EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Human Cost of a Global Crisis
Grim warning from global agencies as ILO fears 40m jobs could be lost by 2012. Undernourished total at 1bn, says Red Cross
The full humanitarian impact of the world economic crisis became clearer this week, as UN and global agencies warned of huge job losses, a rise in the number of people afflicted by chronic undernourishment, and the "extraordinary price" being paid by children and other vulnerable groups as mass austerity programs constrict the developing world.
Supply and demand: plenty of food at an Abidjan market, but who can afford it? (Photo/Issouf Sanogo) In a report prepared with the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) for G20 labor ministers meeting in Paris on Monday, the International Labor Organization said the group of developing and developed nations had seen 20m jobs disappear since the 2008 financial crisis. At current rates it would be impossible to recover them in the near term and there was a risk of the number doubling by the end of next year, it said. "We must act now to reverse the slowdown in employment growth and make up for the jobs lost," ILO director general Juan Somavía said. "Employment creation has to become a top macroeconomic priority."
The World Disasters Report, published by the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, concluded that the number of people worldwide who are undernourished must be at least 1 billion. Of these, around 60% are women.
A total of 178 million children under five have stunted growth as a result of lack of food, it found. The annual report, which this year focuses on hunger and malnutrition, says the rise in basic food prices, the impact of changing climate and a rise in population have led to the increase in hunger.
Meanwhile, a study by the UN children's fund, UNICEF, said there would be "irreversible impacts" from wage cuts, tax increases, benefit reductions and cuts in subsidies that bore most heavily on the most vulnerable in low-income nations. It found that between 2010 and 2012 a quarter of developing nations were engaged in what it called excessive belt-tightening, reducing spending to below the levels before the financial crisis began in 2007.
Both Christine Lagarde, the IMF managing director, and Robert Zoellick, president of the World Bank, said last weekend that their organizations were seeking to build social safety nets to protect the weakest. But UNICEF said: "In the wake of the food, fuel and financial shocks, a fourth wave of the global economic crisis began to sweep across developing countries in 2010: fiscal austerity."
The report looked at IMF spending projections for 128 countries. "While most governments introduced fiscal stimuli to buffer their populations from the impacts of the crisis during 2008-09, premature expenditure contraction became widespread beginning in 2010, despite vulnerable populations' urgent and significant need of public assistance," it said.
The analysis showed that the scope of austerity was severe and widening quickly. Of the 128 countries, 70 reduced spending by nearly three percentage points of GDP during 2010 and 91 planned cuts in 2012. A comparison of the 2010-2012 period with the three years before the financial crisis began showed that nearly a quarter of developing countries were undergoing "excessive contraction", defined as slashing spending to below pre-crisis levels.
The study found governments relied on five main ways to save cash: cutting or capping wages (56 countries); phasing out or removing subsidies, mainly fuel but also on electricity and food (56 countries); rationalizing or means-testing social programs (34 countries); reforming pensions (28 countries) and raising consumption taxes on basic goods (53 countries).
Although the IMF has put a greater emphasis in recent years on ringfencing pro-poor spending, UNICEF said there was a heightened risk of social spending falling below levels needed to protect vulnerable populations.
"Current austerity policies may have major impacts on social spending and other expenditures that foster aggregate demand, and therefore recovery. It is therefore imperative that decision-makers carefully review the distributional impacts, as well as possible alternative policy options, for economic and social recovery."
The report noted that children and poor households were likely to be most affected by budget cuts. "The limited window of intervention for fetal development and for growth among infants and young children means that deprivation today, if not addressed properly, can have irreversible impacts on their physical and intellectual capacities, which will, in turn, lower their productivity in adulthood; this is an extraordinary price for a country to pay."
Zoellick said the risk of a fresh downturn added urgency to the World Bank's work on building safety nets; it was already helping in 80 countries. An IMF spokesman said: "The IMF continues to be supportive of the efforts of low-income countries to sustain growth and to continue strengthening spending on health and education.
