Everything in the plan: a time of myths Now the savings plan is on the table. Or at least the first approach. As expected for a long time was, is, of course, there set in the lobby least resistance is expected. So it obviously makes things vorallen unemployed and families. While the energy industry will also bleed a fuel levy, but that is far out. Top earners are even in the conversation, but where it is not, they're generally only the upper part of the real economy. Somehow a potential takeover approach by the banks and wealthy but is still way out of a serious discussion, remains at best the nebulous and irrelevant.
The timing and timing was unexpected, namely, to enter the NRW election and in the middle of the football World Cup 2010. The package now before us is certainly not the last word
, since this will change some things and still get in a few heavier dogs. But that's the next four weeks completely. As planned.
The emphasis of the austerity package is on output rather than reducing tax increase. But this is just a sham. Because with spending cuts alone is, and not so pointless to lift, test the state restoration. But here plays the biggest role coalition partner FDP. With tax increases they would lose namely the last
rest of her face.
And then once again plays a large role in elections. For Merkel, the FDP would now really take over the coalition table, then a Federal President Gauck would open the door. For with this humiliation Merkel, the FDP has now been openly threatened
. Said Hess was quoted FDP Chairman Joerg-Uwe Hahn
"Two or three times Altmaier, and two or three times Söder, and the majority of Wulff in the first round is at high risk." So no ostensible tax increases and no Withdrawal of the worth billions, and after corruption scented, gift tax on the hotel industry. Last amounts to some 1.1 billion euros a year (!), While for example the now saved building of the Berlin City Palace just once (!) Brings 450 million. This is no rational thinking person to explain, at best, a football fan, at least think the coalition in Berlin.
times of crisis are also times of myths and prejudices. Myths and prejudices usually have quite a kernel of truth or reflect typical daily experiences. This makes it so insidious and indestructible, even if they prove to be when you look closely as complete nonsense. Opportunity that is now to some comments in advance to make, because these myths are in further discussions the citizens now in rows served again.
Myth 1: "We all lived beyond our means, now we all have to tighten our belts.". The truth is your up there have lived beyond our means. In addition, the belt will be strapped tight and not only below the top. Especially as it is up there now so fat that no belt would hold the necessary train because it is necessarily fat. Also, the "we" not only a social but also a temporal component. Those who lived through the conditions are long dead, retired, or in the jet set paradise of Saint Tropez, when get those buckled their belts, should pay the debt. The lower and middle social group, and the future generations will generously taken into custody for debt, of which they themselves have benefited least or not at all (children and grandchildren). The actual main beneficiaries are now it was not, or no longer be liable. With Generation contract or justice is not to really address here.
Myth 2: "The national debt is the biggest problem." This is at best a partial truth. Too high national debt is actually bad because the interest on the public directly by the state coercion of taxes, duties and taxes are taken out of your wallet. Much more important than the relative level of government debt is the sum total of economic debt, the sum of private and public debt. The others can be read from the ratio of bank assets and gross domestic product.
The public debt in Germany, and in many other Western countries is in fact not that high. Far deeper in debt, however, most private Anleihenbegeber next to the state. Thus, in particular the banks
(!) Is far deeper in debt than the state. Big banks with investment shares lift with equity of about 5% in some cases only about 20 times more debt. If we add the state of its 500 billion direct taxes as against equity, so the braces in Germany, not even the 4-fold. Therefore, it is always the relatively solvent state which must be based on a regular basis since 2008, the wobbly banks and not vice versa.
Myth 3: "Public debt is avoidable." No. Because the state must always afford a certain percentage of GDP for investment, be it pp for roads and infrastructure, social services etc.. For such future investments he has to go first just like any business to a certain extent with loans into submission. Since the GDP first increase exponentially as well as the asset (liability according to assets), so does the national debt exponentially. As long as this is compensated by the next annual growth, it is, just like a company, not harmful. Stops the growth has been sustained one, then the even more devastating than for a private company. The latter can outsource business-namely, expenses, the State as manager of the national income but not economics. The truth is, however, that debt must keep in economically reasonable. In the long term is to the dilemma of the increasing national debt to change anything fundamental. Unless one makes any investment in the future, while at the same time increasing the burden on the citizens. But this leads as well as with a company that always brings bad products to ever higher prices to the market to decline.
