Europe Is Alike Argentina 2001

[germano]

What is all this garbage? Argentina screwed itself b/c it went socialist under Peron. What is so hard to understand about that? We even now have her face on the new 100 bills, which are worth 1000% less than they were 12 years ago, b/c the citizens of this country have no clue that socialism and Peron screwed them. It is incredible te lack of understanding this country has about true econimics.

Right ... socialist. Like Obama tries to turn the US into a socialist state.

 

[Bajo_cero2]

(700,000,000,000 dollars to the banks, from where did that money appears if not from the common citizen?)

They printed it. Do as i say, not as i do...

 

[John.St]

I said something similar the other day. When the war finished, the new power, the US, with Marshall Plan and economic helps to Japan and Europe "ninguneó" an important economy as it was Argentina by those days. That was the begginbing of the decadence IMO. And it has to do the fact that Peron has sympathized with the germans and Mussolini.

And you were told, what you could have researched yourself:

A major problem with a Marshall plan for South America was, that while Europe had a highly skilled workforce but lacked machinery, South America lacked both machinery and a highly skilled workforce.

Not a cent went to Japan, BTW, the Marshall Plan was meant to rebuild European economies only. Europe received app 12,731 mio. US$.

Japan received - through Aid to Asia - slightly more than 2,400 mio., completely disconnected from the Marshall Plan.

 

[Matiasba]

But following you logic it would be hard to explain why the Marshall Plan helped rebuilding Western Germany, then. I believe the reason is not that the Argentinian government had sympathies for Hitler Germany - but that it was so far away from the iron curtain and the US saw no risk that Argentina might be becoming part of the eastern block or that they needed Argentina to be a economically strong ally in the cold war. The US did not seem to have any issues with former Nazi sympathizers and even Nazis as long as they weren't involved in war crimes and the holocaust - they made some even US citizens to fly to the moon, build the nuclear bomb, build jet airplanes etc.

The help with germany, the same with japan, was because when the war finished, that shock might put the countries flirting with communism. Smart decission, I too think they might had converted into communism. The same happened for some years with Franco in Spain, they didnt help Spain, they only did it in the 70s, 20 years later.

 

[Matiasba]

And you were told, what you could have researched yourself:

A major problem with a Marshall plan for South America was, that while Europe had a highly skilled workforce but lacked machinery, South America lacked both machinery and a highly skilled workforce.

Not a cent went to Japan, BTW, the Marshall Plan was meant to rebuild European economies only. Europe received app 12,731 mio. US$.

Japan received - through Aid to Asia - slightly more than 2,400 mio., completely disconnected from the Marshall Plan.

well it wasnt the Marshall Plan then, but they recieved help, economic help, from the US, as well as Europe and unlike Argentina. I think Brazil case is different than Argentinas, and the facts tell me that while Argentina de-industrialized, Brazil got heavy industry, huge difference between our militars than them.

 

[John.St]

well it wasnt the Marshall Plan then, but they recieved help, economic help, from the US, as well as Europe and unlike Argentina. I think Brazil case is different than Argentinas, and the facts tell me that while Argentina de-industrialized, Brazil got heavy industry, huge difference between our militars than them.

Brasil simply received what was needed for the US war effort + payment for allowing US bases from where to fight the anti-Uboat war, while Argentina had placed its bet on Germany until very late in the war.

 

[scotttswan]

interesting video about Europe and Austerity

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=JQuHSQXxsjM

 

[joelie]

But saying things like money is the root of all evil and if we could just make sure everyone got some, all hte problems would go away is not only naive, it's incredibly divisive.

Money isn't the root of all evil - it's THE LOVE OF MONEY which is the root of all evil i.e. greed. Although you are right - just redistributing wealth isn't going to change the fact that people are greedy and mostly always going to want more than their fair share (or be wasteful, not share, etc.). Sooner or later after such a redistribution we'll still end up with the same situation.

On the other hand I think that dividing the resources is at least SOMETHING, and is a good thing.

Someone asked how is wealth created? Naturally! All the wealth that the world has are the natural resources (that we exploit rather than use responsibly) i.e food, water, fuel, everything. And our wealth is also our brains and our physical capacities (again, that are exploited rather than used responsibly). Cash and finances ARE NOT real wealth. Unfortunately most of the world has been brainwashed into believing that and so they focus their efforts of getting more money, or restructuring economies, all the while, the people with the real power use this blindness to gain more and more control of the real wealth (i.e. natural and human resources) to further exploit everyone and everything for their own advantage.

If people started working together, and worked at doing what was needed, as opposed to simply doing things as a means to making more money or living more comfortably (and got out of the self-deluded tunnel that what we wear/drive/possess is important),and also started SHARING what they don't need/use/have left over everyone WOULD have what they need - AND we would have more time for the important things in life like focusing on human relationships, and enjoying (rather than exploiting) and bettering the world we live in.

There are enough resources (food, fuel, everything) for everyone to have a decent standard of living, and to have enough food (people in the U.S. and U.K. for example each throw away one third or more of all edible food, simply because it looks 'ugly' or has gone past it's technical expiry date).

While the problem could be superficially resolved with a political solution, it's really a spiritual problem, and needs a spiritual solution. i.e. people need to change their attitudes and behaviour. You can excuse yourself from doing anything by waiting for the governments of the world to do something, or you can start doing something right now to get the ball moving. It's only ever going to happen when people decide to change themselves anyway. The whole world may very well not change, but at least you will be playing your part, and you can't buy the integrity and peace of mind that comes when you know you are doing your best to do the right thing in this regard.

End of sermon.

 

[Dublin2BuenosAires]

"All the wealth that the world has are the natural resources (that we exploit rather than use responsibly) i.e food, water, fuel, everything"

No, that is not wealth. Those are resources. Wealth is created when those resources are extracted, controlled, managed and distributed. None of this is possible without investment from private or public sources.

If we talk about oil, which like it or no the world is dependent on, there is a simple equation. How much does it cost to extract (variable being hit rate, quality and quantity) vs how much does it sell for. Private investment is used to transfer the risk of failure (no oil discovered, rising costs of extraction) away from the public purse into private hands. For this the public expects the private company to pay an adeqaute price to be able to explore public lands and % tax on return. In the nordics, the govt can charge a premium because extraction is not overly complex and the hit rate is high. These natural advantages (abundant extractable resources) allow the nordics to leverage the natural resources to create wealth for the public good. Here, it is high cost high yield. Ireland is high cost, low hit rate and questionable yield. In each scenario the equation should be balanced (by the public sector) to ensure wealth can be generated for the people (via tax) and via those evil corporations (without whom we don't get off the starting line, they have the technology and ability to accept risk which the public purse cannot nor should not have).

Public private partnership works when it is regulated for mutual benefit and not skewed. This is how wealth can be responsibly created. Mother nature doesn't just hand it up for the good of the people.

I am sorry that this is all terribly cold and boring, but it is a pragmatic reality as opposed to the nonsense of waiting for the world to start hugging each other. Human nature, even at the most cursory glance tells us the we will always fight to protect, or worse establish ownership of resources. The same occurs in nature, in plants, animals, everything.

It boils down to a struggle for survival, those with good faith and clear reasoning understand this and work for the most equitable and fair division of resources to allow for mutual benefit. The robber baron will always exist, greed is endemic and society can only place fair limits and fair reward for what we can euphemistically refer to as "sharing and caring"

Anything else ranges from exploitative to naive and ignorant of human nature and reality. I'm afraid your sprituality doesn't have an awesome track record in not ending up with people killing each other over their definitions of this intangible condition.

 

[germano]

interesting video about Europe and Austerity

Excellent talk! His comments about Brazil at end are pretty interesting.