"Recent Fund research shows that social spending has increased at a faster pace in countries with IMF-supported programs … This is true for social spending in relation to GDP and as a share of total government spending, as well as increases in per capita social spending."
This week also saw the launch of a campaign by the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition, Future Fortified, to help ensure pregnant women, new mothers and young children receive critical nutrients, such as vitamin A, iodine, iron, zinc and folic acid.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

43 Comments so far
Show AllI resent articles like this, that shove the "global economic crisis" down our throats, as if it were some kind of phenomenon, rather than a direct result of a very few number of powerful individuals that intentionally set this whole thing up.
And their plan is succeeding. The once stable, social democracies in Europe, are being forced to eliminate those long standing safety nets, ostensibly, because that "spending" is what stands in the way of "recovery".
It is one thing, to read of the economic impacts on everyone, because of the crimes of a few, but it is quite another to read another cover story for the crimes of those few.
That is what this article amounts to, and if CD chooses to print this article for the purpose of highlighting those impacts, should at least link to articles published on CD, that counter the overriding propaganda.
Hue, I think that your belief that the "global economic crisis" comes to us as 'a direct result of a very few number of powerful individuals that intentionally set this whole thing up' is nonsensical, infantile, and conspiracist in mentality. I mean, just how many times do you think that the world capitalist system has gone into one of its periodic crises of overproduction? Just once, Hue? ..lol...
Don't you know from History 101 that it has happened countless times before, and is never the result of a conspiracy brought on by 'a very few number of powerful individuals', as you would have us believe it is now that we are in a global downturn once again. It's a natural part of capitalism!
So stop your ultraleft and childish vitriol against CD for publishing such an analysis. It is you yourself that is far out there in political looney land with your PARANOID conspiracy theory. One begins to wonder just what is it about so many liberal Lefty folk that attracts them to seeing conspiracies all the time? Did some creature pull you guys up into a spacecraft and implant little 'thought controllers' into your heads? Really....???
I won't dignify your remark with a serious comment, nor will I fail to sink to your level in response.
So shove it up your ass, jerk.
Couldn't they just "join the Army" I mean their hireing anybody US citizen or not, 17 to 45 yrs old! I mean who else is hireing?!?!? >^^<
'periodic crisis of overproduction'? How does that explain the sub-prime mortgage scam? or the bail-out heist?
The phrase 'periodic crisis of overproduction' never is the only thing going on in a global downturn of the capitalist economy, Memory_Hole. Yet the phrase does adequately explain why so many are out of work with no incomes to buy stocks of already produced goods which leads to more people being laid off and so on. This is the main characteristic of the crisis now, and not individual 'scams' and heists', which is the usual vocabulary of Conspiracy and Plot addicts. It is not all just one supposed Big Conspiracy against you and 'Hue', Memory_Hole. It is the capitalist market operating as it normally does.
pinchyway, I will overlook your ad hominems, being quite accustomed to epithets and ad hominems from leftist conspiracy phobes. I would only refer you to Michael Parenti's excellent essay, Conspiracy Phobia on the Left, from his book, Dirty Truths.
http://www.disinfo.com/2010/09/conspiracy-phobia-on-the-left/
I'd rather be a conspiracyphobe, as you put it, than a constant conspiracyphile, Memory Hole. Plus, the last time I saw Parenti in public he was trying to telling a large group of aged liberal types of us immediately pre 9/11 about how the country had already turned more liberal and radical as to what he was then seeing. I mentioned publicly that I thought he was totally off the wall in his assessment and he assured me that a new Radicalization was already under way... how dare his political pov and analysis be questioned!!!!???? The shocked audience applauded him wildly, because he was saying what they so wanted to hear. Never mind that it was ALL a fiction....
