disobedience, and compose a story. That is a lot to do in a very short time.
It's likely that most of your friends and acquaintances have never heard of degrowth and thus have never even considered the concept. All they've ever known and been taught is the widespread myth that growth is always good.
Here's a piece you might want to show them that explains degrowth in fairly simple terms...
Our global economy is built for growth. Governments pursue economic growth to compete with other countries and finance public services. Growing companies are praised as our model of success. Consumerism leads individuals to think that more is always better.
Today, growth has become part of the idea of human progress. But it has serious drawbacks, including the increasing destruction of nature.
Could there be another way?
Some people recommend “green growth,” which means greater efficiency. But others call for moving beyond growth. They’re advocating an approach called “degrowth.”
This article describes the challenges associated with growth, and the potential benefits of degrowth.
I think you already know that it isn't. But this article goes into some depth in answering the question...
You can’t have infinite growth on a finite planet. That should be a commonplace idea. And it inevitably means facing up to the necessity of putting an end to capitalism in favor of an economic system of rationality, sustainability, and equity for all the world’s peoples.
Capitalism is dependent on consumerism. Household consumption (all the things people buy for personal use, from toothbrushes to automobiles) constitutes 60-70% of a typical advanced capitalist economy’s gross domestic product; it is because of this dependency that so much money and effort is put into advertising and marketing, creating ‘needs’ we didn’t know we had, and the pervasiveness of planned obsolescence.
Two statistics provide perspective on the high cost of ‘new and improved’ — about 40% of U.S. landfill waste is discarded packaging, and the cost of packaging constitutes 10% to 40% of a product’s retail price. No rational system would propagate such waste, but capitalism is not rational; the endless pursuit of profit and indifference to environmental costs are its natural consequences.
That's just a brief excerpt. I hope you'll read the rest.
How the World Ran Out of Everything by Peter S. Goodman, 2024
How does the wealthiest country on earth run out of protective gear in the middle of a public health catastrophe? How do its parents find themselves unable to locate crucially needed infant formula? How do its largest companies spend billions of dollars making cars that no one can drive for a lack of chips?
I know people think of "the rich" as billionaires, and of course they're important, but any system of tax and redistribution has to deal with the fact that almost no individual makes more than $500k a year.
I tend now to classify mainstream, orthodox schools, the neoclassical and Austrian schools, as conservative economics. It's a more concise and meaningful characterization.
These schools are intimately tied to a particular political outlook, the right wing version of libertarianism proselytized by the .1%. They indoctrinate themselves and those passing through economics courses in high school and college.
The global economy is in better shape than it was at the start of the year, thanks largely to the performance of the #UnitedStates, the World Bank said in its latest forecast Tues. But the sunnier outlook could cloud over if major central banks — including the #FederalReserve — keep #InterestRates at elevated levels.
Economic performance is stronger when Democrats hold the White House
Key findings
• Since 1949, there has been a Democratic advantage in the average performance ofkey macroeconomic indicators measuring economic health, including:
◦ Gross Domestic Product (GDP) growth
◦ Job growth
◦ Unemployment rate
◦ Growth in inflation-adjusted wages
◦ Growth of market-based incomes per capita
◦ Inflation
◦ Interest rates
• This Democratic advantage is across theboard in all variables we measure but strongest in private-sector outcomes—notably, business investment, job growth, and the growth of market-based incomes.
• Household income growth (adjusted for inflation) was faster on average and far more equal during Democratic administrations, and the Democratic advantage shows up for every group. https://www.epi.org/publication/econ-performance-pres-admin/
this image is not the entirety of #economics in the #USA
but it hits on an issue the brainwashed often yammer about, the #deficit
perhaps it can help break through to them that they are brainwashed. because it succinctly destroys a lie
i find it useful, please steal the image like i stole it
the root of the lie "the #GOP is better for the #economy" is akin to a spouse who maxes out the credit cards, while the #Democrats are the other spouse who labors to pay them off
It looks possible that South Africa may be about to embark on the biggest experiment in universal basic income yet;
to some extant, searching for popular policies, the embattled ANC now looks to be supporting a UBI system building on the previous Covid support.
Its certainly clear why this would make sense for South Africa, but equally it would also be a major step forward in the 'pilots' of UBI that have been growing over the last years.
"Despite being a raving commie loon, Smith's observation was so undeniably true that regulators, policymakers, and economists couldn't help but acknowledge that it was true. The trustbusting era was defined by this idea: if we let the number of companies in a sector get too small, or if we let one or a few companies get too big, they'll eventually start to rig prices."