Europe's Populist Left

[Razgovory]

A way to punish people for that most egregious of crimes, wasting money!

[Admiral Yi]

And in the context we're discussing?

Only spending money on necessities is a good starting point for discussion.

[Sheilbh]

Only spending money on necessities is a good starting point for discussion.

Okay. I've nothing to add to that, so begin

[Admiral Yi]

I already did. 

[Sheilbh]

Okay.

I normally understand that when someone has a good starting point they've something to say.

I still don't understand your view, because you've not expanded it at all, and as I say from my perspective it's not a negative word.

[Admiral Yi]

My point is that the words austere and austerity have well-established meanings of frugal, bare-bones expenditure.  Because a duke lives less ostentatiously than a king doesn't make his existence austere; in exactly the same way a country running a 6% deficit is not living an austere existence just because they used to run a 9% deficit.

[Sheilbh]

But the duke and the king are different people.

My point is that you talk about it and Orwell as if it's an awful thing. Austerity isn't necessarily a negative word. In the UK it's most associated with post-war austerity which isn't pre-war Orwellian Wigan. Post-war austerity had belt tightening and rationing, but also the creation of the NHS and the modern welfare state. The reason I think it's used a lot in the UK is because David Cameron, before 2010, explicitly invoked that era. He talked about a new 'age of austerity' and that era's ideal that 'we're all in it together'.

I agree that austerity doesn't accurately describe what's happened in Greece. Cuts to public spending of over 25% per capita go way, way beyond the merely austere and into the actively harmful, but there we go.

Edit: Also in a purely linguistic sense I think you're wrong. No-one is talking about an austere existence, but about the process of austerity. There's a difference.

[alfred russel]

My point is that the words austere and austerity have well-established meanings of frugal, bare-bones expenditure.  Because a duke lives less ostentatiously than a king doesn't make his existence austere; in exactly the same way a country running a 6% deficit is not living an austere existence just because they used to run a 9% deficit.

Whether we are talking about a process or a state, I'm not sure why the word "austerity" shouldn't apply to Greece. They have 20 something% unemployment, a GDP that has plunged since the start of the crisis, and youth unemployment is at epic levels. The country just elected a government titled "the radical left" while at the same time the far right is making gains.

The state has successfully introduced deficit reduction in an environment that has arguably deteriorated to be worse than our great depression, and they don't even get to call it "austerity". 

[Ed Anger]

I'd like to visit a stable, safe Greece before my legs fall off.

Fix it, you greasy bastards. Chop chop.

[alfred russel]

I'd like to visit a stable, safe Greece before my legs fall off.

Fix it, you greasy bastards. Chop chop.

Greece is safe now and stable enough. And on sale.

[Admiral Yi]

But the duke and the king are different people.

And 2010 and 2015 are two different years.  So what?

My point is that you talk about it and Orwell as if it's an awful thing. Austerity isn't necessarily a negative word. In the UK it's most associated with post-war austerity which isn't pre-war Orwellian Wigan. Post-war austerity had belt tightening and rationing, but also the creation of the NHS and the modern welfare state. The reason I think it's used a lot in the UK is because David Cameron, before 2010, explicitly invoked that era. He talked about a new 'age of austerity' and that era's ideal that 'we're all in it together'.

You're missing my point.  I meant Orwellian in the sense of playing with the meaning of words.

I agree that austerity doesn't accurately describe what's happened in Greece. Cuts to public spending of over 25% per capita go way, way beyond the merely austere and into the actively harmful, but there we go.

So the only way to escape "austerity" or worse is to put 14% of GDP on the credit card every year?

Edit: Also in a purely linguistic sense I think you're wrong. No-one is talking about an austere existence, but about the process of austerity. There's a difference.

They come from the same Latin root dude.

[Ed Anger]

I'd like to visit a stable, safe Greece before my legs fall off.

Fix it, you greasy bastards. Chop chop.

Greece is safe now and stable enough.

Not to my standards.

[Razgovory]

They come from the same Latin root dude.

So do Mortuary and Mortgage.

[MadImmortalMan]

I guess the main problem with doing only what is necessary in this sense is that people can't agree on what's necessary. It would need to be something more...quantifiable.



All austerity or stimulus has a limit to how effective it will be or how much damage it will do. These are feedback loops, not perpetual motion machines. Either way it eventually it hits a wall.

Greece has wiped out the bubble in their GDP now and is one of the fastest growing economies in Europe at the moment. Might be time to loosen up a bit. Who knows.

[Jacob]

So the only way to escape "austerity" or worse is to put 14% of GDP on the credit card every year?

Do you genuinely think that credit card balances are a useful metaphor for understanding national budgets?