So just how did all that turn out, Memory~ Hole? Michael is no grand genius and tends to stay well inside liberal university enclaves most of the time instead of getting out there into the broader America as a whole, where he would easily have seen that America really wasn't radicalizing at that time (year 2000) like he thought it was. We need some professors on our side that are not chained down in Berkeley, Boston, and Boulder so much.
Oh I see, pinchy. YOU have all the answers, and we leftists should all just listen to you, who obviously know so much more than Parenti, who you evidently can't even be bothered to read. And while you complain about me misquoting you, you routinely do the same to me and hue while trotting out your tired and hackneyed dichotomy.
Your characterization of Parenti rings false to me. I don't think you read him, I don't think you have one iota of the education or information at your fingertips that he has on even his worst day.
It is interesting that, when I bring Parenti in to support my position, rather than address his claim in support of my argument, you attack him with an ad hominem. Very revealing about where you are coming from.
Memory_Hole: This Michael Parenti article you referenced is an excellent critique of guys like Chomski & Cockburn who refuse to even consider that there may have been much more to JFK's assassination than 'A Crazed Lone Gun-man', and worse still- criticize or even Ridicule those on the so-called political 'Left' who do. Their attitude is on this matter is a precursor to their similar position regarding 9-11.
One might see how Chomski's dislike for JFK as a flawed elitist [IE: JFK was definitely from a rich & powerful family & was no 'Perfect Angel'] might cloud his judgment regarding JFK's assassination [IE: Chomski's prejudice against JFK has blurred his analysis on this matter], BUT - That fails to explain his position on 9-11 where he effectively endorses Bush / Cheney / NeoCon's 'Official Conspiracy Legend' [IE: Chomski in effect strangely defends the Bushites concerning 9-11]!
Back to This Article - The biggest problem I have w this article is that it references the IMF too many times [like the IMF is to be seen as the 'Good-Guys'] without saying anything about the IMF's / World Bank's / WTO's, etc- historic roles in helping to create this sorry state of affairs in Africa & the so-called 3rd World in the first place! IMO: Having the IMF in a leading role to eliminate World poverty & hunger is like having the FOX Guard the Chickens & the Wolves Guarding the Sheeple!
"It is the capitalist market operating as it normally does."
No pinchyway, it's the result of "free trade" (ie monopolism) that is unrestricted by regulation and is full of corruption.
Capitalism worked just fine from the end of WW II up to the late seventies. Through regulation of the financial institutions (Glass-Steagall comes to mind) and progressive taxation, the income created by the many was shared by the many. Then along came Reagan with his "Trickle Down" Freidmanite bullshit economic theory. Remember, even H.W. Bush said it was Voo Doo Economics?
No. This isn't "capitalism" working as it normally does. This is fascism plain and simple where corporations, banks and government all merge into one cozy little relationship and rig the markets for the benefit of the few (ie themselves).
I'll buy it when I see the chinese factories go under cause nobody can afford their lead covered toys for christmas!!! Srsly you can't do it on min-wage!! I do see Wal-Mart stock falling off a bit, now that lay-a-way has returned to the common dissucssion >^^<
Try the article by Paul Craig Roberts at
http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/09/26/saving-the-rich-losing-the-economy/
Roberts pins the blame on the refusal of governments to make the banks accept losses from the housing and debt crises that blew up in 2008. All the rest of us suffer so the banks don't have to, which is not that far from your analysis ...
Whose analysis?
Anybody who believes it's the few against the many, with the few dictating the terms ...
Right on the money! No more too big to fail!!! your stuck with your own decisions,, gods how Libertarian of you!!! LOL >^^<
Apparently, you have become rather accustomed to personally attacking those many who do not believe in elite conspiracies as you do, Hue, with comments like you just made at 1:25pm. I found this out simply by doing a search on your e-name here and the numbers '9/11'. So there is more than one conspiracy theory you are into.... And anybody who is not a chosen Believer like yourseff, gets similar tongue lashings like the one you just delivered to me.