The current fight against the debt burden of the state is trying to avoid a major inflation. Although this is not longer avoidable, but it hurts particularly the major asset owners and is there a nightmare, even more than the small savers. For the state could just as practiced in the United States, the necessary Busy printing money (equity purchase of bonds by the Fed or ECB) and accelerate the increase in wages and purchasing power of workers. This was therefore also been busy lobbying again helpful, since the currency reform last resort discouraged owners of capital much more than hard workers.
Myth 4: "The public debt of the Japanese is much worse, and that it's still not bad." This is partially true. With his exorbitant national debt of close to 200% must
Japan always serve as evidence that we currently around 80% but could still strong long into debt.
But this has more hooks. First. It is not on the national debt, but rather the sum of public and private debt. Which is in Japan but not higher than in the U.S.. According to OECD data
GDP / Assets ratio is about 1:5 there as well. Japan has of course more problems than the U.S. because the yen is not even now hold the world currency.
A consequence of the high public debt is of course the decade-long stagnation in Japan, which is in the model of
"Dead Man Walking" just the hump of the GDP trend. This we have achieved until now in 2008. Secondly, Japan has another special feature: On the one hand the extremely high private savings rate, the high level of discipline, loyalty and faith in government and the specific capacity for suffering of the Japanese.
Myth 5: "We must restore the state budget by saving". This can not succeed. This is only possible through
Saver dead . The infrastructure falls, the purchasing power of the consumer citizen a break. This can be produced with no self-sustaining recovery.
The opposite is the case. Debt "to save away" is in a financial economy with FIAT-money principle, impossible. By the pure debt coverage of the money, the debt of the one always the property of others. Debt destruction therefore means more property destruction, ie, go bankrupt without a replacement, in particular the leave of
bond issue. Just the attempt is as absurd but desperately since 2008, and to avoid the expense of the citizen.
One can only private against public (bank rescue, recovery plans) or public private exchange them (National savings). In the latter, it is hoped the private use its resources to take over government deficits, such as their own road paving. That will do it voluntarily but barely.
Myth 6: "Financial market regulation is internationally useful. This myth is also in the modification of
Capital is a shy deer " or" horse apples theory related to ". It is certainly true that a common and effective international (!) Regulation would be best. Only such a rule that does really through, much less likely than the EU speaks with one voice once. So that's probably the Easter falls on Christmas.
It is only when at least one of the world presses forward key financial centers. BRD is one of those places. The feared consequences are not so bad. This would indeed lead to some capital flight, but this is very limited. The reason is that there are few capital markets there that can take huge amounts of money to gamblers at all. So as the United States, EU, UK and Japan. China, however, is tightly regulated and not free.
addition, the regulation of normal lending and the economy of very little importance. For as it is for a good contract, not to a few milliseconds in the Internet commerce still on the blink something percent Tobin tax. This is only for gamers of, however, significant, important. And also to have large banks, which are mixed in a negligent manner, the merchant banking and investment business. For example, the German bank, whose lobbyists, however, indicate the tone of the discussion.
Myth 7: "Democracy is government by the people, they alone guarantees freedom of opinion and of individuals." This is largely in the last decades in Germany. Just as the Golden Twenties of last century. What can the democracy or not, this turns out to be only in the existential crisis
.
In the Weimar Republic, it has completely failed, and unfortunately the current trend is not really in a different direction. Rather than being directed against those who caused the crisis, the leaders directed against the sovereign, against the fundamental interests of the majority of their own people. They do the good Part not from malice, but out of simple incompetence, presented at the fishing rod of large industry and financial executives.
democracy as we know them for more than 60 years in Germany and love is, from a historical point of view but not more than one
side note. Even the world it represents only a minority of the forms of government. More difficult is the preservation thereof.
And the concept of freedom of the individual and the opinions have changed gradually more and more of a freedom of economic activity. To a prison by, for and with the money. For example, to see just for example, the problem of music piracy. As you will, starting from the USA, which, for freedom essential, post secret in email and internet ad absurdum to give to pressure from the music lobby the major distributors insight into Internet movements. to attach to teenagers because of some silly MP3 files wrecking lives and absurdly high damage claims to the thin neck. Instead of saying, "love music lobby, new techniques are first your problem. You have to keep your business models for, and adapt to the new techniques from the modern age. The holy grail of freedom we take for overpriced Trallala not overboard. "
It is the frightening experience of the new century, how much the parliamentary democracy in Doubt, always apply for the capital and against the people. In the next few years is whether we really have a defensive democracy or whether we can lead us into ruin.
