How Long To Charge Moped Battery

Posted February 22, 2011 by Bruno Colmant The twilight of capitalism?

Now, wealth and growth are rationed. We must deal with this reality. We miss everyone back to place the crisis in a historical dimension, but one thing is certain: it moves the growth areas. But that's not all. After the attacks, two phenomena are intertwined. On the one hand, they tend to increase inequality. But on the other hand, States are involved in the power to restructure the economy. The crisis thus generate moments of social tension, clenched between liberalism contractor (and of course inequality) and social redistribution (often excessively egalitarian).

Since the outbreak of the crisis, many theorists wonder about its subliminal message. So much anguish are revealed: this crisis is it the harbinger end of a cycle or, conversely, saturation of thinking? Is this the culmination of the class struggle or a surface friction? New utopias can be envisaged, or should we resign ourselves to immersion in a market economy increasingly demanding? Is it dawn or dusk of a phase of our civilization? And then, the state deeply in debt is it still able to play a regulatory role while citizens are mercilessly abandoned to the market economy. Many thinkers challenge the financialization of our communities. The latter is often criticized and opposed to a real economy, virtuous and regulated by work. But this distinction is a hoax. Financialisation we have not been imposed. We have chosen to be the beneficiaries. Worse, we were the guilty conscious of his diversion, anticipating consumer debt that allowed the group. Indeed, this explains why European states such as Belgium, have accumulated a total debt equal to nearly a year of GNP. We confiscated and put into a mortgage part of the prosperity of generations following. must also overcome this devastating confusion between growth and redistribution. The latter is possible only if growth is sufficient. Without growth, redistribution is, at best, a mortgage on future generations. It must also, without doubt, accept the reality of the entrance into an economy of free trade. The latter is infinitely more unstable than our industrial communities after the war. The market economy is confrontational.

In summary, it is too early to settle the crisis intellectually, but Capitalism is no terminal. Instead, it is in the process of permanent birth, without issue, as a delivery that does not succeed. Moreover, capitalism is, by itself, an unfinished state and imbalances permanent self-sustaining his own movement. must now identify trends wisely. The economy and morality probably belong to two different orders. It must reconcile the need for spontaneity economic combative with a correction of social inequalities. The perimeter of the state will change. Providential, the State will provide with incentives, support alternative. But more fundamentally, we must accept that the crisis requires a more demanding market economy.