Schlagwort / #debt

by steven25

Die Folgen des Übergangs vom Industrie zum Finanzkapitalismus

The Consequences of Moving from Industrial to Financial Capitalism

Die Folgen des Übergangs vom Industrie- zum Finanzkapitalismus

7. Januar 2021

Michael HUDSON und Pepe ESCOBAR haben letzten Monat an der Henry George School of Social Science einen harten Blick auf Miete und Rent-Seeking geworfen.

Das Nobelkaufhaus Saks Fifth Avenue hat vor einer Black-Lives-Matter-Demonstration in New York private Sicherheitskräfte, Zäune und Stacheldraht aufgestellt, 7. Juni. 2020. (Anthony Quintano, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)

Michael Hudson: Nun, ich fühle mich geehrt, hier in der gleichen Show mit Pepe zu sein und über unser gemeinsames Anliegen zu sprechen. Und ich denke, man muss das ganze Thema so einrahmen, dass China auf dem Vormarsch ist und der Westen das Ende der ganzen 75-jährigen Expansion erreicht hat, die er seit 1945 hatte.

Es gab also die Illusion, dass Amerika wegen der Konkurrenz aus China de-industrialisiert wird. Und die Realität ist, dass es keine Möglichkeit gibt, dass Amerika reindustrialisiert und seine Exportmärkte zurückgewinnt, mit der Art und Weise, wie es heute organisiert, finanziert und privatisiert ist, und wenn es China nicht gäbe. Der „Rust Belt“ würde immer noch vor sich hin rosten. Die amerikanische Industrie wäre immer noch nicht in der Lage, im Ausland zu konkurrieren, einfach weil die Kostenstruktur in den Vereinigten Staaten so hoch ist.

Michael Hudson. (Wikimedia Commons)

Der Wohlstand wird hier nicht mehr durch Industrialisierung gemacht. Er wird finanziell erwirtschaftet, hauptsächlich durch Kapitalgewinne. Steigende Preise für Immobilien oder für Aktien und für Anleihen.  In den letzten neun Monaten, seit das Coronavirus hierher kam, wuchs das oberste 1 Prozent der US-Wirtschaft um 1 Billion Dollar. Es war ein Glücksfall für das eine Prozent. Der Aktienmarkt ist weit oben, der Anleihenmarkt ist oben, der Immobilienmarkt ist oben, während der Rest der Wirtschaft nach unten geht. Trotz der Zölle, die Trump auf chinesische Importe erhoben hat, steigt der Handel mit China, weil wir einfach keine Materialien produzieren.

Amerika stellt seine Schuhe nicht selbst her. Es stellt keine Schrauben und Muttern oder Verbindungselemente her, es stellt keine industriellen Dinge mehr her, denn wenn man mit einem Industrieunternehmen Geld verdienen will, dann kauft man das Unternehmen und verkauft es, nicht um Kredite zu vergeben, um die Produktion des Unternehmens zu steigern. New York City, wo ich lebe, war früher eine Industriestadt, und die Industriegebäude, die Handelsgebäude wurden alle zu hochpreisigen Immobilien gentrifiziert, und das Ergebnis ist, dass die Amerikaner so viel Geld für Bildung, Miete, medizinische Versorgung zahlen müssen, dass sie, selbst wenn sie alle ihre physischen Bedürfnisse, ihre Nahrung, ihre Kleidung, alle Waren und Dienstleistungen umsonst bekämen, immer noch nicht mit ausländischen Arbeitskräften konkurrieren könnten, wegen all der Kosten, die sie zahlen müssen, die man im Wesentlichen als Mietwucher bezeichnet. (…)

Michael Hudson ist ein amerikanischer Professor für Wirtschaftswissenschaften an der Universität von Missouri Kansas City und ein Forscher am Levy Economics Institute am Bard College. Er ist ein ehemaliger Wall-Street-Analyst, politischer Berater, Kommentator und Journalist. Er bezeichnet sich selbst als einen klassischen Ökonomen. Michael ist der Autor von J is for Junk Economics, Killing the Host, The Bubble and Beyond, Super Imperialism: The Economic Strategy of American Empire, Trade Development and Foreign Debt und The Myth of Aid, um nur einige zu nennen. Seine Bücher wurden ins Japanische, Chinesische, Deutsche, Spanische und Russische übersetzt veröffentlicht.

