Sad
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

The end of western democracies ?

So as the US stock market starts to weaken, is this the end for the strong dollar ?
With the end of free trade world wide is that the end of world economic growth ?
With the end of strategic alliance across the Atlantic is that the end of world peace ?
With the birth of a new great depression is that the start of runaway global warming ?

These things are structural changes in the world order that will haunt us forever unless soultions can be found and I see nothing in the current situaiton to give us hope of a brighter future - the attitude of the world has to change before thing can get better. The attitude of the world is not changing, positions are just becoming more entrenched and hostility is rising. How can we the people stop this ?

In a world dominated by democracies - how are we letting dicatatorship rise and triumph again ?
In a world of shrinking resource and overcrowding of habitable lands, how can democracies based upon continued economic and personnal wealth growth even survive ?
This looks like its very much the end - sad to say - and we let it happen on our watch.

Sorry to sound pessimistic but "united we stand, divided we fall."
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ArishMell · 70-79, M
European cand many other countries already trade with the BRICS ones (and each other of course), but President Trump's bull-in-a-chnia-shop approach wil cause problems for averyone - but he seems not to realise that - nor care anyway.

End of democracy?

Well, democracy based on economics and personal wealth alone is a fundamentally flawed because it bases the system on money rather than people. Rather, modern democracies work by constitutional equality of political, religious and cultural rights to all, irrespective of personal means; strengthened by those with little means being helped by those with more.

The problem lies in that last clause. We are not all "equal" by personal wealth, and if those with the least feel overlooked, ignored or not helped, they are very likely to turn to anyone promising them a "strong government" supposedly offering a better life economically despite becoming more and more constricted.

Then of course, when it doesn't they find it far harder to rid themselves of that "strong government".

.....

Climate change and resource depletion?

I don't think depressions brought climate change. Instead, wealthy times create much greater consumption of fuels, and of non-fuel minerals. Vitally though, alongside the sheer wastefulness within wealthy societies, the "developing nations" rightly want such necessities as reliable, safe water, sewerage and electrical services, and decent homes. Services and homes we in the "developed" world too easily take for granted... until a breakdown in any of them hints that we should take nothing for granted.

The threat of anthropocentric climate-change was first raised more than a hundred years ago, but based on the contemporary rate of burning coal, the universal fuel then, and it placed the danger-point so far ahead it was easy to ignore. Anyway the early 20C was marked by a touching faith in "taming Nature", with rapidly-evolving science and engineering forecast to solve all of Mankind's troubles. No-one is a seer so no-one could foresee some of these devolpments bringing their own problems.

However, this unbridled growth increasing climate-change and resources depeletion, could indeed threaten democracy in their own ways.

Minmising climate-change may need moves many people find unpleasant to contemplate because they may infringe their right to choose and use fuels as they wish. Shrinking availability of materials makes owning "stuff" more expensive and difficult. The alternatives would still alllow the critical freedoms but the "stuff" may become too expensive for many people.

Now, those are not themselves threats to democracy. We still have the constitutional rights but some aspects of our personal lives may be restricted by direct regulation or by increasing cost. Unfortunately, rather than accepting the inevitability of a cosy life taken for granted, and working with it, many people are likely to see it as "They" removing their freedoms for the sake of it. This will affect the well-off more because they tend to have hobbies needing costly equipment like boats, a lot of driving, and holidays in pricey foreign resorts.

.....

To summarise, strong democracies and their economies should survive the present crises within, and caused elsewhere, by the USA's present leadership; but the entire world irrespective of political systems faces far greater threats that may need very uncomfortable solutions.

In a democracy, those solutions will not or should not reduce our basic, constitutional, political, religious, economic and cultural rights. They may though need legislation, or will bring strong economic restrictions, impinging on our personal lives in material ways. We'd still be free to do the things we enjoy but no longer able to afford it.
Captain · 61-69, M
@ArishMell Nice summary Arish. I belive in equality of opportunity, and that means the same chances for everone which means a restriction in what parents can do for their children and thats hard... but totaaly fair... and I think to the benefit of the world as a whole. I also think a world where anyone ca be more than x100 better off than anyone else is fundamentally flawed. I have ideas about how this could happen but I think they are too radical for this totally greed and power bsed society we have, back to you for comments. as glad to have net you. Looking forward to part 2
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Captain Thankyou

Many countries do attempt to reduce that giant wealth gap by combined taxes and welfare systems, but I know such measures are very unpopular in some countries.

