How To Sew A Saddle Pad

Love the new communism. Alain's approach Badieu

I like to check the plasticity ideology of communism, like viruses, to cohabit with any other ideology. The one now before us, and represents Alain Badieu in this interview , communism is a very typical new age.

Since it is not the class struggle that concentrates the break with capitalism, or even already in the hands of the intelligentsia or the knowledge as he had argued Lukacs, no, now is the concept of love that makes the revolutionary march of communism.

This claim is debatable axioms:

A. - "We have established a system of existence in which everything must be transformed into product, a commodity." For Mr. Badieu that Marx had already predicted. Unfortunately, the German philosopher was unable to provide that communism would end up turning the man in the commodity of your system.
If something today's economy is characterized by diminishing concern about the product and another for service. If all mp3 players are equally good or bad then where is the secret of Apple?, If coffee is just as good or not in any neighborhood café, why Starbucks wins?, Why do Gmail and Hotmail and Google and not Internet Explorer?, why BMW sells more cars than Mercedes? Could put a thousand examples to show that we are in a service economy rather than product.

B. - "A society that is not governed by the fact that a man pursues his interest but by the idea of \u200b\u200bthe association of men. Is that the association that defines the projects or collective goals. " But does not explain how will decide or who will take the reins which go to make decisions and goals. Nor is it clear what would happen if an individual decides not to join that group. The main problem with communism is its ability to dilute the value of the individual, the person in favor of the mass. Millions of people have died from the common idea of \u200b\u200ban egalitarian, proletarian state, in defense of true religion and the supremacy of one race. To achieve this, the first step is to destroy individuality, difference. The person is not more important than the state, class, faith, etc. and when this happens, generally, the concept of respect for life are blurred, because what has value human life against the interest of the common good or collective.

therefore no wonder the fear that technology, especially internet, you are given. The ability to dissent, incoformismo, debate and mechanism of identification with communication technologies, cause real fear among those who difienden to ground. The free movement of knowledge and information, apparently, do not please Badieu, and calling the "false egalitarianism," one of the most important revolutions in the history of mankind. In the end, is aware that the need for communism by mass forces a standardization and homogeneity that is not possible if essentially, in our thinking, debate is allowed, free knowledge and the unrestricted flow of ideas.

C. - We must be careful not to confuse concepts apparently equal. Hobbes speaks of struggle and not competition and here are the nuances in these cases, important, especially for a philosopher who claims to be a student of a leading intellectual of analytic philosophy and Derrida. In war fighting, competing in sports. Perhaps this example will be the clearest way of framing the problem. The competition involves taking of personal values \u200b\u200bwhile respecting the contrary. That does not happen in the fight.

But we go further, we accept the premise of taking the association as the main axis. Communism certainly has no place in this concept from the moment we accept that dissent is not allowed. One of the features of the voluntary associations to which members enter. However, still no answer to the question of who will do the work distribution of goods and services in material terms.

However, capitalism itself. Is self-interest, selfishness, which leads to a voluntary association and the other for logara what we have and need. The market is only self-association of suppliers and consumers to address their needs through trade.

D. - Returning the need for a unifying element in our theory all masses, in this case is the love that fulfills the role of attractor. But who defines what kind of love, will it be valid any kind of love?, Independent love are we talking about sex?, Do you accept homosexuality or bisexuality as a love, or only heterosexual? Is allow the love of efebos as in Classical Greece?, is it a love of the divine? One thing is clear, has a particular conception of love, and that what for many is acceptable for him not: "Today it looks tame love with a mix of free porn ...."

Moreover, this competition is blurred in the loving on the other, how it fits into the romantic love that stands true? And if your partner decides to have an open relationship, are not we then have a case of complete surrender to the mass?, Would not it be a way to eliminate competition, selfishness, individualism struggles and absolute dedication to all those people they do not feel like relationships?

Finally, how is it possible to defend the love being Maoist Marxist theory was even decide how many children a family should have, cause a real murder and abandonment of female children in China, is it that the love that stands Badieu, a love that the state may regulate?

Zebra Paper Wedding Programs

The importance of the road and the goal

differ in economic policy on the one hand what is called the objectives of the "economic policy" and on the other hand, the instruments. The first reference to the goals or targets to which to direct the efforts of responsible economic policy, such as employment, inflation control, economic growth, etc. To fulfill these objectives, the "policy maker" has the tools, which can be defined as the path or route to be followed to achieve the desired goal. It is desirable and necessary therefore that objectives and instruments are alienated to achieve the desired results.

However, currently there is no such consensus between the goal and the road, as it can be seen the words written by the economist and journalist Joaquin Estefania . In an opinion piece for the newspaper COUNTRY "8th of November, under the title" Achilles heels G-20, "reads: "[...] will resolve the dispute raised three months ago in Toronto: If the main problem is economic growth or fiscal consolidation, areas faced by its members. Though a bit schematic put in such a way solve the problems of unemployment and disposable income is what is required particularly to citizens while markets (increasingly demanding) want the fixed date back to fiscal discipline and orthodoxy. "

From the perspective of Mr. Estefania , market and people go every man for himself, the former being unable to respond to the needs of the second, becoming the state in economic agents should provide a solution to the demands of citizenship. Unfortunately, the interventionist rhetoric defends the author is not the answer. Millions of euros spent on expansionary fiscal policies through public spending out of control, have only served to generate higher unemployment, uncontrolled state debt, lower disposable income due to future tax increases that are being passed and approved in the nearest future, lower economic growth. Excluding the decline in all of this is valuable for individual freedom. Is what usually happens when you ignore the market and falls in the fatal conceit that beautifully describes the Nobel economics teacher and FA Hayek .