The question is why does this conspiracy thought seem so attractive to you and others who are nominally Left Wingers? You started out by attacking nastily The Guardian article reprinted on CD (and CD itself), and now you have leapt out like cornered demon in my direction for questioning your line of thought. But you never answered why you think it necessary to blame a conspiracy, of what you see as 'a very few number of powerful individuals that intentionally set this whole thing up', for what is a normal global downturn in the global capitalist economy? Why does it have to be plot all the time in your thinking?
pinchyway, perhaps you should ask yourself why conspiracy is such a frightful notion for you and other nominal leftists? Why you believe that the rich and powerful, uniquely among all sectors of society, NEVER engage in meetings behind closed doors to plan policies that further their own interests?
Actually, Memory_Hole, I have never said any of the remarks you now attribute to me. So I really don't have to ask myself the things that you tell me that I MUST be asking. There are real political conspiracies all the time, however the MAJOR aspects of the world economic crisis and the US political crisis regarding the so-called 'war on terrorism' post 9/11 has little to do with any board room conspiracy by rich folk or powerful folk, secretly plotting and acting in covert cells of landestine unison and all alone out of public view. Even when the Conservatives do coordinate their planning, it is usually done in rather obvious, readily observable, and open manner via their monied 'Think Tanks'. Instead of conspiracy, the Right is usually most blunderbuss, while many of my co-Leftists want to think that somehow they are all evil and all powerful when they simply just are not.
Hello again Horace.
"A normal global downturn in the global capitalist economy?"
That theory is being tested by the slowness of the supposed "recovery" to actually recover.
Conspiracies are attractive because they presuppose the possibility that the headquarters of the conspiracy can be located, the "very few number of powerful individuals that intentionally set this whole thing up" can be identified and held accountable, thus reversing the effects of the conspiracy.
What I think is going on is bigger than a "mere" conspiracy and there are more than a "very few" involved. But whoever they are and however many of them there are, the economy is still heading towards a crash. The world economy, thanks to globalization and its chief enabler computerization, is now one big tangled mess and no one can accurately predict what the effect of anything anywhere within it will be. Who would have thought that countries who are no longer big time players (e.g., Greece) could be in an economic situation that people who I believe to be well informed (James Howard Kunstler, for example) say could bring the whole thing down.
http://kunstler.com/blog/2011/09/punked-world.html#more
I hope they're wrong and that there are ways still to be found to keep the worst from happening.
Actually, rereading the Kunstler piece cited above, his last paragraph:
" In the meantime, can anybody answer this question: where is the Tea Party of Progressives? Why are the Nascar morons and Jesus jokers the only people in this country who can mount an aggressive political movement? Will somebody please step up and take the baton?"
Michael Moore and others have expressed the hope that something like this would happen. This is the dream of many, that if progressives behaved like tea party animals, they could force a turn-around and get the institutions to give it up and do the right thing. A few paragraphs earlier, Kunstler says (rightly) "financial chaos is not cool. Just so you know the sort of fate we are tempting with our shenanigans." I would remove the word "financial" from that sentence. When the progressives reach the "fed up enough to hit the streets point," that will not cause the Establishment to say "OK, OK, we give up." It will lead to social not just financial chaos. I'm surprised to find this optimistic dream at the bottom of the column of someone who I had always looked to for factual support for my paranoid pessimism.
'where is the Tea Party of Progressives? Why are the Nascar morons and Jesus jokers the only people in this country who can mount an aggressive political movement?'
The Left community has its Tea Party style nuts out there, Paranoid Pessimist. They often call themselves '9/11 Truthers'. They are quite numerous and noticeable, in fact.
______________________________________
"Why are the Nascar morons and Jesus jokers the only people in this country who can mount an aggressive political movement?"
_______________________________________
Ever heard of the Koch brothers?