One thing perhaps not mentioned much is that although the very rich can afford tax "advisers" to help them avoid paying as much tax as possible; many wealthy people do pay a lot of tax indirectly, e.g. via VAT, because they buy so many luxury goods and services.

The real difficulty for the poor is that they still need eat, heat their homes, buy clothes, pay utility bills and so on just as the rich do; but if you are on a low pension they cost a far greater proportion of your income.
@ArishMell That’s what happened in China - a huge increase in the standard of living for many people, at the cost of living in a dictatorship.
Captain · 61-69, M
@LeopoldBloom Very true - and somewhat socialist - but it only goes so far. However that is the point, A socialist meritocracry surely is a better ultimate desitination than a greed based partiarchy and nepotism driven free enterprise society which preaches no safety nets and lets its weak and poor starve ot death - ie the ultimate Republican party dreamland or somehting similar to ancient Rome although they used to let them die in combat for entertainment which was cheaper/infact made some richer. Which path are we aiming to go down ?
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@LeopoldBloom The dictatorship was not at cost of better standards of living, but parallel. There are plenty of democracies with equally high standards. Any decent country looks after its citzens, without needing be a one-party tyranny like China.
Captain · 61-69, M
@ArishMell But the US already has some of the poorest and cetainlt has the richets and this whole theory of tirickle down ecnomics has been completely discredited by the last 50 years of history since th esoclial democratic models of democracy were replaced by free enterprise models. Rich people do not spend their money - %age wise they are the meanest people on earth - almost by definition. Also recessions happen when the velocity of monety decreases because money exchange is business by definition.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Captain The richest can also afford accountants who understand tax laws enough to exploit any useful loopholes; but I was referring to the luxuries they buy.

It will depend heavily on their country of course, by different tax systems:

Buy an expensive home in the UK and you pay high Stamp Duty on the purchase, then high Council Tax on it, for example.Sell it, and if above a certain value you pay Capital Gains Tax on your investment.

Also, most purchases here are VAT-rated at 20% (presently). So for example if you buy a £100 000 car you pay far more than the buyer of the £20 000 vehicle. Then the fuel is taxed in a compound way by Duty and VAT: 120% of (retail cost + duty): but the profit to the garage is minimal. And the insurance will be very high on the luxury car so the Insurance Premium Tax will be relatively large.

I gather the USA is one of very few major countries now that do not use the complicated but lucrative VAT system, invented in France but soon adopted by other countries.

Nevertheless the very rich still manage to squirrel money away abroad, a sore point that successive governments seem unable to cure. As like as not by the time the announced loophole really is closed the "advisors" have found ways round it.

That by the way, is tax avoidance, and legal. Tax evasion is a different matter, and a serious offence.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
Crisis? You should be ashamed. This is the beginnng of a fairness adjustment. About time. @ArishMell
Captain · 61-69, M
@ArishMell Its about velocity of money - and only the rich can park it so it no longer creates economic acitivty so in a recession they just park it somewhere safe.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
Are you rich or are you making this up? @Captain
Captain · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson Neither - next question
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
If you’re not rich you can’t know what the rich are doing with leaves (fill in the blank). @Captain
Captain · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson Of course I know what they are doing. I have rich rellies who've done it for years. Dont play mind games with me
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
I see and they discuss everything with you. Got it 😂🤣😂 @Captain
This comment is hidden. Show Comment
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@jackjjackson I didn't use the word "crisis" but as things become clearer, the tariff regime becomes ever more baffling, inconsistent and unfair - eventually bad for the USA as well as everyone else.

I can understand why Trump has imposed it: he thinks, rightly or wrongly, the USA is in hock to the rest of the world, but he has not grasped why so much once-US industry has gone overseas over many years.

Unfortunately his policy also seems based merely on lists of nations and territories, compiled with no skill or analysis.

Some reported examples:


Higher tariff on Israeli goods than Iranian ones?

Compound tariffs on some nations - though I can understand that for Chinese goods?.

Tariffs on poor countries in Africa who are no threat to America but need all the exports they can?

Tariffs on countries like the UK, with whom the USA is in reasonable trade-balance - though at least the tariff is "only" 10% on UK-made goods?

