Anonymous
9th December 2001, 05:25
After the second world war the US was in a very confortable position so i came as no suprise when those in charge of its external policies imposed there vision of the new world order. This grand scheme, new world order that started to be put in motion had many aspects. The one that interests us for this particular issue is the new economic world order. The Bretton Woods system, idealized by the US and the Brits. Its objective was to liberalise comerce but not the movement of capital, because the flux of capital had to be regulated. There where two fundamental reasons for this: one was the belief that the liberalisation of finances in general was prejudicial to free comerce and the other knowledge that no restrictions on capital movement would end the good condictions enjoyed by the west. With no control over capital goverments would be unable to organise there tax sistems and there social policies for fear of seeing those capitals flee because of the excessive costs those policies would force on them. The Bertton Woods sistem was the guide line for the new economic world order until the clinton administration. If in 1970 90% of the World "trade" was real trade (transaction of products) in 1995 95% of the world "trade" was sepeculative most of it was very sort term investment. At the same time the richest nations eliminated what was left of capital restrictions.
The results where the expected y bretton woods. There was a serious atack social policies and at the same time intervencionism was increased. Markets became more volatile and the gorwth of the developed nations economies entered resetion/stagnation. In the US salaries and profits stabalised or droped, meanwhile the 5% richest acumulated enormus profits. Enequality returned to levels seen 70 years before as did levels of poverty and hunger. Ingland follow the same route as did the other rich nations although with less extreme consequences in some cases. But The effects where more devastating in the sothern hemisfere. The comparison between latin america and east asia is interesting. Latin america is the world champion of social enquality east asia is the oposite, the same can be said for heath education and social well being. In latin america the economy is mostly run for the consumtion of the very rich, in east asia it is directed to productive investments. the total of capital that left latin america is almost the sum total of its external debt. in the estern asiatic contries that movement was controled in latin america wealth almost total exempt from social obligations. the problem there is state subjection to the rich, and mafioso like corporations.
Capital leakedge isnt a problem exclusive to the third world. After the second world war there a massive exodus of capital to the US from europe. This could have bin evoided had proper messures have bin taken. But instead the american goverment prefered the rich europians to deposit there money in NY banks while the costs of the resconstruction of europe where suported by the american ppl through the payment of taxes. Marshall plan about covered the movements of this nervus capital.
For The Third world contries that have no control over there elite class the debt that rises each day dispite the payment of enormus interest rates has estrangulated there economies and paralised there social policies efectivly kill thousands if not millions of people. This debt is wrong and has no fundament because that money was not asked by the miserable peseants that do not benefit from it and sufer its consequences. They have become responsible for this debt through the payment of taxes.
Debt is an idealogical construction, not a simple economic fact. Andas has bin known for a long time freedom of capitals is a powerfull weapon against social justice and democracy. there are meany tecnical sistemas to evoide it but they have bin pushed aside by powerfull interests. This is the true face of golbilisation and one of its major components is slavery through debt.
At the same time this is happening there is talk among WTO of a law that would enable corporations to prosecute goverments that try to impose restrictions on capital....
The results where the expected y bretton woods. There was a serious atack social policies and at the same time intervencionism was increased. Markets became more volatile and the gorwth of the developed nations economies entered resetion/stagnation. In the US salaries and profits stabalised or droped, meanwhile the 5% richest acumulated enormus profits. Enequality returned to levels seen 70 years before as did levels of poverty and hunger. Ingland follow the same route as did the other rich nations although with less extreme consequences in some cases. But The effects where more devastating in the sothern hemisfere. The comparison between latin america and east asia is interesting. Latin america is the world champion of social enquality east asia is the oposite, the same can be said for heath education and social well being. In latin america the economy is mostly run for the consumtion of the very rich, in east asia it is directed to productive investments. the total of capital that left latin america is almost the sum total of its external debt. in the estern asiatic contries that movement was controled in latin america wealth almost total exempt from social obligations. the problem there is state subjection to the rich, and mafioso like corporations.
Capital leakedge isnt a problem exclusive to the third world. After the second world war there a massive exodus of capital to the US from europe. This could have bin evoided had proper messures have bin taken. But instead the american goverment prefered the rich europians to deposit there money in NY banks while the costs of the resconstruction of europe where suported by the american ppl through the payment of taxes. Marshall plan about covered the movements of this nervus capital.
For The Third world contries that have no control over there elite class the debt that rises each day dispite the payment of enormus interest rates has estrangulated there economies and paralised there social policies efectivly kill thousands if not millions of people. This debt is wrong and has no fundament because that money was not asked by the miserable peseants that do not benefit from it and sufer its consequences. They have become responsible for this debt through the payment of taxes.
Debt is an idealogical construction, not a simple economic fact. Andas has bin known for a long time freedom of capitals is a powerfull weapon against social justice and democracy. there are meany tecnical sistemas to evoide it but they have bin pushed aside by powerfull interests. This is the true face of golbilisation and one of its major components is slavery through debt.
At the same time this is happening there is talk among WTO of a law that would enable corporations to prosecute goverments that try to impose restrictions on capital....