Daily: IMF to suggest govt. to raise VAT, retirement age

Paying down debt in the middle of a financial crisis is what the Tea Party is calling for here in the U.S. It sounds to me like kicking a man out of the hospital before he's recovered because he's behind on the bill. So he gets a job - and collapses. And just who does that help?

Back during the Great Depression, after Roosevelt's policies had begun to work and conditions showed some sign of improvement, the politicians started worrying about the size of the debt the government had run up in order to put people back to work, and they raised taxes and cut spending - and a second, worse, wave of business failures and lay-offs followed. The Depression was a long time ago, but how have demands to cut debt worked in Greece lately?

As for raising the retirement age, that's happening everywhere. When Social Security was introduced in the U.S. (during the Depression), the retirement age was 65 and the average age at death was 60. These programs just never envisioned providing for 30 years of leisure after 40 years of work.

You gotta be f'ing kidding me? The VAT is already at 18%, how much higher can people afford? And lower the pensions, they are at bare survival levels in many cases now. Wouldn't it nice for these enslaving world monetary organizations to just once think about the good of the citizens, than how for a state to better pay back its loans? The New World Order, lend a country some money, the elite do well, but the citizens are enslaved to pay back the loans taken by governments. What a great concept - a lot tidier than missles and assualt rifles. Read a book call Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, it explains how the West, mainly the USA, enslaves nations. What great humanitarians they are - filth!

You know you have a puppet goverment when the IMF is dictating you terms on the economy.

As someone who studied history you are utterly wrong.Roosevelt policies of overall neccesery but not too much government intervention did work well.The 1929 crash has massive repercusions.American GDP had halved by 1932.The coutnry suffered massive forclosures by both banks and farms.Industry ahd failed to moidernize and thus production had outstriped demand.

The facts are against you i am afraid:

In from 1929 to around 1933 American gdp had shrunk by a quarter.from 1000 billion to 750 billion.Within that same time period Roosevelt restored it to pre depresion levels by 1936/1937.By 1939 just before the war in Europe started,GDP rose above pre depresion levels.

The greatest economic crisis in American and indeed world hisotry had resulted in unemployment going from around 5 pecent in 1929 to around 22 percent in 1933.Within 4 year roosevelt had cut in down by around a third to 14 percent.It shot back up to 17 percent by 1938 but was declining once more to 17 percent.By 1941 just before the US entered the war,unemployment had dropped to around 10 percent.It is important to nore that while America was already doing its war business in Europe by suplementing demand for war goods,it did not skyrocket intil the involvment of the US in at the end of 1941.unemployment thus continued to drop substantially to pre depresion levels,thanks to new deal policies.Although high since hoover took office,dept levels were stable during Roosevelts peace time administration as president.

True,the war had helped America open new markets in the form of a war industry,but it could never do that had Rosevelt not implemented these policies.How else could the US make these war products to sell.

And thats the reason why the US economy was doing great untill the deregulation of the 70's and 80's.If Roosevelts work had been untarnished it would have worked.How would we know?Because his planners went to the defeated nations of Germany and Japan after the war to help rebuild their economies.Contrary to poplar belief the marshall plan was not solely responsible for the economic recovery of europe.It needed a good system to make use of that stimulus.As for claims of how the "looney left" messed up the economy i would gladly tackle the ussual neoliberal stories of how good old Maggie and Ronnie saved thw world economy by getting rid of big government.Too bad they could never bring in good government either.For the myth of the faliure of figures like Carter and Callaghan is misleading.Jimmy Carters tenure saw the creation of around 10 million jobs in his first term while Raegen created far less in his first term.Many believe that the economic woes of the 70's were caused by too much regulation.But it was largely a result of the arab oil embargo as well as the subsequent late 70's economic and energy crisis.The labour government in the late 70's had managed to reduce inflation to single digits.Unemployment had started to drop and callaghan could have actually .Britain had a rise in living standards in 1978 by 6.5 percent,so much for the " sick man of Europe".The so-called 'Winter of Discontent' of 1979 - which ushered in Thatcherism - is also shrouded in myth. James Callaghan never said 'Crisis, what crisis' - that was an invention of The Sun. The strikes themselves only lasted for a comparatively short period and were largely over by February 1979.

In Germany the social market economy set up by the conservative Adenaur reached its greatest potentials under the socialist leadership of Willy Brandt and Helmut schmidt.Germany's conservative leaders have ironically been the ones who historically set up Germany's social programs.Germany and Japan (despite the troubles of the 90's) have kept that model:As much freedom as possible and as much regualtion as neccesary.And it works.