It wasn't my question, it was Kunstler's. The "9/11 Truthers," as you refer to them, raise good questions. As with most of the big whodunnits, there may well never be a definitive final answer to 1) Did Lee Harvey Oswald act alone, was an innocent framed patsy, or as part of a conspiracy; 2) Was 9/11 a demolition job, a "let it happen" job, or exactly what the official story with all unlikelinesses its says it was; 3) Who really murdered Jon-Benet Ramsey; 4) Did Casey Anthony act alone and with premeditation.
With 1) and 2) I would personally love to see somebody outed as a proven guilty party, but I don't think that will happen. I await being pleasantly surprised because, were that to happen, major political changes could indeed ensue 3) and 4) are there to occupy and obsess the public mind.
The 9/11 Truthers may be numerous and noticeable, but they haven't yet caused any political public figures to change previously stated positions to avoid losing favor with them. The Tea Party animals have done and continue to do that.
LOOK OVER HERE! I have been standing on this mountian holding up this banner for years and nobody shows up! LOL, Ihave all the answers and I won't make you wear the same color shoes!! I'm ready to lead but nobody seems to care 'cry"
srs (sarcasim) >^^<
Pinchy, even the 9/11 Commission now refuses to stand behind the report they issued because so much information was witheld. Even now there is new information coming to light as the FBI just reveiled with the family in Sarasota, Fla. that just up and split days before the attacks. They were Saudi nationals and among the items found in their deserted home were ties to Atta and other hijackers.
A conspiracy is simply a gathering of more that one person involved in the plotting of an activity. Therefore there are literally thousands of conspiracies hatched each day. Conspiring with others is not a crime unless the activity they are conspiring on is illegal.
_______________________________________
There are many reasons, but two key and obvious ones as to why there has not been a left "tea party" equivalent stems from a lack of big-time financial backing and mainstream media support.
Particularly that "big-time financial backing" which the entire leftist, liberal, progressive world is hobbled for the lack of.
I would argue that the whole systemic analysis vs. conspiracism is a false dichotomy. Obviously the current Depression is the predictable result of 30 years of free market fundamentalism and deregulation of the financial sector. On the other hand, to abstract it out, to pretend that there are not specific wealthy individuals and institutions that pursued policies that got us here is fatuous. That is why Robert Scheer called his book about the sub-prime mortgage crisis and the bailout, "The Great Stick-up,"--because that's what it was: essentially, a heist of taxpayer dollars. And, appropriately, he names names. This stuff does not "just happen." There are real players who made it happen.
http://www.questionsquestions.net/documents2/conspiracyphobia.html
http://daviddegraw.org/2010/06/full-report-the-economic-elite-vs-the-people-of-the-united-states-of-america/
A criminalized business SOCIAL CLASS made up almost entirely of liars, thugs, and cons made it happen as it has happened, but not just some hidden group of nefarious and secret plotters. And besides just this business class, were huge groups and members of other enablers such as the churches, Pentagon welfare recipients (military paid families en masse), etc. Why concentrate always as if their are merely some cartel of secret criminals that have supposedly infiltrated 'our' National Security? YES, it is not just the Far Right that sees the world is this manner, but quite a few in the Left and liberal communities, too!
Neither hue nor I used the words "secret" or "hidden"--you did. Why pretend that real people like Robert Rubin and Larry Summers are not blameworthy but instead use abstractions like "overproduction" which nobody understands and is essentially meaningless as a proximate cause of the our joblessness and growing poverty? Of COURSE the corruption is spread out, and the problem is capitalism, but again I refer you to Parenti because you insist upon making an unnecessary dichotomy out of structuralism vs. conspiracy.
I'm just backing up what hue said. He didn't use the words "secret cartel of secret criminals"--nor did I. I simply refuse to pretend that the Depression we are in is some kind of 'natural' event like the weather. It isn't. Real people made it happen, and continue to make it happen, and continue to fail to address the real problems of the working people in this economy. And yes, these people are enabled by many liberals and others who have drank the Kool-Aide of neoliberal ideology, but that doesn't change the fact that real people in positions of power made the decisions to deregulate that resulted in millions of people being plummeted into financial disaster.
