Quick comment: Strengthening the Commission to regionalize the EU for the benefit of an European Hegemonic Center? This stimulus plan goes beyond the equalization logic inherent to the structural funds in terms of real transfer of decision-making power. In addition, we should note that the trend towards regionalization and competitive autonomy of the regions was defeated by referendum in Italy on December 4, 2016. (1)
See : « France et Allemagne unies pour une relance européenne face à la crise.» 18 mai 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44mdYGi18U8
This preliminary German-French agreement will have to be finalized by the 27 EU countries in the coming days. Some countries are hanging on the threat of the possible surge of the spread, which risks transforming their rating into junk, and therefore they have little room for maneuver. Unless they choose to revive their public credit by leaving money management to the ECB, which is its stricto sensu mandate, i.e., price stability and the management of the exchange rate of the Euro jointly with member states.
What do the German Chancellor and the French President propose? Simply a drift towards more economic power for the Commission, including in areas of exclusive national competence such as Health, to endorse regionalization under the control of the EU and its decisional rules which are as shaky as the democratic representation of peoples in the Strasbourg Parliament.
This would defensively bury the tendency, normal in times of crisis, which consists in the Member States fully recovering their exclusive powers – and the management of credit now abandoned to the private banks which the ECB slavishly serves – in order to revive a Social Europe based on a Europe of nations. This Europe of nations should be based on the emulation of the best models via a deepened cooperation or « coopérations renforcées » – therefore leading to virtuous concentric circles – and above all via the opting out clause substituting the disastrous decision-making rule of « qualified majority ». (2) In my opinion, the opting out clause would have enabled the GB to remain within the EU while integrating the euro zone. These are two opposing visions of Europe.
What is actually proposed?
It is proposed to supplement the existing arrangements – 750 billion euros for banks and companies granted by the ECB, 500 billion euros in the form of guarantees via SURE, MES and EIB – to which would be added a stimulus plan of 500 Billions of Euro’s.
This stimulus plan would be financed by loans made by the EU with its more advantageous rating than some EU highly indebted countries. Thus avoiding bankruptcy via the soaring of the spread for countries like Italy. Indeed, once the country investment risk has gone to junk, neither the ECB nor the banks or other institutional investors can buy the debt. In the medium term, this risk will not be excluded since this aid will have to be repaid, which will imply a strengthening of socio-economic austerity. It is true that Greece can once again borrow on the financial markets dominated by speculative finance, but this dubious result was acquired at the price of unheard of sacrifices – as in the Chile of the Chicago Boys and Pinochet – while auguring an eternal slavery by the debt which certainly made Solon turn in his grave.
However, Italy or Spain and Portugal no longer even have the necessary margins – wages, pensions, social services, privatization – to implement the austerity measures necessary to stay within the criteria
. This money would be made available to member countries according to a distribution which remains to be decided according to 4 pillars of intervention:
a ) the sectors and regions most affected by the crisis – e.g. health, tourism, etc. –
b ) budgetary transfers in fact aiming to allow the respect of the stability criteria and its neoliberal and monetarist a-social logic which led to the crisis of 2007-2008 and to the current crisis of which the Covid-19 only revealed;
c ) the environment according to the debilitating anti-CO2 logic of the Green New Deal;
d ) the preservation of “sovereignty” via normative and or tariff protection measures still to be decided and above all via the logic of building of economic “European champions”. The so-called « national champions » were created by privatizing state enterprises, the European champions do follow the same logic of “global private governance” and free trade largely determined by the current definition of anti-dumping. As we know, the latter induces a run toward the lowest salary and lowest environmental protection.
Such a logic is likely to reinforce economic hyper-centralization – concentration, centralization of capital – for the benefit of the countries with the strongest enterprises while the crisis will open a series of bankruptcies and mergers. This without changing anything from the hyper-centralism of the pitre Mundell who disastrously informed the creation of the ECB with all the problems we know today. (3) The most peripheral countries and those most in demand of ” aid ”will simply be swallowed economically, starting, of course, with strategic sectors and companies. The companies themselves only benefit from ECB purchases and EIB guarantees according to their rating decided by the various BlackRocks of this poor world. The EU’s free and undistorted competition will grant no gift to the most naive or subservient member countries.