Myth 8: "Democracy and capitalism go together" Now, however, this is utter nonsense. They have so much in common as thick as thieves, but not like Yin and Yang. Which business form a democracy chooses, it depends really only on the will of the people. Preferably, this is a general opinion that the social market economy.
What belongs together, therefore, this is democracy and social market economy. Whether one of the latter still can talk, is now questionable. Increasing time work instead of full-time, 1-euro jobs, layoffs due
trivia for the little people and the grotesque bonuses and severance pay for the billions of shredders, weakening workers' rights and participation, transformation of expensive by the worker himself paid unemployment insurance in an alms tax, cuts in social benefits as Hartz IV, etc. pp. It is also from the SPD and the Greens Schroeder's party these things were sent on their way.
For the Greens, was so inexcusable that it indeed only useful for a bunch of more or less environmental laws came into office. In the SPD, it was rightly seen as a betrayal of the own electorate seen. This process is particularly significant for the diametrically opposite of democracy gradually changed the initial objectives of the Basic Law fathers.
The philosopher
Matthias C. Mueller was interviewed by Focus on the zeitgeist:
.. "You have to see this in context. We live in an era in which the classical democracy is being destroyed little by almost unnoticed. By global capitalism in the financial markets, the data storage and future generations, it does not matter that their data is stored. I see it as a threat to our liberal lifestyle. That is why we need more democratically enlightened, engaged citizens ... Why do we let the world rush and see the world from nothing but not more screens? Why do we tolerate the subjects role in the frenzied capitalism? These are existential questions .... What disturbs me about our contemporary culture, is the compulsion for perfection and excellence. There is this unspoken invitation to be interesting to keep an impressive life, much to see of the world, an illustrious circle of friends to have ... Hardly a person does not feel pressured. Today it is a rarity, if you are enrolled in any gym. And who is not a yoga retreat on a Thai island flies, is almost to justify its merits .... Basically is almost in the direction of fascism - when entire populations are placed them in a mindset from which they no longer know that it is problematic. Fascism comes from the Italian word "fascio" for bundles - Restraint, if you will. In a figurative sense, we live in a fascist era, which makes many people unhappy ...." Myth 9: "Subsidies are bad because they distort the market" No. The purpose of a subsidy is in fact the market distortion. It will give the recipients an advantage. So to overcome such a crisis or to enable a start-up funding.
they are bad because, if one has once given, it is taking little more back. The ubiquitous lobby groups regularly throw themselves into stuff because when threatened with imminent doom. When you make a subsidy has been deleted, then usually at the price of a compensatory subsidy elsewhere.
If our democracy still works, will also show the fate of the current subsidy
hotelier. As it has annually in silly campaign using 1.1 billion (!) Off on the expense of taxpayers. By 2014, ie 5.5 billion. This would necessarily include the current savings plan, it would be been a major contribution. But even the addition of its own corruption. Exciting and revealing, then, as we intend to conduct in the matter.
Permanent
subsidy of the poorest is but one of the subsidies, which practically do no harm. For as the welfare recipients or unemployed has virtually no savings and were less likely to vacation in Thailand, the subsidy ends up almost completely back into the domestic economy. Be it in the pub or on the rent account of the medium. Anyway, they protect German jobs as a waitress or the janitor. And it reduces crime, because anyone who is starving cares understandably no longer legal, illegal or give a damn. Just as many financial jugglers, where morality not from hunger but out of greed, have lost.
Myth 10: "After every downturn comes an upturn again." That's right, just as the weather warms up cold at night and by day, just as the summer hotter than winter. And regularly, if no climate catastrophe is announced.
Really interesting course, are the medium-and long-term averages.
short term are variations in economic development to the longer-term average. The long-term trend is however now in the negative, because the private and public debt Skim off on their return on assets had grown exponentially every last possible growth.
Without real property reforms in the coming economic winter
getting colder and the economy always balmy summer, the average drops to negative.
(Source: here ) 
Despite this clear legal position, the members of the Federal Assembly shall be taken into coalition force and prevented effectively in a free decision. The applied pressure is enormous, and caught dissenters may be in doubt be sure never back to their party a foot on the floor to get. to risk and thus, ultimately, immaterial or material benefits, and even income and pension entitlements. Even though it is officially formulated in any document so ever, it is a fact. 