Tariffs on the Norwegian island of Svalbard, population about 3000, whose only industries are a coal-mine due for closure anyway, and cruise-ship tourism ?

Tariffs on a group of Pacific islands that are not even inhabited?


No thought about the consequences for all the American customers who will pay these taxes, let alone for other countries and world-wide trade? Or does Trump understand those but simply not care?

Some countries might benefit by finding new markets - and the UK firm JCB has announced plans to double the size of its Texas factory - but there is also the fear of "dumping" by which exporters like India and China significantly cut prices to sell elsewhere, seriously undercutting indigenous manufacturers.

It's a mess, trying to solve a problem that has been building for decades, but in about the clumsiest way possible.
Captain · 61-69, M
@ArishMell My favourite bit was the uninhabited island. The hting is while the US had high growth and was the go to county to trade with it was all supportable, but when the stock market drops and it looks like it will America will sneeze and the rest of the world will catch a cold and the hole ponzi scheme will collapse. This is not good.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@Captain The stock-markets are infested by quick-profit buffoons with the nerves of bomb-happy chickens but usually the sneezes are smoothed over by those with more long-term interests, like pension-fund managers.

This thing though is not a stock-market sneeze. Those are reacting, with major American companies being among the ones to suffer; but this farago looks more like an entire national government losing its way.

I can understand what it thinks it is trying to do and have some sympathy with American industrial employees, as over the latter half of the 20C Britian lost swathes of her industry to the USA, Japan and China in roughly that chronological order. This id different though. For sheer bloody-mindedness combined with ineptitude and ignorance of the rest of the world, this policy by Donald Trump takes the award.

I have just heard even the UK-dependency Falkland Islands have been hit with a 24% tariff, over twice that on most UK goods. Hardly a threat to the USA, whose trading might exceeds much of the rest of the world combined, the Falklanders' main export is frozen fish.

'''''''

When Trump was President first time round, in 2016, he invited himself on a State Visit to the UK, where he rapidly announced his international diplomacy skills by both stating he wanted Greenland and suggesting we sell our National Health Service to America. We soon set him right on that one. I've a vague recollection he also offended Germany at about the same time, but I forget over what.

I realised even then why he might have wanted Greenland, because he'd already been calling climate change a lie. The link was about as subtle as the man himself, and just as naive.

Previously most of we Britons knew him only as some American property-speculator who had somehow wangled planning-permission to destroy a Scottish "Site of Special Scientific Interest" (protection by law) to build a mere golf-course and its hotel.

He had hoped for a State Visit this time around as well, but perhaps he has decided, or been advised by his diplomatic service, to pass on that...
Captain · 61-69, M
@ArishMell Yes but he loves his golf courses because he's Scottish. Remember that one ? Ive said this already but I bet he doesnt know the words to "flower of Scotland" (incidently the song that caputures th eone thing that unites all Scotland, going to war aganst England, a propery only shared with the French, and which does in reality expaling the forging of th eauld alliance). Notrue scot would not know the words to their unofficial national Anthem ?
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
You’re a Scottish citizen now? How does anyone know when you’re being truthful? @Captain
Captain · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson No but I've lived in Scotland and I know scottish history and the only thing that ever united them was war against the English, and it uUnited them wiht the french against the Elizabethans. I know you folks don't have much history and prefer to forget most of it so Im not surprised you don't know this.
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
I see so snarkiness is now your new angle. BTW in which country do you currently reside please? @Captain
Captain · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson What busines is that of yours ? Snakiness well I don't bother being bitter, I just move on, saracstic - I know yankees don't do sarcasm or irony as a rule, but Im a Brit and we do it all the time, its a way of life. it comes form always being on the worng end of things like trench humour. Semoer in bobvinu excretum that's us. Putin has us down as his m=number 1 nuclear target - did you know that ? He'll probably end up using your exported missiles LOL
jackjjackson · 61-69, M
You answered my question. I never wrote that snarkiness is bad. @Captain
Captain · 61-69, M
@jackjjackson Well to be bitter is bad., Yoiu cant hold grudges all your life. They will eat away at your character and make you a lesser person.. I dont hold grudges if I can help it. As someone once said "forgive your enemy, love your neighbour, and turn the other cheek". He was a clever bloke regardless about what you may consider as his provenaunce.