Billionaire Priorities Means Society Will Fail Ordinary People
A recent survey (ref Bloomberg TV) showed that 56% of people would prefer to see jobs created than have cuts to deal with the deficit.
What this shows is that ordinary people are more in tune with what is good for the economy than the experts making the decisions on our behalf.
The simple answer to the conundrum "jobs or deficit?" is that in a fair and just society we can have both, the reason being that creating jobs is the best way to deal with the deficit.
But the priorities of those who run the banks, manage equity funds and handle our pensions will always run counter to this simple truth.
When jobs are created the burden of social security is removed and taxes paid to the treasury improve.
When people have jobs or feel confident about future employment prospects, they are more likely to spend money which helps local businesses.
Improving the lot of local businesses adds further riches to treasury coffers.
The general uplift in confidence at street level will ultimately filter through to the property market and unlock that other great obstacle to growth, house sales.
Instead we are now faced with the twin evils of low consumer confidence and rising inflation.
When has this ever happened before? In the past inflation was linked to high street spending.
Now there is constrained spending on the part of the consumer, yet inflation is rising.
How come? Because the interests of the world's richest are being placed before the interests of the man in the street, and this in turn will make everything a lot worse for the vast majority of the population.
It means that central banks are faced with the frying pan or the fire as the only options to get us out of this mess: they can either raise interest rates to keep a check on inflation but risk sending the property market into oblivion; or they can do nothing and risk inflation wiping out what little disposable income people have left, also likely to damage any growth prospects.
So why doesn't the government just create some new jobs? Because this runs counter to the free market theories of today's political and business incumbents.
Artificially creating jobs would put a brake on business confidence in the upper echelons.
Stock markets respond favourably to job cuts, but hate artificial job creation.
This is ideology, not common sense.
Common sense tells the ordinary man in the street that unless he has a job he will not be able to contribute one jot towards the recovery of his country's economy.
And moreover if commodity prices continue to rise, fuel and food on which he absolutely depends, the very things which are now stoking inflation, then his lot, and the state of the country, will continue to deteriorate.
It is a sad fact that billionaire priorities, low employment and wage ratios, short term productivity and profit increases, and rising stocks and shares, continue to mar a proper and lasting recovery in the health of our world economy.
What this shows is that ordinary people are more in tune with what is good for the economy than the experts making the decisions on our behalf.
The simple answer to the conundrum "jobs or deficit?" is that in a fair and just society we can have both, the reason being that creating jobs is the best way to deal with the deficit.
But the priorities of those who run the banks, manage equity funds and handle our pensions will always run counter to this simple truth.
When jobs are created the burden of social security is removed and taxes paid to the treasury improve.
When people have jobs or feel confident about future employment prospects, they are more likely to spend money which helps local businesses.
Improving the lot of local businesses adds further riches to treasury coffers.
The general uplift in confidence at street level will ultimately filter through to the property market and unlock that other great obstacle to growth, house sales.
Instead we are now faced with the twin evils of low consumer confidence and rising inflation.
When has this ever happened before? In the past inflation was linked to high street spending.
Now there is constrained spending on the part of the consumer, yet inflation is rising.
How come? Because the interests of the world's richest are being placed before the interests of the man in the street, and this in turn will make everything a lot worse for the vast majority of the population.
It means that central banks are faced with the frying pan or the fire as the only options to get us out of this mess: they can either raise interest rates to keep a check on inflation but risk sending the property market into oblivion; or they can do nothing and risk inflation wiping out what little disposable income people have left, also likely to damage any growth prospects.
So why doesn't the government just create some new jobs? Because this runs counter to the free market theories of today's political and business incumbents.
Artificially creating jobs would put a brake on business confidence in the upper echelons.
Stock markets respond favourably to job cuts, but hate artificial job creation.
This is ideology, not common sense.
Common sense tells the ordinary man in the street that unless he has a job he will not be able to contribute one jot towards the recovery of his country's economy.
And moreover if commodity prices continue to rise, fuel and food on which he absolutely depends, the very things which are now stoking inflation, then his lot, and the state of the country, will continue to deteriorate.
It is a sad fact that billionaire priorities, low employment and wage ratios, short term productivity and profit increases, and rising stocks and shares, continue to mar a proper and lasting recovery in the health of our world economy.
Source...