Pepe Escobar, geboren in Brasilien, ist Korrespondent und Chefredakteur der Asia Times und Kolumnist für Consortium News und Strategic Culture in Moskau. Seit Mitte der 1980er Jahre hat er als Auslandskorrespondent in London, Paris, Mailand, Los Angeles, Singapur und Bangkok gelebt und gearbeitet. Er hat ausgiebig über Pakistan, Afghanistan, Zentralasien bis hin zu China, Iran, Irak und den weiteren Nahen Osten berichtet. Pepe ist der Autor von Globalistan – Wie sich die globalisierte Welt in einen flüssigen Krieg auflöst; Red Zone Blues: A Snapshot of Baghdad during the Surge. Er war mitwirkender Redakteur bei The Empire and The Crescent und Tutto in Vendita in Italien,. Seine letzten beiden Bücher sind Empire of Chaos und 2030. Pepe ist auch mit der in Paris ansässigen European Academy of Geopolitics verbunden. Wenn er nicht auf Reisen ist, lebt er zwischen Paris und Bangkok.

Der vollständige Text des Gesprächs findet sich als PDF hier:
hudson-escobar-die-folgen-des-ucc88bergangs-vom-industrie-zum-finanzkapitalismus-210107Herunterladen

by steven25

The Consequences of Moving from Industrial to Financial Capitalism

The Consequences of Moving from Industrial to Financial Capitalism

The Consequences of Moving from Industrial to Financial Capitalism

January 7, 2021

Michael Hudson and Pepe Escobar last month took a hard look at rent and rent-seeking at the Henry George School of Social Science.

High-ended retailer Saks Fifth Avenue added private security, fencing and barbed wire ahead of a Black Lives Matter protest in New York, June 7. 2020. (Anthony Quintano, CC BY 2.0, Wikimedia Commons)

Michael Hudson: Well, I’m honored to be here on the same show with Pepe and discuss our mutual concern. And I think you have to frame the whole issue that China is thriving, and the West has reached the end of the whole 75-year expansion it had since 1945.

So, there was an illusion that America is de-industrializing because of competition from China. And the reality is there is no way that America can re-industrialize and regain its export markets with the way that it’s organized today, financialized and privatized and if China didn’t exist. You’d still have the Rust Belt rusting out. You’d still have American industry not being able to compete abroad simply because the cost structure is so high in the United States. (…)

hudson-escobar-consequences-of-moving-from-industrial-to-financial-capitalism2101071Herunterladen
by steven25

Michael HUDSON: How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote; The Real NEWS Network, June 27, 2016

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 29.06.2016

We continue the debate on BREXIT with an interview on The Real News Network with Michael HUDSON.

———-

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/06/27/how-western-military-interventions-shaped-the-brexit-vote

How Western Military Interventions Shaped the Brexit Vote
MICHAEL HUDSON

Michael Hudson argues that military interventions in the Middle East created refugee streams to Europe that were in turn used by the anti-immigrant right to stir up xenophobia.

GREGORY WILPERT: Britain’s referendum in favor of leaving, or exiting, the European Union, the Brexit referendum, as the results are known, won with 52 percent of the vote on Thursday, June 23, stunning Europe’s political establishment. One of the issues that has raised concern for many is that what does the Brexit mean for Britain’s and Europe’s economy and politics. This was one of the main topics leading up to the referendum, but a lot of disinformation [reigned] in the discussion.

With us to discuss the economic and political context of the Brexit is Michael Hudson. He is a research professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, and author of Killing the Host: How Financial Parasites and Debt Destroy the Global Economy. Also, he is an economics adviser to several governments, including Greece, Iceland, Latvia, and China. He joins us right now from New York City.

