Would Tea Partiers be happier in Britain?
When it comes to the economy, governments - like generals - seem to be fighting the last war. This explains the radically different approaches to dealing with the economic droop on both sides of the Atlantic.
John Maynard Keynes - arguably still the world's most famous economist - was buried in Britain, the country of his birth, yesterday in an undignified, unmarked grave. The coalition government thumbed its nose at deficit spending, deciding to tighten belts so much that some fear it might choke the life out of a questionable recovery.
The reason, apparently, is that the last economic trauma for Britain was the intervention of the IMF in the late seventies. That was when the UK ran up unsustainable debts, couldn't keep the lights on and gained the reputation for being the sick man of Europe.
The IMF rode again earlier this year, this time into Greece. But Britain wants to holiday in Greece. It doesn't want to become Greece.
The coalition's cost-cutting, belt-tightening measures are principally aimed at preventing history from repeating itself even while they raise the stakes in a completely new gamble.
This may account for the fact that Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg, leader of the more centre-left Liberal Democrats, sat next to his boss David Cameron looking as comfortable and rosy cheeked as Banco's ghost.
In the US it is of course the Great Depression and its traumas which inform today's battles. Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank, is the preeminent scholar of the subject. It is commonly acknowledged that the Depression was prolonged when FDR introduced severe budget cuts, until America was saved by those massive public works projects otherwise known as the New Deal and World War II.
So, compared to Europe, the administration here has spent like a drunken sailor and is merely tinkering with the thought of cutting welfare programs and containing - at best - the increase in defence spending. Keynes has been naturalized with full honours.
I have an idea. We should organise a massive population exchange program: French demonstrators and British worry-warts in return for Tea Party supporters. Both would feel so much more comfortable in each other's homes right now.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~43~RS~)
Comments
"It is commonly acknowledged that the Depression was prolonged when FDR introduced severe budget cuts, until America was saved by those massive public works projects otherwise known as the New Deal and World War II."
You know, I've also heard the explanation that the artificial economy created by New Deal programs actually lengthened the Depression. If the economy had been allowed to recover naturally, the Depression may have ended sooner-well before WWII. Just a theory, but looking at the sorry success rate of the Obama administration's "stimulus programs" it might be a theory to ponder.
Complain about this comment
A 'pov' from north of the border: the "Tea-Partiers" would never approve axing the military. That's just too, too "un-American". The US should have listened to Eisenhower.
Complain about this comment
"I have an idea. We should organise a massive population exchange program: French demonstrators and British worry-warts in return for Tea Party supporters. Both would feel so much more comfortable in each other's homes right now."
An excellent idea. Sadly, none of us can afford it. Which is more-or-less at the crotch of the matter, no?
It reminds me of a similar idea of some twenty years ago, to the effect that the entire population of Northern Ireland should be swapped for Palestinians in a one-for-one exchange. Two birds with one stone, peace in our time &tc..
But on a more serious note: if we give you Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck -- who do we get in exchange? For the right offer, maybe we could get a public collection going.
Complain about this comment
"I have an idea. We should organise a massive population exchange program: French demonstrators and British worry-warts in return for Tea Party supporters. Both would feel so much more comfortable in each other's homes right now."
Oh please take every last one of the tea party supporters! It's on me, at no charge to you.
Complain about this comment
It is commonly acknowledgged that the US was 'saved' in the 1930s by FDR's new Deal?
I assume this is meant as a serious remark. In that case - it's back to the history lessons for your, Mr. Frei. And choose your textbooks with care.
Complain about this comment
The tea party movement in America is, contrary to contrarian accounts, a true peoples’ or grass roots movement. With the American rebellion in full sway, William Pitt (the Elder) continued to remind the British parliament of the spirit of a true Briton. The British people had reached a zenith within their realm whereby kings (previously appointees from God) where relegated to normal people, and normal people were elevated, in the mindset of the likes of Thomas Paine, as folks that could for the first time pursue their true desires.
This ‘Spirit of ‘75’, proposed by Pitt, should for all purposes be thought of as the last ditch hope to save the colonies and maintain their love of England, Britain and all that the previous revolts, revolutions and rebellions had brought to this freedom-loving people. However, due to ill health, and a monarch that was utterly inept, insane and out of touch with normal people, Pitt tried but failed to persuade Parliament, and more importantly the ministers to this Idiot ‘King’, to accept the olive branch proffered from the eastern shores of America.
In many ways the tea partiers of today revel in that same halcyon light of 1775, where the Hanoverian ‘monarch’ was repudiated and English individual freedom was rejuvenated. They talk of Franklin and Paine, Reagan and Thatcher. They harken back to monarchical tyranny, which today in America is found in the new ‘kings’: the elite from Harvard and Cambridge, and the money, wealth and social standing that those things bring.
Would tea partiers be happier today in Britain? I think so. I think they would see much of the same boundless energy in the pursuit of both freedom from the bonds of unfair and unrepresentational taxation, as well as the freedom from governmental control so that they can pursue their own individual dreams, without let or hindrance from an overarching government or monarchy.
So to them, the Tea Party movement in America, I give my full support. It is a hindsight view of both the freedom that Britain developed and engendered to the world, as well as the folly of allowing ‘our’ government to get a little too big for its boots.
Complain about this comment
Would Tea Partiers be happier in Britain?
No, but I think the Brits would get a laugh, might cheer them up.
The Coalition Government (to me) is a disappointment. If they were really "for the people", they would be considering adding their European voices to FTT (Financial Transaction Tax) or FAT (Financial Activity Tax), and stop cutting and squeezing the little people. Ut's a fact that either FTT or FAT would harm the investment banks very little, while making all the difference to social programs and the fear of any future bank failures. So why has the Coalotuion Government chosen spending cuts? Possibly the G-20 will throw light on this weird situation.
The IMF always causes econmic traumas; this is due to the fact that it requires social welfare cuts and capital privitization before it lends, and these policies spell doom & gloom.
The IMF rode again earlier this year, this time into Greece, but the EU (for the most part) closed the door on Greek involvement with the IMF.
The coalition's cost-cutting, belt-tightening measures are principally aimed at the lower class while the elite, especially financial institutions continue to make profut and pay bonuses. I really cannot understand where the British wrath is; is Britian too polite to get loudly angry at the Coalition Government?
It's commonly acknowledged that the Depression was prolonged when FDR, wanting depserately to enter WW2, finally got his excuse with Pearl Harbour. It was the full employment afforded by WW2 that gor the United States out of its last depression, and the United States has subsequently clung to the war machine. What would happen if the modern military came home, armed, angry and finding no jobs?
I have an idea. Britain should shake hands with the EU and insist on FTT or FAT across Europe, but then that would require courage to finally cut the symbiotic ties with the United States of America.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS