Just before New Year’s Eve, I had the pleasure of being interviewed by Doug Henwood once again. As the New Year was approaching fast, our talk, naturally, summed up developments on the Euro Crisis during 2012 and the prospects for 2013. To listen click: Behind the News with Doug Henwood for December 27th 2012
Podcast Contents
- 27:00 to 38:08 – Starting at the 27th minute of the program, Doug asked me about the mood in Athens (as, at the time, I was visiting Greece for the holidays). Until 38:08 the audio quality was quite bad, due to a bad Skype line. After that it is fine (so if you loathe bad sound quality, jump to 38:08)
- 38:08 to 38:50 Discussing the Greek government’s lack of a Plan B and its reliance on the hope that some miracle will deliver Greece from its Depression
- 38:50 to 45:03 On the prospects of Italy and Spain
- 45:03 to 51:26 What is Germany up to? What is Berlin’s plan for the Eurozone?
- 51:26 to 54:10 Doug asks: “Why has Europe’s Left proven so docile in the face of these senseless austerity policies?” This gave me an opportunity to delve into my ‘theory’ of what lies behind the death of European Social Democracy – see this too.
- 54:10 to end On the rise of the Greek Nazi Party, Golden Dawn
Tomorrow the Bundesbank will tell France to send the Bundesbank´s gold back to Germany. This will go down very well in Paris!
Eureka! Eureka!
Let’s mint Greek coin and bypass austerity:
http://www.iefimerida.gr/news/85600/%CE%B2%CE%B1%CF%81%CE%BF%CF%85%CF%86%CE%AC%CE%BA%CE%B7%CF%82-%CE%B5%CE%B3%CE%B9%CE%BD%CE%B1-%CE%B4%CE%B9%CE%AC%CF%83%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%BF%CF%82-%CE%B5%CE%BE%CE%B1%CE%B9%CF%84%CE%AF%CE%B1%CF%82-%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%82-%CE%BA%CE%B1%CF%84%CF%81%CE%B1%CE%BA%CF%8D%CE%BB%CE%B1%CF%82-%CF%84%CE%B7%CF%82-%CE%B5%CE%BB%CE%BB%CE%AC%CE%B4%CE%B1%CF%82
Let me start by saying the show is clearly left leaning. The climate change propaganda being spouted out is a dead give away. If I can state what I thought was common knowledge it has now been proven that there is zero connection between CO2 emissions and the climate of the planet. For example, (sources are given)
About Merkel not wanting to admit Germany cannot continue with a trade surplus with Greece. This may be so but it also must be acknowledged that the actions of the Greek government are only making Greece more uncompetitive with Germany and therefore making the trade account deficit problem with Germany worse. In other words the Greek government is just as much to blame as the German government.
About the Right & Left. We have to acknowledge that this is an extremely narrow definition. The right and the left as referred to in the media is two sides of the same coin, that coin being a big government. The true alternative to the right and the left is small government and this is never talked about as being a solution.
About “Why has Europe’s Left proven so docile in the face of these senseless austerity policies?”. This exposes Henwood’s complete & total ignorance of the situation. The reason the left are silent is that they are the beneficiaries of the “austerity”. If it wasn’t for the tax increases and bailouts they would have gone out of business in the form of a Greek government default long ago. The left (unions/government workers) will lose their jobs if the tax increases and bailouts stop.
Make no mistake, the problems in Europe have been created by the left & the right through their big government policies. The crisis in Greece is not about the left or the right it is about small government vs big government, it is about a default, low taxes, low regulation, economic freedom vs bailouts, increasing debt, massive tax increases, poverty and starvation. The solution is obvious and it is a travesty that the logical solution is not even being discussed in the media in Greece or anywhere else. It is the biggest piece of evidence you can have to prove that the “mainstream media” are actually GPOs (Government Propaganda Outlets)
For Christ’s sake, Richard: the link between carbon emissions and climate change is established by consensus of the world’s leading scientists. The fact that there is some dissent is meaningless, especially considering how many people are prepared to say anything to get lobbyists’ big money. It is no more left-leaning than the Tower of Pisa. Rather, it shows how ignorant you are of basic scientific principles and methodology.
As far as your grasp of economics is concerned, I have given my opinion here several times and I will not repeat it. My only surprise is your continued chutzpah in putting your own uninformed opinions at the same level as people with decades of expertise and serious published research.
Guest – “carbon emissions and climate change is established by consensus of the world’s leading scientists.” – Guest, you are either blissfully ignorant or refuse to acknoweldge the facts. It is now recognised that temperature increases come before CO2 increases. Governments cannot acknowledge this information as they now derive so much taxation from CO2. You have noticed that road tax for example is now based on CO2 emissions?
The dead giveaway to you that the rest of the world not longer believes CO2 causes global warming should be the fact that the mainstream media and government no longer use the term “global warming” and instead use “climate change”, this way they are covered if temperatures increase or decrease. I hope I am not labouring the point here.
The video gave numerous sources to show the CO2 farce but let me give the link again in case you missed it http://board.freedomainradio.com/forums/t/23462.aspx
Here are some additional sources if the ones above are insufficient for you
http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/vostok/vostok.html
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/291/5501/112.full
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/283/5408/1712.full
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/299/5613/1728.full
http://www.brighton73.freeserve.co.uk/gw/paleo/400000yrfig.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tag/climategate/
A highlight “The letter is interesting for lots of reasons, not least its grotesque hypocrisy. “In recent years”, he writes, “attacks on climate science have become personal” – as if somehow the real victims of all this are not the innocent taxpayers being screwed to pay for the great green boondoggle, but ordinary decent climate scientists like Mann and his Hockey Team just trying to get on and do their job.” – http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jamesdelingpole/100121659/climategate-2-0-junk-science-101-with-michael-mann/
Richard
You talk complete cr@p there from start to finish. The evidence for AGW continues to grow & confirm the scientific consensus (one or two vocal & immensely well backed cranks aside). Moreover, we see that the scientists have in fact offered a +conservative+ estimate of effects & timescales.
Also, the fact that the economic crisis began & continues because of the finance & banking sector’s casino, not the fault of government anywhere in Europe with the tiny & trivial exception of Greece. is not controversial in Europe, or much anywhere outside the fantasy universe of clowns like yourself. The government sector is more widely in crisis now having taken on the losses of private finance.
It should also be noted that Greece’s government – of whatever nominal label – was long ago ‘captured’ by the narrow interests of the wealthy elites there.
No actual ‘left’ or meaningful democracy has been in operation anywhere much in decades.
Mike – Why is big government defenders always seem to think insults are the way to carry on a discussion? Is it that your castle is so fragile you do not think it can withstand any probing?
You seem to be have a raft of sources to back up CO2′s effect on climate, please feel free to highlight a couple here so I can investigate further.
You think that the Greek government is the only one with the problems? Please remove your head from the sand, what do you think the largest economy in the world is going through at the moment? The debt ceiling debate is just around the corner. Why is the UK government so worried about its spending? Why are the markets on a knife edge about Italian bond yields?
“The government sector is more widely in crisis now having taken on the losses of private finance.” – Yes I agree, yet more mismanagement and abuse of the population by big government and big business, what is your point?
“It should also be noted that Greece’s government – of whatever nominal label – was long ago ‘captured’ by the narrow interests of the wealthy elites there.” – Again I agree, you believe the UK or the USA is in a different position fundamentally?
“No actual ‘left’ or meaningful democracy has been in operation anywhere much in decades.” Again I would have to agree, we are living in fascist times or as I think you would put it, a world dominated by the right? ie a world dominated by businesses who have taken over government.
As I said originally, there is more than “left” and “right”, I am neither of these. I disagree with the “left” just as much as I disagree with the “right” and the “centre”. There is an alternative. Look to the USA pre 1913.
Richard: I am not interested. I have read far more on the science of climate change than you ever will. I already know from your comments on economics that you have insufficient education or knowledge to make sense of complex issues.
Guest – Okay your not interested, your entitled to live in the past. The sources I state give the most up to date understanding of the situation, I do not doubt that reams have been written about “global warming” in past which you have read and I have not. And again, you fail to state any of your sources.
About economics, I believe the same thing about your opinions. You have a far too simplistic view of an impossibly complex subject. And again, my point is proved in the fact you believe in macroeconomics.
Macroeconomics being a text book example of something that massively over simplifies a complex issue.
You are obviously in complete denial or completely oblivious to the damage that the leading proponents of macroeconomic theory are doing to the US, the UK and the European economy. Unless of course you believe the people “in charge” of these economies are not practicing and/or are not believers in macroeconomics? If not, what economic theory do you think they are subscribing to?