So let’s begin with the political context in which the Brexit vote took place. Aside from the right-wing arguments about immigrants, economic concerns, and about Britain’s ability to control its own economy, what would you say–what do you see as being the main kind of political background in which this vote took place?

HUDSON: Well, almost all the Europeans know where the immigrants are coming from. And the ones that they’re talking about are from the near East. And they’re aware of the fact that most of the immigrants are coming as a result of the NATO policies promoted by Hillary and by the Obama administration.
The problem began in Libya. Once Hillary pushed Obama to destroy Libya and wipe out the stable government there, she wiped out the arms–and Libya was a very heavily armed country. She turned over the arms to ISIS, to Al-Nusra, and Al-Qaeda. And Al-Qaeda used these arms under U.S. organization to attack Syria and Iraq. Now, the Syrian population, the Iraqi population, have no choice but to either emigrate or get killed.
So when people talk about the immigration to Europe, the Europeans, the French, the Dutch, the English, they’re all aware of the fact that this is the fact that Brussels is really NATO, and NATO is really run by Washington, and that it’s America’s new Cold War against Russia that’s been spurring all of this demographic dislocation that’s spreading into England, spreading into Europe, and is destabilizing things.
So what you’re seeing with the Brexit is the result of the Obama administration’s pro-war, new Cold War policy.

WILPERT: So are you saying that people voted for Brexit because they are really–that they were concerned about the influence of the U.S.? Or are you saying that it’s because of the backlash, because of the immigration that happened, and the fact that the right wing took advantage of that…
HUDSON: It’s a combination. The right wing was, indeed, pushing the immigrant issue, saying wait a minute, they’re threatening our jobs. But the left wing was just as vocal, and the left wing was saying, why are these immigrants coming here? They’re coming here because of Europe’s support of NATO, and NATOs war that’s bombing the near East, that is destabilizing the whole Near East, and causing a flight of refugees not only from Syria but also from Ukraine. In England, many of the so-called Polish plumbers that came years ago have now gone back to Poland, because that country’s recovered.
But now the worry is that a whole new wave of Ukrainians – and basically the U.S. policy is one of destabilization – so even the right-wing, while they have talked about immigrants, they have also denounced the fact that the European policy is run by the United States, and that you have both Marine Le Pen in France saying, we want to withdraw from NATO; we don’t want confrontation with Russia. You have the left wing in England saying, we don’t want concentration in Russia. And last week when I was in Germany you had the Social Democratic Party leaders saying that Russia should be invited back into the G8, that NATO was taking a warlike position and was hurting the European economy by breaking its ties with Russia and by forcing other sanctions against Russia.
So you have a convergence between the left and the right, and the question is, who is going to determine the terms on which Europe is broken up and put back together? Will it simply be the right wing that’s anti-immigrants? Or will it simply be the left saying we want to restructure the economy in a way that essentially avoids the austerity that is coming from Brussels, on the one hand, and from the British Conservative Party on the other.

(…)

HUDSON-Brexit-Military-Interventions160628.pdf

by steven25

The Evil Empire Has The World In A Death Grip

In my archives there is a column or two that introduces the reader to John Perkins’ important book, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. An EHM is an operative who sells the leadership of a developing country on an economic plan or massive development project. The Hit Man convinces a country’s government that borrowing large sums of money from US financial institutions in order to finance the project will raise the country’s living standards. The borrower is assured that the project will increase Gross Domestic Product and tax revenues and that these increases will allow the loan to be repaid. (…)

Now the book has been reissued with the addition of 14 new chapters and a 30-page listing of Hit Man activity during the years 2004-2015. http://www.amazon.com/New-Confessions-Economic-Hit-Man/dp/1626566747/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1456080628&sr=1-1&keywords=John+Perkins

Perkins shows that despite his revelations, the situation is worse than ever and has spread into the West itself. The populations of Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy, and the United States itself are now being looted by Hit Man activity. (…)

Quelle: The Evil Empire Has The World In A Death Grip

http://en.reseauinternational.net/the-evil-empire-has-the-world-in-a-death-grip/

by steven25

The IMF Changes its Rules to Isolate China and Russia

December 18, 2015

The IMF Changes its Rules to Isolate China and Russia

by Michael Hudson Counterpunch

The nightmare scenario of U.S. geopolitical strategists seems to be coming true: foreign economic independence from U.S. control. Instead of privatizing and neoliberalizing the world under U.S.-cen…