Aid to the most affected sectors and regions will reinforce this logic of imperialist centralization-concentration in favor of the Center. In addition, under the guise of aid to the most affected sectors and regions, this will infringe on exclusive national competences, in particular Social Affairs. In fact, this is already illegally the case with the creation of SURE – for social shock absorbers against unemployment – and for the part made available by the MES to alleviate the health emergency – for example, 37 billion for Italy which, ironically, correspond to linear cuts in the health sector since 2011…
This is a very serious violation of the EU Functioning Treaty because it calls into question the division of exclusive and shared powers between the EU and its member states. This must be brought to court, as it is completely unacceptable. Furthermore, regionalization will destroy national sovereignty in the perverted framework of this division of powers, without any specific negotiation on the subject and without a democratic mandate. It’s worse than the real constitutional coup that led to the adoption of the mini-Lisbon Treaty after the defeats of the pseudo European constitutional treaty by referendum, especially in France.
In the end, the Green New Deal remains an anti-CO2 nonsense – CO2 is beneficial to vegetation (4). It will have the inevitable consequence of accelerating the privatization of what remains of public companies in transport, electricity, gas, posts etc., under the guise of ecology. It’s a shame. It has nothing to do with ecomarxism or popular ecology. And this will be done without any compensation in terms of income for workers to whom ministers and institutes – ex Montaigne – plan to impose more work by removing what remains of the RTT, including in terms of weeks of paid leave – the Gilets jaunes already know something about it, having been able to assess the effect of rising fuel prices on their standard of living. (5)
Countries requesting this kind of aid to be repaid on terms still to be negotiated will save a few points on the spread and may save themselves from drifting towards the junk status facing their public debt; but they will pay dearly for it by agreeing to the de facto transfer of their budgets to the Commission – which is much worse than the late Fiscal Compact. And this will be done by regionalizing and accepting the logic of “European champions” whose businesses will pay the price.
I repeat what I have been saying for years. The only solution compatible with diversity and virtuous European integration operated from below remains the building of a Social Europe based on the Europe of nations, which involves replacing the decision-making rule of the qualified majority by the opting out clause – which would induce integration through emulation of the best models. This also implies the return to deeper cooperation, in particular between public enterprises, as has been the case with great success in the past, in order to protect the rights of citizen beneficiaries and the strategic interests of member countries and therefore the return to public credit by through a public bank with a specific mandate to finance public and para-public debt.
I remind you that the distinction between money and credit is an essential scientific distinction. (6) In fact, the Statute of the ECB only conceded to the ECB the management of money by maintaining price stability – CPI, PPI – and by fixing the exchange rate of the euro – joint power with member states – while the Maastricht Criteria were a matter of fiscal and economic policy in member states to transit toward a more harmonized socio-economic community level. Note that the FED no longer measures the M3 monetary aggregate – QE and other liquidities – although it is the basis of the speculative bubble or “inflation” of derivatives and other financial instruments. That says a lot about money and credit. The Maastricht Treaty, which still prevails, protected public enterprises for those States which wished to protect them and provided for the principle of subsidiarity rather than a brutal hyper-centralism for the sole benefit of a hegemonic center, which can only induce recurrent crises and Euroscepticism.
I would also remind you that the Karlsruhe Court Opinion questions the extent of the liquidity issued by the ECB. These liquidities have been outside its mandate ever since Trichet’s Facility 1 and 2 and even more so with the other FSEF, MES, OMT, Ltro, Tltro 1,2,3, QE and corporate assets purchases programs. In fact, Trichet presented his Facilities as exceptional measures … They are now permanent and they do illustrate the debilitating drifts linked to the hegemonic speculative finance regime. The Court of Karlsruhe does so under the guise of proportionality by specifically emphasizing the problem of inflation. This means that it is not so much the proportionality of the purchase of bonds on the secondary market that is targeted, because it is done in proportion to the weight of the member States, but rather the proportionality of the liquidity policy according to the stated objective and the statutory control of inflation to be maintained at around 2%. This is also a fraudulent objective since no Marginalist or bourgeois theorist is able to say what inflation and what is genesis are – inflations should be written in the plural -, neither the FED nor the BIS nor anyone else. (7)
This very clearly means that the ECB manages money, not credit. In fact, the latter is abandoned to private banks and their fractional system, in particular the few large so-called “primary” banks. Article 47 of the Italian Constitution dictates that the State must protect the credit and savings of citizens. Better still, when the Constitution was written and voted by referendum, the economy had to be mixed and the management of public credit was the responsibility of the Italian Public Central Bank. Period. This made it possible to finance the vast post-war reconstruction – the “Italian miracle” – with minimal public debt because it corresponded to the annual anticipation in the form of credit of the additional investments required by the real economy, and therefore not speculative. Ditto for France before the privatization of the Banque de France in 1973.