Richard: if you do not accept any economic theories at all, then you are back to the Middle Ages. The problem is not with accepting a range of theoretical frameworks (including Marx’s political economy): it is that the world has been, and continues to be, dominated by neoclassical economics. The entire economics profession has been structured to exclude economic models that do not conform to the closed classical models that US economics has pushed. Yanis has explained this again and again, so I don’t see why you don’t get it.
As to what I believe in, I incline to scepticism about all economic models, but am open to persuasion with adequate empirical testing — just as in natural science. Neoclassical models have failed to explain, predict or manage economic reality; therefore their utility is very limited.
Guest – ” if you do not accept any economic theories at all,” Your reply leads me to believe that you think all economic theories support the idea of macroeconomics.
“do not conform to the closed classical models that US economics has pushed.” – your saying the the US economic policy is in someway different to France, the UK, Greece, Spain, Italy?
“but am open to persuasion with adequate empirical testing” you have the same view of psychology?
“Neoclassical models have failed to explain, predict or manage economic reality; therefore their utility is very limited.” – I couldn’t agree more, I think I must have got you all wrong, your comments up to this point led me to believe you were defending the status quo.
If you are not defending the status quo I wonder why you attack the theory that predicted the current crises, has predicted what will happen next, managed the US economy brilliantly up to 1913 and explained all of the above in a way a 5 year old could understand.
“Unless of course you believe the people “in charge” of these economies are not practicing and/or are not believers in macroeconomics?”
From wikipedia:
Macroeconomics (from the Greek prefix makro- meaning “large” and economics) is a branch of economics dealing with the performance, structure, behavior, and decision-making of an economy as a whole, rather than individual markets. This includes national, regional, and global economies.[1][2] With microeconomics, macroeconomics is one of the two most general fields in economics.
So let me get this straight.You dont even understand what macroeconomics is.You assume its a single thing/theory/school of thought
Again from wikipedia:
Macroeconomists develop models that explain the relationship between such factors as national income, output, consumption, unemployment, inflation, savings, investment, international trade and international finance.
So according to you there is a single one theory regarding “the relationship between such factors as national income, output, consumption, unemployment, inflation, savings, investment, international trade and international finance.”And that theory is wrong.
If you dont even understand what macroeconomics is how can you argue about it?Unless ofcourse you’re not aware that even your beloved Austrians have developed theories about inflation,unemployment,investment etc…does that make them “microeconomists” ?
Crossover – You’ll have to explain this to me. How is it possible for someone to disagree with something on a logical basis if they do not know what it is?
With regards to your other comments. Yes I acknowledge the existence of the theory of macroeconomics.
“Unless of course you’re not aware that even your beloved Austrians have developed theories about inflation,unemployment,investment etc…” – You have lost me here. Yes Austrians economics explains inflation, unemployment, investments etc. Are you saying because of this Austrian economics must subscribe to macroeconomic theory?
“How is it possible for someone to disagree with something on a logical basis if they do not know what it is?”
Thats exactly what im wondering.
“Are you saying because of this Austrian economics must subscribe to macroeconomic theory?”
Austrian economics is just ONE of the several macroeconomic theories*.Why is it so hard to understand that there are several (and most often opposing ) views about topics such as inflation,unemployment,output and so on ?And these views fall under the macroecomics field of economics.You dont get to study inflation or unemployment in microeconomics classes.Its so simple.
Im well aware that Austrians believe that what is true for one entity should be true for the sum of all entities (which is absurd anyway) but this doesnt change the fact that Austrians are just one more school of macroeconomic thinking.
*Im not saying that the Austrian school has only developed theories over macroeconomic topics.Im merely saying that they do cover macroeconomic topics among other things.
Crossover – “Im well aware that Austrians believe that what is true for one entity should be true for the sum of all entities” – Excellent, taking it a step further, do you acknowledge that Austrians generally have a negative opinion towards the concept of “macroeconomic policies”?
@Richard
You still dont realise “macroeconomic policies” are not just what you are against and they are certainly not ONE THING.
Lets say a country suffers from unemployment.The Austrians would suggest to slash wages.Others would suggest an increase in gvt spending.Someone might suggest a currency devaluation.
No matter which option you prefer, all 3 are MACROECONOMIC POLICIES.
We get the point.You hate Keynes.But not only Keynes has developed theories over macoeconomic topics.And we’re certainly not experiensing Keynesian policies right now as you like to believe.
PS Im not a Keynes’ advocate.