I am not advocating for the the social market economy per se,but progressivism is the way forward.What we have today in Serbia, the Yugoslav region and the Balkans.We went from having economies (which although had an ok system )were totally based on loans,to a system where we sell of all of our industry with no replacement,we let corruption go rampant and thus have any good revenue from taxes.No proper programs,too little economic freedom for the common man and woman who have to adhere the lines of political parties and far too little regualtion on the major enterprises.No innovation and areas for creativity and no real attempts to improve education at all.

I think we need to change,and as long as we have both these far right wing who have yet to come out of the middle ages as well as these neo liberal loosers like Tadic and Ceda who think they are climbing mountains when all they do is walk over bodies.If thats what people vote for then fine.But I think we need the social liberal,progressive and enlightmment ideals that bring out the best in society.To give workers and employees a say in their professions,in companies based on the John-Lewis model.I sometimes hear people say that we can never be as succesfull as the Germans.

But the Krauts went through even tougher times than we did.They went from being an obscure collection of territories and states to becoming a strong economy one for the benefit and the success of all.

People are at heart the same all over the world,it is the path we take that defines us.Anything is possible if individuals set their minds to it.We in Serbia and in the region can do it,and if we set our minds straight,we will do it.

Sorry if this post might be long,the truth always takes some time to explain.

Rossevelt's policies did NOT work.. The economy did not get better until WW2 ended and all those people working jobs to support to war started building really every day goods.. That's when the depression ended..

Now as far as the debt goes, it CANNOT be repaid but it has to be dealth with.. Default..

(zman, 18 February 2012 23:03)

Roosevelt's efforts BEGAN to work (as I said), then - in his second term - the government changed course, worrying about the debt too soon, raising taxes and cutting spending.

As for the current debt, nobody's going to default. It's too high, granted, but compared to the size of the U.S. GDP, it's not as bad as in many countries - and what's more, it's declining (total debt, private plus public). There's a graph here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/9031478/America-overcomes-the-debt-crisis-as-Britain-sinks-deeper-into-the-swamp.html.

Reduce income tax puts more money in people's hands... An increase in sales tax will help this 'new found', which it really isn't, money flow into the country's budget stimulating growth... Makes sense to me... I'd rather have lower income taxes and then 'choose' how I pay tax with my purchases...

Hoover did not allow the correction, he had his own version of bialouts and stimulus and price fixing, rossvelet did the same.. The depression didn't end until 1946..

You know you have a puppet goverment when the IMF is dictating you terms on the economy.

You gotta be f'ing kidding me? The VAT is already at 18%, how much higher can people afford? And lower the pensions, they are at bare survival levels in many cases now. Wouldn't it nice for these enslaving world monetary organizations to just once think about the good of the citizens, than how for a state to better pay back its loans? The New World Order, lend a country some money, the elite do well, but the citizens are enslaved to pay back the loans taken by governments. What a great concept - a lot tidier than missles and assualt rifles. Read a book call Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, it explains how the West, mainly the USA, enslaves nations. What great humanitarians they are - filth!

Paying down debt in the middle of a financial crisis is what the Tea Party is calling for here in the U.S. It sounds to me like kicking a man out of the hospital before he's recovered because he's behind on the bill. So he gets a job - and collapses. And just who does that help?

Back during the Great Depression, after Roosevelt's policies had begun to work and conditions showed some sign of improvement, the politicians started worrying about the size of the debt the government had run up in order to put people back to work, and they raised taxes and cut spending - and a second, worse, wave of business failures and lay-offs followed. The Depression was a long time ago, but how have demands to cut debt worked in Greece lately?

As for raising the retirement age, that's happening everywhere. When Social Security was introduced in the U.S. (during the Depression), the retirement age was 65 and the average age at death was 60. These programs just never envisioned providing for 30 years of leisure after 40 years of work.

Hoover did not allow the correction, he had his own version of bialouts and stimulus and price fixing, rossvelet did the same.. The depression didn't end until 1946..

Rossevelt's policies did NOT work.. The economy did not get better until WW2 ended and all those people working jobs to support to war started building really every day goods.. That's when the depression ended..

Now as far as the debt goes, it CANNOT be repaid but it has to be dealth with.. Default..

As someone who studied history you are utterly wrong.Roosevelt policies of overall neccesery but not too much government intervention did work well.The 1929 crash has massive repercusions.American GDP had halved by 1932.The coutnry suffered massive forclosures by both banks and farms.Industry ahd failed to moidernize and thus production had outstriped demand.

The facts are against you i am afraid:

In from 1929 to around 1933 American gdp had shrunk by a quarter.from 1000 billion to 750 billion.Within that same time period Roosevelt restored it to pre depresion levels by 1936/1937.By 1939 just before the war in Europe started,GDP rose above pre depresion levels.

