A - I n f o s

a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **
News in all languages
Last 30 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts Our archives of old posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Catalan_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Francais_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkurkish_ The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours

Links to indexes of first few lines of all posts of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008 | of 2009 | of 2010 | of 2011 | of 2012 | of 2013 | of 2014 | of 2015 | of 2016 | of 2017 | of 2018 | of 2019 | of 2020 | of 2021 | of 2022 | of 2023 | of 2024

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF - How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups

(en) France, OCL CA #339 - A new austerity plan, decided by decree (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]

Date Thu, 6 Jun 2024 09:03:39 +0300


The government has announced budget cuts of 10 billion euros in 2024, and 20 in 2025. A budget cut is a reduction in spending. We are reducing taxes on the richest, which this government is doing consistently (the previous ones too, by the way), so others will have to tighten their belts... ---- However, there was already a reduction in spending provided for in the budget voted by parliamentarians. These budget cuts are in addition to these reductions, by decree and without debate. And this is undoubtedly what the government was most keen to avoid, a debate and evaluation of its policies.

The first area affected by the cuts is "ecology, development and sustainable mobility", and therein priority "energy, climate and post-mining". It's not as if a planetary ecological catastrophe was announced... In particular, while it's happening, the government will first reduce the budget for heating and insulation aid. This is the lesson he learned from the end-of-the-world and end-of-month problem posed by the Yellow Vests. The categories "work and employment", "research and higher education" and "school education" are affected respectively by 1.1 billion, 900 million and 690 million euros in canceled credits. Since we tell you that school and university are doing too well... Public development aid is cut by 740 million euros, aid for access to housing loses 300 million, culture 200 million, the national police 134 million, the prison administration some 118 million and defense 105 million. Well, for the police and the defense, maybe we won't cry. So, rest assured, there will be no cuts to the innovation support plan for businesses (France 2030 investment plan of 54 billion euros).

To justify his plan, Bruno Lemaire took up the most hackneyed and caricatured liberal argument, widely relayed by the press. Of course, he ignores the tax giveaways which explain a large part of the deficit. Some press still said that. But we must also not swallow the fable according to which when we lack revenue, we must reduce expenditure. This is true for us and for all households around the world. But this is not true for states. A State is not a family, and the State treasury is not managed like a good father. It is normal for a state to be in debt. Governing means planning, isn't it? And the State is supposed to ensure the expenses necessary for stability and the future: education, health, adaptation to climate change, territorial defense, etc. The question is not whether he is in debt. The question is whether his debt is sustainable, that is to say whether he can repay it without becoming poorer. The debt burden represents a little less than 2% of the wealth created in France over one year (the famous GDP), around 12.5% of the state budget. It's as if someone who earns EUR2,000 had a total of EUR240 of credit to pay per month. We must not look at the debt, what the State owes, but at the debt burden, what it must pay each year. Someone who wants to become a happy homeowner will perhaps borrow 200,000 euros, but what matters to obtain credit is how much they have to pay per month. France is relatively well rated on the financial markets, which means that money is lent easily and not too expensive. There is therefore absolutely no obligation currently to reduce the deficit.

So yes, there is still an obligation. The European Union is in the process of reestablishing the Maastricht rule by which States undertake to remain below a certain deficit. The timing doesn't seem particularly good, but you can't stop a losing team. There is therefore an obligation, but voluntary. But why, you will ask me, when all the economists will tell you that it will penalize growth. Well, it's always the same story. Inflation has resumed, and financiers don't like that: it reduces their income. And when in addition the balance of power allows us to take only from the poor, why deprive ourselves.

There is of course another reason. What are we cutting into? In the ordinary expenditure of public services. What result will this have? They will work even worse. That's good, it will be an additional argument for their privatization, a privatization which is of great interest to financiers, in search of new markets on which to exert their nuisance.

If we break down the biggest cut, that which concerns "energy and climate". There will be 1 billion euros less for maprim'renov, the insulation assistance bonus. This will penalize many households and quite a few craftsmen. No problem, it's not a big sector for multinationals. This will slow down the objective of reducing greenhouse gases. Obviously, this is not an important thing for those who govern us. Except when it comes to promoting nuclear power, of course. The fund to support local authorities for the energy transition will also be affected (decrease of 400 million). Further reducing their room for maneuver will not displease our Jacobin government. In total, more than 2 billion euros are taken from the "ecology, development and sustainable mobility" budget. That's a green government! Afterwards, when we see their brilliant ideas in terms of ecology, does it really matter if they spend less?

Actually, what is the logic of all this? It is still a question of firstly serving financial interests by fighting against inflation, whatever the social damage that this fight causes. It is still a question of continuing the logic of degradation of public service in order to better privatize it. And as far as the destruction of the planet is concerned, above all, do not thwart it. We might think that this is suicidal: after all, they too are part of it. In fact, their belief in technological solutionism should not be underestimated. They really think the solution is in helping predatory companies. And they are right: of course, climate change will get worse, but we will find solutions so that the richest are protected from the unpleasant consequences...

Sylvie

http://oclibertaire.lautre.net/spip.php?article4141
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe https://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en
A-Infos Information Center