tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5575042626763129889.post4914283363428303807..comments2023-09-23T08:56:47.362-07:00Comments on Grime and Reason: Organised Religion Vs NeoliberalismUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5575042626763129889.post-69246518254778626552012-05-29T10:33:29.283-07:002012-05-29T10:33:29.283-07:00TBH, with the market-fundamentalist chicago school...TBH, with the market-fundamentalist chicago school of economics being central within neoliberal evolution, they are indistinguishable on economic grounds.<br /><br />Certainly having an SOB as dictator in chief aint great, but it isn't a separate issue. Oftentimes these dictators received support from the U.S. so that these reforms could be forced through, often for geo-political (stopping them going commie)as much as economic reasons.<br /><br />I aint no fan of government, neoliberal or not (in the same way I'm not a fan of corporations or organised religion). I fully accept their necessity *up till now* of course.. but I do not think that status should go unquestioned much longer. The longer we go, the more immoral and corrupt they become since they are not evolving at the same rate as civil society.<br /> <br />Were you to establish a government from scratch, using today's technologies, it would be utterly different to the current 18th century relics that are struggling to remain relevant.Grimeandreasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12767103165109605622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5575042626763129889.post-75111444857167768812012-05-29T05:50:04.030-07:002012-05-29T05:50:04.030-07:00See, I would consider the idea of the viewing the ...See, I would consider the idea of the viewing the "free-market" (in pedant-quotes b/c there's really no such thing IMO as a "free" market) as a panacea is more a "market fundamentalist" perspective than a "neoliberal" perspective. But regardless, i tend to agree, but there's definitely an overwhelming amount of evidence that there's a benefit to reducing government involvement in the economy to an extent. <br /><br />It's like most things in life - i.e. it's a balancing act. Too little "G" in the macro economic equation is bad, as is too much. <br /><br />The correct ratio seems to depend largely on the type of government you're dealing with. i.e. it has to be fine tuned to based on the country you're dealing w/. <br /><br />In the USA, our central government was designed to be a loosely organized, inefficient mess, and therefore I think the ideal level of government involvement here is relatively less than in Europe (government spending of around 20% of GDP seems to be ideal in my estimation). <br /><br />Whereas in Europe, where you have smaller, more concentrated population masses and stronger central governments, I'd say the ideal level of governemtn spending would be closer to 30-35% of GDP. <br />That's just my own rough estimate though.<br /><br />As for third world hegemony based on neoliberal ideology (e.g. Pinochet in Chile), I'd say that there was some undeniable economic growth as a result, but there was also a lot of suffering and injustice (i.e. atrocities). But that could be due more to having an SOB as dictator in chief than economic freedom...skepoliticalhttp://www.skepolitical.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5575042626763129889.post-76046922098622232842012-05-28T15:08:24.534-07:002012-05-28T15:08:24.534-07:00A working definition of neoliberal here would be t...A working definition of neoliberal here would be the form of democratic governance seen in the west pretty much since Reagan and Thatcher, that is ideologically bound to the idea of the free-market as a panacea.<br /><br />Economically they follow the theories of Friedman, and through the neoliberal IMF force foreign countries to open their markets to US companies, privatise all sectors and slash all public welfare. It is a one-size-fits-all approach with zero evidential success. Indeed, it has led to many a dictatorial ruler being supported in order to implement these plans.<br /><br /> Theoretically framed in such a way as to invoke its benefits to the greater good, there is no evidence to suggest this is true. Inequality has skyrocketed the whole time.Grimeandreasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12767103165109605622noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5575042626763129889.post-38538388819125439802012-05-25T06:10:54.321-07:002012-05-25T06:10:54.321-07:00I agree with the gist this post and there is a lot...I agree with the gist this post and there is a lot to talk about here, but I'm not sure I understand exactly what neoliberalism is, or what you mean it to mean. Not to say you haven't made a cogent point, it's just that neoliberalism is one of those words that seems to mean different things to different people. Like "post-modernim" or avant garde. what exactly do those words mean?skepoliticalhttp://www.skepolitical.comnoreply@blogger.com