Under Maastricht treaty Central Banks in Europe were barred from doing what they were designed to do in a first place - monetizing government deficicts in their owncurrencies. 1997 Polish Constitution put the same restraint on our state as well
Sometimes I am glad to never have married and produced children despite being in mid-30s . Hamster wheel will be extremely hard to propel in the future
"Debt and Democracy: Has the Link been Broken?
Book V of Aristotle’s Politics describes the eternal transition of oligarchies making themselves into hereditary aristocracies – which end up being overthrown by tyrants or develop internal rivalries as some families decide to “take the multitude into their camp” and usher in democracy, within which an oligarchy emerges once again, followed by aristocracy, democracy, and so on throughout history.
Debt has been the main dynamic driving these shifts – always with new twists and turns. It polarizes wealth to create a creditor class, whose oligarchic rule is ended as new leaders (“tyrants” to Aristotle) win popular support by cancelling the debts and redistributing property or taking its usufruct for the state.
Since the Renaissance, however, bankers have shifted their political support to democracies. This did not reflect egalitarian or liberal political convictions as such, but rather a desire for better security for their loans. As James Steuart explained in 1767, royal borrowings remained private affairs rather than truly public debts. For a sovereign’s debts to become binding upon the entire nation, elected representatives had to enact the taxes to pay their interest charges.
By giving taxpayers this voice in government, the Dutch and British democracies provided creditors with much safer claims for payment than did kings and princes whose debts died with them. But the recent debt protests from Iceland to Greece and Spain suggest that creditors are shifting their support away from democracies. They are demanding fiscal austerity and even privatization sell-offs.
This is turning international finance into a new mode of warfare. Its objective is the same as military conquest in times past: to appropriate land and mineral resources, communal infrastructure and extract tribute. In response, democracies are demanding referendums over whether to pay creditors by selling off the public domain and raising taxes to impose unemployment, falling wages and economic depression. The alternative is to write down debts or even annul them, and to re-assert regulatory control over the financial sector.
Is the "10 years ahead" quip about the state of military technology true?
reichstag fireman wrote:Who are all these people, and whose websites are they?
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-QRvL ... ognuts.jpg (me, w, murf and dognuts??)
http://www.informantnews.com/uploads/im ... ncooke.jpg (justin cooke??)
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-6s6hk04r0Mg/T ... 0848_n.jpg (unnamed person??)
http://www.spingola.com/Deanna%2005.jpg (Deanna 2005??)
http://www.iol.co.za/polopoly_fs/iol-ne ... 003458.jpg (stephen goodson??)
hoi.polloi wrote:(Sorry to keep harping on you fbenario, but what's with always quoting nothing lately? Please don't abuse our "quote" function just to break it.)
hoi.polloi wrote:The 'always' was rhetorical. Sorry. You got me on that.
What I mean is, if you're going to quote me, don't make the forum look broken. Put something in there like...
or ... something. It's not aesthetics. It's just that newbies will be thrown off by that kinda thing, I suspect. You don't have to adopt this rule like a law and then enforce it. I'm just asking you personally please if you could not do things like:fbenario wrote:[/quote
You could even just say, hoi.polloi at the beginning of your post, to address me! Does that make sense?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests