Charles wrote:
>CB: What is competitive austerity ? Is it competition between governments
>to see who can cut social spending and public enterprise the most ? Is the
>difference between this and the 1930 situation that there weren't welfare
>state institutions as much in place then as in the period out of which
>competitive austerity is taking us now ?
Max writes: > There is tax competition between states and countries, but
the effect in distorting tax structures is much
more important, IMO, than the impact on the size of government. There is
pressure on the size of Gov, but it stems from ideological and
(anti-)redistributive concerns, not very much from actual competitive
pressure.
>There is the conservative notion that devolution will cause the public
sector to shrink, but so far this has not happened, in the U.S. at least.<
this is another reason why Max shouldn't leave the list. He's got it
exactly right. Different political units are competing for the favors of
the multinationals by cutting taxes & wages and the like. They also are
competing to push exports. This could lead to deepening world
depression. It's encouraged by the World Bank & the IMF (and the weakness
of labor and other non-capitalist forces). Until 2000, the deflationary
effects of this part of the "race to the bottom" was counteracted by the US
being the world's consumer of last resort. (These days, the US is
broadcasting recession to the world.)
>CB: Would Bush be going back to the old Republican trend if he protects
>the U.S. steel industry ?
more likely, he'd be giving in to special-interest pressure. The powers
that be -- both Republican and Democratic -- are all in favor of "free
trade." I doubt that they'll give up on this philosophy until the US stops
being the hegemonic power.
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
