The basic reason for the "hung" Parliament was that the British voter couldn't settle on a candidate who represented their economic interests. The British voter is not alone in their confusion, because all the major parties, in the soon to be formerly developed West, represent the financial markets and not the people on Main Street who they are supposed to serve. The markets tell them they can't support a certain amount of debt. They should therefore eliminate jobs, reduce wages, reduce the social safety net for ordinary people and balance the budget for financial markets so they can feel safe enough to grant loans. We also see multinational corporations combining so they can eliminate jobs and lower wages.
What we are looking at is a new form of economic imperialism, in which mutltinational big business, along with financial markets, weakens governments and directly controls the globalized economy. Traditional economic imperialists operated from their developed home country, seeking free trade agreements with underdeveloped countries, where their cheaper industrial products would prevent industrial development in those countries and they could dominate their economies. Through "globalized free trade," the financial markets and multinationals can roam the world for cheap labor and have workers compete in a race to the bottom of the wage scale. We are looking at class warfare as a business model, where economic elites seek to create a two-class system consisting of the very wealthy and the working poor as wage slaves.
However, their nineteenth-century Social Darwinist approach to economics will not work, because modern developed economies are dependent on consumer spending that is supported by the disposable income of ordinary wage-earners. Consumer spending supports 70 percent of the American market and more than 60 percent of developed Western markets. You take away jobs, reduce wages, and the consumer-based market will be destroyed along with the elites' wealth.
Pervis James Casey
May 18 2010 - 5:01pm