In the current context, we can perfectly abandon the management of money to the ECB – its Statute – if necessary we could add the National Cooke Ratios that I advocated in my Tous ensemble (8) to avoid the foreseeable disaster inevitably caused of the kind of hyper-centralism advocated by the pitre Mundell. It is never too late to do well. On the other hand, it is imperative to take over, at least in part, public credit. It will be enough to to create a public bank with an initial financial leverage of 40 for 1 euro and to put each year two billion in assets – coming from the budget or from seigniorage payments from the ECB to the budget of the member States. This would solve the economic and budgetary problems, including by financing a large part of the new issues of public and para-public debt – strategic nationalizations – at rates close to zero while removing the Sword of Damocles of the spread, therefore the voluntary servitude to private speculative and philo-Semite Nietzschean banks.
I hope that the parties of the Left or those which remain attached to authentic national sovereignty within the framework of a virtuous and democratic European integration process – Social Europe based on the Europe of nations with the opting out clause and the democratization of the Strasbourg Parliament – will refuse this political and economic dispossession under cover of aid, a political push which will only centralize the European Union in an unacceptable manner. I hope that they will fight against this drift by all the available means, including by appealing to the courts of justice because, in any event, it is a frontal violation of the letter and the spirit not only European integration – intergovernmental and non-federalist or Spellelian integration – but above all a head-on violation of the current Operating Treaty of the EU and its division of powers between the European Commission / Council and member States.
Paul De Marco, former professor of International Relations – International Political Economy.
Notes:
1 ) See the “Costituzione” Category of this same site in particular the following article http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/la-riforma-costituzionale-renzi-gutgeldiana-distruzione-del-paese-ad-opera-del-federalismo-competitivo/
2 ) Sur l’Europe des nations et l’Europe sociale se my articles, including in English in the International Political Economy of my venerable old Jurassic site www.la-commune-paraclet.com
3 ) in my Tous ensemble for the Cooke ratios and the circuit breakers. This book proposed a reform of credit at national and international level – quotas and SDRs of the IMF, for example – as well as Workers’ funds and adapted Productivity funds based on the deferred wage which is one of the three components of “global net salary ” of the household. (see the Appeal in this same site). With regard to the Workers’ funds, I wrote following Rudolf Meidner that they had the potential to socialize private property very quickly while respecting private possession and social democracy. This is why, in homage to Jean Jaurès, I wrote that “The hour of Carmaux had come”. This strategic choice linked to the peaceful path to socialism discussed in the chapter on “revolutionary democratic reforms” opposed to the lamentable petty-bourgeois reformism remains even more topical today since the credit crunch literally suffocates SMEs, small businesses and artisan shops. The cooperative form supported by the workers’ funds would remove the credit crunch, increase the standard of living of the people concerned and above all would change the sociological and cultural base, therefore electoral, from top to bottom.
4 ) It would seem that the 11-year solar cycles are also linked to astral alignments so that we would probably entered a period of solar cooling in 2019. (v. « Le cycle solaire 25 qui démarre pourrait être le plus faible depuis 200 ans, selon la NASA» ,3 mai 2020 / Usbek, https://www.climato-realistes.fr/le-cycle-solaire-25-qui-demarre-sera-le-plus-faible-depuis-200-ans/ ) According to the testimony of satellite photos the ice cap and Antarctica is growing. (v. L’évolution de la banquise antarctique : les explications de la NOAA, 18 mai 2020 / Usbek, https://www.climato-realistes.fr/levolution-de-la-banquise-antarctique-les-explications-de-la-noaa ). Finally for the reduction of the Hole in the ozone layer before the crisis, so that the reduction of CO2 has nothing to do with it, is discussed here http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/peoples-environmentally-sustainable-policies-vs-green-speculative-bailout-and-social-regression-7-may-2020/. I also refer to the other articles in the Ecomarxismo section of this same site.