Quelle: The IMF Changes its Rules to Isolate China and Russia

by steven25

Michael HUDSON: The IMF Joins the New Cold War; COUNTERPUNCH, Dec 9, 2015

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis, 10.12.2015

On Tuesday „the IMF joined the New Cold War. It has been lending money to Ukraine despite the Fund’s rules blocking it from lending to countries with no visible chance of paying (the “No More Argentinas” rule from 2001).“
Hudson explains the message of this IMF/US-Empire-blow: “We only enforce debts owed in US dollars to US allies.” and his geopolitical scope: „…what was simmering as a Cold War against Russia has now turned into a full-blown division of the world into the Dollar Bloc (with its satellite Euro and other pro-U.S. currencies) and the BRICS or other countries not in the U.S. financial and military orbit.“ (further see attachment)

DECEMBER 9, 2015
The IMF Joins the New Cold War
by MICHAEL HUDSON
… But on Tuesday, the IMF joined the New Cold War. It has been lending money to Ukraine despite the Fund’s rules blocking it from lending to countries with no visible chance of paying (the “No More Argentinas” rule from 2001). With IMF head Christine Lagarde made the last IMF loan to Ukraine in the spring, she expressed the hope that there would be peace. But President Porochenko immediately announced that he would use the proceeds to step up his nation’s civil war with the Russian-speaking population in the East – the Donbass.
That is the region where most IMF exports have been made – mainly to Russia. This market is now lost for the foreseeable future. It may be a long break, because the country is run by the U.S.-backed junta put in place after the right-wing coup of winter 2014. Ukraine has refused to pay not only private-sector bondholders, but the Russian Government as well.
This should have blocked Ukraine from receiving further IMF aid. Refusal to pay for Ukrainian military belligerence in its New Cold War against  Russia would have been a major step forcing peace, and also forcing a clean-up of the country’s endemic corruption.
Instead, the IMF is backing Ukrainian policy, its kleptocracy and its Right Sector leading the attacks that recently cut off Crimea’s electricity. The only condition on which the IMF insists is continued austerity. Ukraine’s currency, the hryvnia, has fallen by a third this years, pensions have been slashed (largely as a result of being inflated away), while corruption continues unabated.
Despite this the IMF announced its intention to extend new loans to finance Ukraine’s dependency and payoffs to the oligarchs who are in control of its parliament and justice departments to block any real cleanup of corruption.
For over half a year there was a semi-public discussion with U.S. Treasury advisors and Cold Warriors about how to stiff Russia on the $3 billion owed by Ukraine to Russia’s Sovereign Wealth Fund. There was some talk of declaring this an “odious debt,” but it was decided that this ploy might backfire against U.S. supported dictatorships.
In the end, the IMF simply lent Ukraine the money.
By doing so, it announced its new policy: the IMF joined the New Cold War. It has been lending money to Ukraine despite the Fund’s rules blocking it from lending to countries with no visible chance of paying (the “No More Argentinas” rule from 2001). This means that what was simmering as a Cold War against Russia has now turned into a full-blown division of the world into the Dollar Bloc (with its satellite Euro and other pro-U.S. currencies) and the BRICS or other countries not in the U.S. financial and military orbit.
What should Russia do? For that matter, what should China and other BRICS countries do? The IMF and U.S. neocons have sent the world a message: you don’t have to honor debts to countries outside of the dollar area and its satellites.
Why then should these non-dollarized countries remain in the IMF – or the World Bank, for that matter? The IMF move effectively splits the global system in half, between the BRICS and the US-European neoliberalized financial system.
Should Russia withdraw from the IMF? Should other countries?
The mirror-image response would be for the new Asian Development Bank to announce  that countries that joined the ruble-yuan area did not have to pay US dollar or euro-denominated debts. That is implicitly where the IMF’s break is leading.  —  emphasis, m.z.  –
More Articles by Michael HUDSON on CounterPunch  –  Jun – Dec 2015
October 5, 2015
September 29, 2015
September 28, 2015
August 31, 2015
July 8, 2015
July 6, 2015
July 1, 2015
June 29, 2015
June 26, 2015

 

HUDSON-IMF-joins-New-Cold-War151208.pdf

by steven25

Bailout deal allows Greek oligarchs to maintain grip – The Guardian

Bailout deal allows Greek oligarchs to maintain grip – The Guardian.