The greatest economic crisis in American and indeed world hisotry had resulted in unemployment going from around 5 pecent in 1929 to around 22 percent in 1933.Within 4 year roosevelt had cut in down by around a third to 14 percent.It shot back up to 17 percent by 1938 but was declining once more to 17 percent.By 1941 just before the US entered the war,unemployment had dropped to around 10 percent.It is important to nore that while America was already doing its war business in Europe by suplementing demand for war goods,it did not skyrocket intil the involvment of the US in at the end of 1941.unemployment thus continued to drop substantially to pre depresion levels,thanks to new deal policies.Although high since hoover took office,dept levels were stable during Roosevelts peace time administration as president.

True,the war had helped America open new markets in the form of a war industry,but it could never do that had Rosevelt not implemented these policies.How else could the US make these war products to sell.

And thats the reason why the US economy was doing great untill the deregulation of the 70's and 80's.If Roosevelts work had been untarnished it would have worked.How would we know?Because his planners went to the defeated nations of Germany and Japan after the war to help rebuild their economies.Contrary to poplar belief the marshall plan was not solely responsible for the economic recovery of europe.It needed a good system to make use of that stimulus.As for claims of how the "looney left" messed up the economy i would gladly tackle the ussual neoliberal stories of how good old Maggie and Ronnie saved thw world economy by getting rid of big government.Too bad they could never bring in good government either.For the myth of the faliure of figures like Carter and Callaghan is misleading.Jimmy Carters tenure saw the creation of around 10 million jobs in his first term while Raegen created far less in his first term.Many believe that the economic woes of the 70's were caused by too much regulation.But it was largely a result of the arab oil embargo as well as the subsequent late 70's economic and energy crisis.The labour government in the late 70's had managed to reduce inflation to single digits.Unemployment had started to drop and callaghan could have actually .Britain had a rise in living standards in 1978 by 6.5 percent,so much for the " sick man of Europe".The so-called 'Winter of Discontent' of 1979 - which ushered in Thatcherism - is also shrouded in myth. James Callaghan never said 'Crisis, what crisis' - that was an invention of The Sun. The strikes themselves only lasted for a comparatively short period and were largely over by February 1979.

In Germany the social market economy set up by the conservative Adenaur reached its greatest potentials under the socialist leadership of Willy Brandt and Helmut schmidt.Germany's conservative leaders have ironically been the ones who historically set up Germany's social programs.Germany and Japan (despite the troubles of the 90's) have kept that model:As much freedom as possible and as much regualtion as neccesary.And it works.

I am not advocating for the the social market economy per se,but progressivism is the way forward.What we have today in Serbia, the Yugoslav region and the Balkans.We went from having economies (which although had an ok system )were totally based on loans,to a system where we sell of all of our industry with no replacement,we let corruption go rampant and thus have any good revenue from taxes.No proper programs,too little economic freedom for the common man and woman who have to adhere the lines of political parties and far too little regualtion on the major enterprises.No innovation and areas for creativity and no real attempts to improve education at all.

I think we need to change,and as long as we have both these far right wing who have yet to come out of the middle ages as well as these neo liberal loosers like Tadic and Ceda who think they are climbing mountains when all they do is walk over bodies.If thats what people vote for then fine.But I think we need the social liberal,progressive and enlightmment ideals that bring out the best in society.To give workers and employees a say in their professions,in companies based on the John-Lewis model.I sometimes hear people say that we can never be as succesfull as the Germans.

But the Krauts went through even tougher times than we did.They went from being an obscure collection of territories and states to becoming a strong economy one for the benefit and the success of all.

People are at heart the same all over the world,it is the path we take that defines us.Anything is possible if individuals set their minds to it.We in Serbia and in the region can do it,and if we set our minds straight,we will do it.

Sorry if this post might be long,the truth always takes some time to explain.

(zman, 18 February 2012 23:03)

Roosevelt's efforts BEGAN to work (as I said), then - in his second term - the government changed course, worrying about the debt too soon, raising taxes and cutting spending.

As for the current debt, nobody's going to default. It's too high, granted, but compared to the size of the U.S. GDP, it's not as bad as in many countries - and what's more, it's declining (total debt, private plus public). There's a graph here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/9031478/America-overcomes-the-debt-crisis-as-Britain-sinks-deeper-into-the-swamp.html.

Reduce income tax puts more money in people's hands... An increase in sales tax will help this 'new found', which it really isn't, money flow into the country's budget stimulating growth... Makes sense to me... I'd rather have lower income taxes and then 'choose' how I pay tax with my purchases...