If we analyze well the very appointment of Joaquin Estefania see that there is no contradiction between what the citizens want and what the market demands. The first we make the goal and the second way, in terms of economic policy we can say that people want to achieve the objectives of employment, income and economic growth as the market indicates that we must use the tools of a restrictive fiscal policy disciplined combined with a return to control public expenditure. As rightly pointed out liberalism, the only mechanism capable of giving a proper and effective response to the demands and needs of individuals is the market. While our leaders continue to face the market, while still thinking they are the solution and stop solutions advised by economists as Joaquin Estefania, the out of the crisis will be long and the end of the road that we all desire will never be achieved.

Gemmy Holiday Light Show

banking system and its implications (I)


internet

Walk a protest against the banking system which of course has already created a group on Facebook, December 7: Day of protest banks across Europe . Basically consists of removing the funds as clients have deposited in banks in which we are customers. I've read several blogs and a brief introduction that sets out in the group and not clear to me why which organizes the event. Personally I think there are two reasons totally incompatible with each other: the first is a critique of fractional-reserve system, the second disaster drawer where basically meet those who want to stop the system without more. To all this must be added a general lack of knowledge of how the mechanisms of monetary policy of central banks, fiscal policies and the actual state with fractional reserve banking.

Dealing with all these issues here would a post worthy of a book, so I will focus mainly on criticizing the fractional system, because I will pass explain the operation of monetary policy.

The current banking system operates under what economists call fractional reserve. This means that banks are only required to keep on hand a part of all the money their customers have deposited in them is what is known as the technical reserve requirements, a legal share in the monetary union marked by Central Bank and U.S. Federal Reserve. Currently this ratio is 2%.

To better explain, if a bank has in its coffers € 100, under the law of the minimum reserves can provide save only € 98 and € 2. What is legally available to those Euros? As provided in the form of credits, loans, etc. What does that? Generate additional money (money held by the public and bank deposits), which is technically called the money multiplier. It provides funding from the creation of companies to buy our house. Because the role of banks is the intermediary, ie, to communicate those with financial capacity to those with financial needs. And where they keep the 2% the banks? For in the various Central Banks on their part. In the case of Spain in the European Central Bank.

hope you have been able to clearly explain these concepts and the initial situation, I can enter and to detail what is known as monetary policy. Central banks have a simple and basic three tools to carry out its operations in the money market. Market operations open mainly based on modifying the official interest rate money and standing facilities, the cash ratio.

The instrument used has long been the central rate of interest, which is to mark the minimum interest rate which the central bank will stop lending money to various banks participating in the system. This means that if a bank like Capital SA needs to ask € 1,000 million to BC and the rate rises from 1.2% to 1.25% this means that you'll pay more and perhaps financed decide not to attend this auction and reorganize its business, may grant make fewer loans and interest rates to their customers more expensive.

Currently, central banks are operating in the market with extraordinary measures such as buying debt, which means nothing more than financing the government so it can continue its pace of spending. This operation was prohibited by the law regulating the operation of central banks and it has been necessary to modify the rules to allow this operation.

Is it advantageous for central banks such operations? Of course, now the main funding mechanisms are very expensive as the case of interbank market (the system where different banks lend money to each other), because no one trusts his neighbor. And even though central banks are taking huge financial facilities, banks require guarantees and as such offer the same debt purchasing and central bankers have decided to accept. Basically this is money leaving the state to pay an interest rate of 2% for example, going to the Central Bank and borrow money at 1% and leave change to guarantee the payment of public debt in exchange the bank earns differential, ie, 1%.

Looking for spoil banks to the States? No, because it would go against their interests, and that would collect outstanding debts and guarantees frete Central Bank would have no value. Furthermore, in an interconnected system as a case of this type would be a domino collapse of all stakeholders and a disaster for the world economy.

Do they generate debt

banks and central banks? Depends on debt are talking about. If it is private debt, it is clear that this has been part of their business and their role. If we talk about public debt or state, we have seen that your purchase was prohibited by the Central Banks and therefore only the banks could buy this type of instrument Financial.

-debt Is the main goal of the banking system? No, because the banking business consists of two legs, the assets and liabilities. By assets we mean the loans or credit from other banking products, money deposited by liabilities in the accounts of customers. And between the two entities must be a balance that closely monitored the international rules of the Bank for International Settlements in Basel BIS regulations I, II and now III. To be able to leave money, banks should not have many assets on its balance sheet, so if you are heavily indebted, will come a point where one of the ways to make money is depleted.

hope I have explained certain concepts on the functioning of the banking system within the financial system and the use of monetary policy and its instruments. In the next post I will discuss the opinion that to me, means to operate under a fractional reserve system and of course, to answer the questions and concerns that reading this entry exist.