From the dictionary for you even, Memory_Hole....
business cycle — n chiefly ( US ), ( Canadian ) Also called: trade cycle the recurrent fluctuation between boom and depression in the economic activity of a capitalist country
You might want to not believe that the business cycle is a natural event, but it really is though, Memory_Hole. The dictionary definition reflects just that. You might actually want to interject your own, rather Christian morality and outrage against members of the upper classes into the equation, and then condemn them all to Hell for their sins, but that is quite like the Tea Party Right's world view and not so much the Left's.
We do all feel outrage about how the rich run the world but there simply is nothing that new or different about their modern day behaviors that has caused this particular downturn in the world economy. Our bursts of outrage and indignation will not change them much, and most especially our efforts to point fingers at the biggest 'sinners' can become rather counter-productive if we are not careful about restraining ourselves some. We oppose The System because it does not work, not just because it is immoral and sinful in our eyes.
It seems that this pov you express somewhat parallels that of liberals who seemingly believe that the corporate Democratic Party can be changed from being a corporate party into being one full of some sort of a higher morality, if just they can get some supposedly better people in. It just isn't going to happen though, simply because the DP paid hacks ARE BEHAVING just like themselves in a natural manner.... just like with the day and night of the weather. If we enacted all sorts of new laws against capitalist corruption, it would change nothing in the least long term, because the economic system is built on class unfairness and the looting of Nature itself.
Then what of the effects of Peak Oil upon Capitalistic economies? Would not the end of cheap energy be a major factor in bringing about the collapse of consumer consumption? Or is Peak Oil a hoax cooked up by the New World Order?
_____________________________________
"Zoellick said the risk of a fresh downturn added urgency to the World Bank's work on building safety nets; it was already helping in 80 countries. An IMF spokesman said: "The IMF continues to be supportive of the efforts of low-income countries to sustain growth and to continue strengthening spending on health and education.
___________________________________
"Recent Fund research shows that social spending has increased at a faster pace in countries with IMF-supported programs … This is true for social spending in relation to GDP and as a share of total government spending, as well as increases in per capita social spending."
______________________________________
These guys (WB, IMF) are pathetic ---- the venality and hubris is simply off the charts. Ever hears of "structural adjustment programs"?!
_____________________________________
The following is a link to an excellent article (quite long), and a brief excerpt:
_____________________________________
http://andrewgavinmarshall.com/2011/07/15/167/
_______________________________________
"In short, when the day comes where the rest of the industrialized world falls into the same trap as Greece, the middle class will be pushed down into the lower class, and a global socio-economic plutonomy will emerge. The middle class cannot survive the perfect storm of fiscal austerity, increased interest rates, inflation and ‘Structural Adjustment.’ We are entering a global age of austerity, where our political leaders commit social genocide for the benefit of the global banks, and at the behest of the institutions that represent them. The IMF and other supranational institutions increase their own powers and authority in order to punish and impoverish large populations. What has been done to the ‘Third World’ – the ‘Global South’ – over the past several decades is now being done to us, in the industrialized North."
Pinchyway-- I've been reading the above comments, but I can't quite make sense out of your behaviorist view of history. You state that "there is nothing "that" new or different about "their" [the rich] modern day behaviors
that has caused this particular "downturn". So you're saying the stimuli that they've responded to is basically eliciting the same old responses of the past.
This suggests that technology, the environment etc. may change but not really the behavior of this particular social class. Sounds lke fatalistic behaviorism.
I simply believe that the members of the capitalist class throughout the world have always been rather venal and calculating and so I ask myself why it seems that so many on the liberal Left side of the fence need to suddenly say that the Big Wigs have turned on America and blah blah blah in some sort of super calculated plot to dismantle what they themselves had once been forced by the Trade Union Movement and the Soviet and Chinese rebellions to do? Is it really necessary to come up with unsubstantiated ideas that 9/11 had the Bush Administration behind the carrying out of the attack, or that we are all under attack by USA 'Disaster Capitalists' whom are all DELIBERATELY creating constant world disasters so as to DELIBERATELY further their always totally evil intentions?
