Byretorial - keep whistling!

[The Byre]

Ever since the financial crisis of 2007-8 (when the banks fell for their own Ponzi scheme and actually believed that CDOs - collateralised debt obligations and their derivatives - were risk-free money machines) there has been a growing clamour from various august bodies and academics that capitalism is either dead or is about to die.

The list of august economists and bodies, ranging from The Economist to the IMF and a few Nobel prize winners that have announced the death of capitalism is considerable - and they place the blame at a new collection of modern 'Robber Barons' such as Amazon, Google and Facebook. At fault is what Russian-American economist Shoshana Zuboff calls 'Surveillance Capitalism' in which the punter (that's you and me) becomes the product being sold.

According to financial journalist Erwin Stelzer, the burial of capitalism is to take place on November 3rd, 2020. That's the US election day. Gave diggers will include Donald Trump and whoever wins the Democratic nomination to run for president. Whoever wins the election will give the sermon. (No flowers please - just charitable donations to those CEOs who are going to be reduced from eight- to six-figure incomes!)

Yer - right! Wake me up when you have finished whistling 'Dixie'!

The thinking goes like this -

If Trump wins and is able to navigate the choppy waters of impeachment and other hazards, he will be freed of any restrictions imposed by having to seek a second term and be able to impose tariffs where and when he likes and can subsidise farmers (who voted for him) if he feels like it and tax urbanites (who didn't vote for him). He would probably force interest rates even lower, pushing up the value of investments and capital. Globalisation will be stopped in its tracks as tariffs on global goods will put the brakes on global trade.

That's if he wins - if he loses then the US will get somebody like Elizabeth Warren, who has promised to raise wealth taxes, prevent off-shoring of profits and put a stop to lobbying by big business. She also wants to dampen down private health care and expand what is commonly called Obama Care, which is a sort of US version of European-style social insurance and she wants to introduce more enforced environmental changes.

And a great number of Americans support such moves. They want change.

In a recent poll from Gallup twice as many US voters disagreed with the statement "I am satisfied with the way things are going in the US." than agreed with that statement.

Either way, that would be a change in direction to a more European style of government and economic policy. That may (if we are lucky - unlikely though) put a dampener of what I would call 'Robber Baron Corporatism', but as we have seen in the most socially aware and reforming European countries, capitalism itself is alive and well.

Many US business leaders condemned Roosevelt's 'New Deal' as the death of private enterprise back on the 1930s, Warren's 'New Deal' may prove to be equally as 'deadly'! Until then, keep whistling!

 

[Chris Ashdown]

With the tax wars going on, how has it effected Mr & Mrs USA

 

[Mr D]

Yes the US votes in some of its politicians that day.
Presidents are voted in the following month as the electoral college is the group of voters who decide.

Have heard of the death of capitalism many times over the years. It appears to be alive and well and what people prefer!

 

[The Byre]

With the tax wars going on, how has it effected Mr & Mrs USA

It hasn't yet, though the low interest rates and $1 trillion public spending deficit has lead to a mini-boom and full employment. But that is a deficit that will bite them sooner or later, whether through failing public purse or a fall in the value of the dollar which leads to more expensive imports.

Throwing tariffs around fairly at random will, however, have a bigger effect on those US trade partners such as Britain.

 

[Mr D]

It hasn't yet, though the low interest rates and $1 trillion public spending deficit has lead to a mini-boom and full employment. But that is a deficit that will bite them sooner or later, whether through failing public purse or a fall in the value of the dollar which leads to more expensive imports.

Throwing tariffs around fairly at random will, however, have a bigger effect on those US trade partners such as Britain.

Though in the US - EU trade spat we suffer, once out we aren't part of that group.
Just subject to other trade spats.

 

[The Byre]

The 25% tariff on imported spirits had more to do with Trump being denied planning permission for a housing development on one of his golf courses than some deep conflict over unfair trading conditions. He wanted to hit the whiskey industry in retaliation.

The US has structural manufacturing problems in many fields and is unable to make those goods that US customers want.

 

[Mr D]

The 25% tariff on imported spirits had more to do with Trump being denied planning permission for a housing development on one of his golf courses than some deep conflict over unfair trading conditions. He wanted to hit the whiskey industry in retaliation.

The US has structural manufacturing problems in many fields and is unable to make those goods that US customers want.

The media appear to see it as part of the disagreement with the EU. Which we are of course still part of.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/felipe...ngle-malt-scotch-whisky-imports/#4cfe44c5207f

 

[gpietersz]

At fault is what Russian-American economist Shoshana Zuboff calls 'Surveillance Capitalism' in which the punter (that's you and me) becomes the product being sold.

Part of the problem is that we sell our information either too cheap (nectar cards and the like) or without noticing (credit and debit cards) or in return for a free service (Facebook Google) without any idea of the real value.

There was an experiment offering people something cheap (a burger, I think) in return for a swap to take a DNA sample from. A very high (not sure if it was most) people approached agreed to it.

Either way, that would be a change in direction to a more European style of government and economic policy. That may (if we are lucky - unlikely though) put a dampener of what I would call 'Robber Baron Corporatism'

Except that Europe is heading in the opposite direction, towards a more American model. That is in Western Europe. Eastern Europe, especially Russia and some countries in its orbit are far, far, worse than anything in the West - the barons are literal robbers or worse, many of them making their original money form organised crime, and wealth is far more concentrated. Russia is a good warning to us of what happens if we let too much wealth accumulate in a few hands.

 

[Mr D]

Part of the problem is that we sell our information either too cheap (nectar cards and the like) or without noticing (credit and debit cards) or in return for a free service (Facebook Google) without any idea of the real value.

There was an experiment offering people something cheap (a burger, I think) in return for a swap to take a DNA sample from. A very high (not sure if it was most) people approached agreed to it.



Except that Europe is heading in the opposite direction, towards a more American model. That is in Western Europe. Eastern Europe, especially Russia and some countries in its orbit are far, far, worse than anything in the West - the barons are literal robbers or worse, many of them making their original money form organised crime, and wealth is far more concentrated. Russia is a good warning to us of what happens if we let too much wealth accumulate in a few hands.

The thing about wealth accumulating in a few hands is that the hands die. Then what?

Here we have protection of wealth if someone wants to do it, not cheap but can pass the wealth down multiple generations. Our tax system allows this and taxes the trust over time while allowing the wealth or the income from the wealth to be used by those inheriting.
For those not using available means then governments can take considerable chunks of wealth from the estate. If the government chooses.