Bailout deal allows Greek oligarchs to maintain grip – The Guardian

The Guardian summed up my annotated version of Greece’s Third MoU with this title. Click here for the Guardi . . .

http://yanisvaroufakis.eu/2015/08/18/bailout-deal-allows-gr . . .

by steven25

$60 Trillion of World Debt in One Visualization – Visual Capitalist

http://www.visualcapitalist.com/60-trillion-of-world-debt-in-one-visualization/

<div style=“clear:both“><a href=“http://www.visualcapitalist.com/60-trillion-of-world-debt-in-one-visualization/“><img src=“http://2oqz471sa19h3vbwa53m33yj.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/world-debt-60-trillion-infographic.jpg&#8220; border=“0″ /></a></div><div>Courtesy of: <a href=“http://www.visualcapitalist.com“>Visual Capitalist</a></div>

by steven25

Death by Debt: My Response to The German Finance Ministry, by Jeffrey Sachs

Yanis Varoufakis

Dr. Ludger Schuknecht, senior economist at the Germany Finance Ministry, explains his ministry’s viewpoint regarding Greece. This viewpoint essentially holds that Eurozone countries should live within their means; adjust to their debt burdens; and take their reform medicine as needed. If they do so, they will be successful, as illustrated by Ireland, Spain, and Portugal. Greece has only itself to blame, and indeed was on track to recover as of late 2014 if it had not deviated from its course.  

Ursprünglichen Post anzeigen 1.286 weitere Wörter

by steven25

Stathis KOUVELAKIS: Greece: The Struggle Continues; Reason in Revolt – JACOBIN, July 2015

globalcrisis/globalchange NEWS
Martin Zeis – martin.zeis

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2015/07/tsipras-varoufakis-kouvelakis-syriza-euro-debt

Reason in Revolt – JACOBIN, July 2015 *

Greece: The Struggle Continues

A definitive account of what has transpired over the last few weeks in Greece, and what’s next for Syriza and the European left.

by Sebastian Budgen & Stathis Kouvelakis

Key Points
The government was overtaken by the referendum’s momentum.
The ideology of left-Europeanism was crippling.
Remaining unprepared for Grexit was deliberate.
The government has two main camps.
The „No“ campaign was driven by class.
After the vote, Tsipras revived a discredited opposition.
The Left Platform plans to stay and fight to reclaim Syriza.
Syriza’s leadership want to purge the party.
The new agreement is the worst yet.
It’s unknown what resistance will follow.
Syriza’s left made some errors.
But working within the party wasn’t a mistake.

The latest agreement between the Syriza government and the creditors shocked many on the Left who have been following events in Greece. It seems to signal the end of a whole political cycle.
In this interview with Jacobin contributing editor Sebastian Budgen, Stathis Kouvelakis, a leading member of the Left Platform in the party covers the latest sequence, to what extent expectations have been confirmed or disproved, and the next steps for the radical wing of the party.
Kouvelakis uses this opportunity to reflect more broadly on the balance sheet of the Left Platform’s strategy, whether things could have been done differently, and what the prospects are for a more general left recomposition.

What were the causes of the July referendum? Many saw it as something out of the blue, a wildcard that Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras pulled out. But there is some uncertainty about his motivations — some even speculate that he thought he would lose. (…)

Note
* Jacobin is a leading voice of the American left, offering socialist perspectives on politics, economics, and culture. The print magazine is released quarterly and reaches over 10,000 subscribers, in addition to a web audience of 600,000 a month.

KOUVELAKIS_Greece-Struggle-continues150720.pdf