Everyone will agree that measured over the last 300 or 100 years, the poor have been much better and the top layer went only marginally ahead.
No so This may go on for some economies as in (Western) Europe and countries like Canada, the USA, New Zealand, etc. In the rest of the world is the gap between rich and poor one hundred years since the couple often extremely increased , such as in India (under the influence of colonial rule), Latin America (Brazil, Chile, Venezuela, Mexico, etc.), the Philippines, Indonesia, and many more areas. The example of India: including the British economic warfare with the Indian textile industry for example (using the Queen's gunboats) took the standard of living is dramatically down, poverty in India is still incredible - there the (British) wealth ( Indian) creates poverty.
Rich country, poor people It is not odd that the richest countries in natural resources are often the poorest people know. The widespread looting that Europe, Japan, and after the Second World War, especially the United States committed, found no place where nothing was to get. Sat Netherlands nor in Indonesia to the local population to Christianity. But the impact of colonialism not weggeëbt? It is replaced by a much smarter economic imperialism. In some third world countries are democratic reforms that have something to do with the differences (eg Venezuela, Bolivia). One of the methods can be applied is partly shielding the domestic market for the "globalization" - the recipe that virtually all wealthy countries have come to their prosperity. In other countries the gap (the threat of) violence maintained.
China it takes its wages artificially low state - a large group of Chinese economic growth benefits, but a much larger group, which actually does work, little or much smaller extent. Reactionary offensive In many countries where the differences were less 1980 years, is a reactionary offensive that began to expand it again (United Kingdom, United States). It is also called "neoliberal", but it is actually reactionary: a response to the mixed economy and democratic structures that reduce the disparities between rich and poor control).
This is sold as it would bring prosperity, but the most excessive by the neoliberal ideology-ridden countries (U.S., Canada, UK) are now recognizing the fastest growing poverty and debt slavery in what was once the "middle" name. And that is certainly no coincidence. Ex-Soviet: poorer than ever The former Soviet Union and many countries in Eastern Europe are a special case, because in the western communist societies were associated with poverty. In fact, there is also poverty of large groups of people increased, after the total sales of public services especially in Russia.
Although the wealth for a small group there to record levels rose, so did since the gap between rich and poor is extremely far - we had the Russians after 1991 promised something quite different. No clichés, a.u.b. It is not wise to think in clichés, as some societies in their own way to a form of wealth that are not always fit in a box, such as South Korea on the one hand an enormous wealth had increased in recent decades by an aggressive application of the Asian Tiger recipe that made Japan a superpower - to South Korea changed from a feudal state into a consumer society, but on the other hand it was the target of "structural adjustment" of the IMF ( after the Asian crisis ", which I will highlight elsewhere on request). And where now the number of have-nots again steadily increasing (from never been away, incidentally), with a neoliberal believer at the helm. Democracy? There is no reason for pessimism lapse - it helps not to "the poor" pathetic way. Help them help themselves, but how do you do that? Who can stand up for themselves, can unite in unions, not by the henchmen of an oppressive state to be nailed together, is an acceptable wage together fishing. Those who own case, as millions in the Third World, may well save himself, but not as a corrupt state tolerates exploitation by corrupt mafiosi, exorbitant rents and usurious interest rates that count. IMF and World Bank urge countries 'structural adjustment' that lead to a debt mountain, the selling off of public services and commodities, and a devalued currency, so a low purchasing power of the poor access to productive resources that go with it - the best recipe for Sustainable poverty. Is the introduction of democracy this recipe? It is by no means a guarantee.
There are dictatorships, from the desire to retain some popularity, a reasonably sensible economic policies, and there are democratic governments ± sell their land to the highest bidder, and let the people mired in poverty - and vice versa. Divide and conquer The smart of the global economic system that the capitalists have put together is that people can play against each other brilliantly. In a country like the Netherlands can we speak of "the gap between rich and poor, but so is a country like Indonesia.
Dutch (without debt) with a permanent full-time job working at the minimum wage, without too many problems can usually come around (and making a good chance of a subsidized apartment). You should not complain, would you say. The prosperity gap with the poor in the developing world is enormous. At the same time from the financial-economic elite pressure exerted on the structures that make this possible. The minimum wage should be reduced, to compete with low wage countries to enter. The housing would be largely liberalized, this flexible. It should be stressed that education and knowledge is the key to the future, while they work to further privatization of education, which are more expensive the better training and equal opportunities in education for each social class are undermined.
Dual The working class of the richer countries in a dual role as manoeuvrable. On the one hand there is the role of exploiter. By buying all extremely cheaply produced stuff (be it fruit, exotic fruit and vegetables, coffee, toys, DVD players or laptopjes goes) is the working class from the richer countries contribute to the fun of his fellow-chains ( land) worker in the Third World. On the other hand, the living standards of citizens in richer countries modal latent and under constant pressure, and is by no or little inflation of wages (by manipulated inflation figures) and continued pestering of "moderation" by politicians and the business, through which we "strong" would be found in the mythical battle cooked with low wage countries. It is a time A perfect case of divide and conquer, naturally. The working people of the United States are the most prominent victims of the globalization mechanism.
Their role of exploiters - thanks to artificial purchasing power of the dollar, they could consume all silly - is increasingly eroded by the role of exploited. The U.S. itself produce far too little for the trade shortfall, businesses will not be there temporarily, because they are good in India, Mexico, China, and elsewhere, of the wealth generated by charlatans and false prophets promised in the real estate bubble is nothing left. And so it pushes millions with the rubbish, which (if lucky) now looks in a mobile home may eat their food bank. Or will our turn depends entirely on us: we the mechanisms of capitalism and globalization distinguish whether we remain in self hypnosis and become warm to the "purchasing power pictures" of technocrats?
0 comments:
Post a Comment