This sort of paranoia is almost a mirror image of the Far Right which also fantasizes gigantic DELIBERATE plots against their agenda by UnHoly Alliances.
'You (pinchyway) state that "there is nothing "that" new or different about "their" [the rich] modern day behaviors that has caused this particular "downturn". So you're saying the stimuli that they've responded to is basically eliciting the same old responses of the past. This suggests that technology, the environment etc. may change but not really the behavior of this particular social class. Sounds lke fatalistic behaviorism.
Tell me then, why do you think they, the Big Business community, have seemingly fundamentally changed in behavior, as you say that you actually believe has occurred? The NEW world environment and NEW technology simply has nothing much to do with their class consciousness and class behaviors, and nothing you mention is all that different from the past and neither is how the ruling class carries out its policies.
Plus, nothing I'm talking about has anything at all to do with what you label as 'fatalistic behavioralism'. I am simply stating that the conduct of the ruling class in no way has fundamentally deviated from ways they have behaved in the past during similar times. It is not a class that was doing 'good' but now has gone 'bad'. It's the same ol' group of thugs as always.
Makes sense to me,, every time an elite comes to the fore, they always out of dissatifaction with their own position, (still wanting more) they create various pyrmid and ponzi schemes to enrich themselves, many times they understand it's only for a short time, and many understand that creating these bubbles will inthe end create a mass of destriuction and and pain for those who supported them.... THEY DO IT ANYWAY! look at the collapse of Greese, Egypt, Rome, France, The British Empire! US 1929, Nazi Gremany, Japan, 80's, US S/L Bubble, the DOT.com bubble, and last but not least the Global mortage bubble! thet just collapsed!
IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME!!! ever since the fools invented CASH,MONEY!
>^^<
The ultimate goal of capitalist production is to maximize profits NOT the welfare of people. When more is produced than workers can afford to buy back workers are fired. Thus the inevitable crises of capitalism.
communism vs capitalism
is always quoted as either or
there is a middle ground
pure capitalism decays in to an oligarchy or monarchy ie a dictatorship
communism clearly decays into a dictatorship or oligarchy
regulated capitalism is the only way, reward hard work, but when concentration of wealth gets out of hand, government must step in and make sure everyone shares int he wealth and human compassion rules
this would be capitalism with some element of socialism perhaps
this is john maynard keynes
Great in theory, except the capitalist class always ends up getting so powerful it regulates the regulators and makes a mockery of the whole idea of govt. influence or control. The problem is capitalism itself. It must be abolished before it impoverishes all but a tiny elite and ruins the biosphere.
If anyone was being honest the title should not be, "The Human Cost of a Global Crisis",
but "The Human Cost of Global Empire" --- which causes all the crises, the wars, the vast economic inequality, the domestic spying and lying, the two-party "Vichy" facade, the environmental destruction, the etc., etc., etc.
The causal cancer behind all these 'symptom problems' and the too-numerous distractive 'identity political issues' that divide our focus, is not this "Crisis" or that "Crisis", but the friggin EMPIRE that causes the pre-planned looting scams, wars, etc.!
Get real folks, the Empire behind the "Vichy" curtain is what's killing you and your kids.
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
Liberty & democracy
over
violent & "Vichy"
empire
Not mentioned here is the rural aspect of the crisis. LDCs are 70% rural. (UN ESA) The "undernourished" are 80% rural. (UN FAO) The US, the global price leader, lowered export prices for farm commodities more and more 1953 to today, and prices have fallen drastically, except for a while in the 1970s and recently. This has made for a long term rural poverty crisis and a global food poverty crisis.