5 ) Gilets jaunes and purchasing power versus the standard of living see in this same site
http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/purchasing-power-standard-of-life-socially-necessary-working-time-and-global-net-income-of-the-households-2-31-dec-2018/
6 ) I refer to my Synopsis of Marxist Political Economy. I note that quite recently the ECB has modified its prudential ratios which comes out of my work and has already proven itself in China.
7 ) On Janet Yellen and the BIS on inflation see http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/the-fed-finally-admits-it-does-not-know-what-inflation-is-sept-21-2017
8 ) My Tous ensemble is freely accessible in the livres-Books section of www.la-commune-paraclet.com
Strengthening the Commission to regionalize the EU, c. “France and Germany united for a European revival in the face of the crisis.” May 18, 2020.
Posted: 19th Maggio 2020 by rivincitasociale in Commenti rapidi, EconomiaQuick comment: Strengthening the Commission to regionalize the EU for the benefit of an European Hegemonic Center? This stimulus plan goes beyond the equalization logic inherent to the structural funds in terms of real transfer of decision-making power. In addition, we should note that the trend towards regionalization and competitive autonomy of the regions was defeated by referendum in Italy on December 4, 2016. (1)
See : « France et Allemagne unies pour une relance européenne face à la crise.» 18 mai 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=44mdYGi18U8
This preliminary German-French agreement will have to be finalized by the 27 EU countries in the coming days. Some countries are hanging on the threat of the possible surge of the spread, which risks transforming their rating into junk, and therefore they have little room for maneuver. Unless they choose to revive their public credit by leaving money management to the ECB, which is its stricto sensu mandate, i.e., price stability and the management of the exchange rate of the Euro jointly with member states.
What do the German Chancellor and the French President propose? Simply a drift towards more economic power for the Commission, including in areas of exclusive national competence such as Health, to endorse regionalization under the control of the EU and its decisional rules which are as shaky as the democratic representation of peoples in the Strasbourg Parliament.
This would defensively bury the tendency, normal in times of crisis, which consists in the Member States fully recovering their exclusive powers – and the management of credit now abandoned to the private banks which the ECB slavishly serves – in order to revive a Social Europe based on a Europe of nations. This Europe of nations should be based on the emulation of the best models via a deepened cooperation or « coopérations renforcées » – therefore leading to virtuous concentric circles – and above all via the opting out clause substituting the disastrous decision-making rule of « qualified majority ». (2) In my opinion, the opting out clause would have enabled the GB to remain within the EU while integrating the euro zone. These are two opposing visions of Europe.
What is actually proposed?
It is proposed to supplement the existing arrangements – 750 billion euros for banks and companies granted by the ECB, 500 billion euros in the form of guarantees via SURE, MES and EIB – to which would be added a stimulus plan of 500 Billions of Euro’s.
This stimulus plan would be financed by loans made by the EU with its more advantageous rating than some EU highly indebted countries. Thus avoiding bankruptcy via the soaring of the spread for countries like Italy. Indeed, once the country investment risk has gone to junk, neither the ECB nor the banks or other institutional investors can buy the debt. In the medium term, this risk will not be excluded since this aid will have to be repaid, which will imply a strengthening of socio-economic austerity. It is true that Greece can once again borrow on the financial markets dominated by speculative finance, but this dubious result was acquired at the price of unheard of sacrifices – as in the Chile of the Chicago Boys and Pinochet – while auguring an eternal slavery by the debt which certainly made Solon turn in his grave.
However, Italy or Spain and Portugal no longer even have the necessary margins – wages, pensions, social services, privatization – to implement the austerity measures necessary to stay within the criteria
. This money would be made available to member countries according to a distribution which remains to be decided according to 4 pillars of intervention:
a ) the sectors and regions most affected by the crisis – e.g. health, tourism, etc. –
b ) budgetary transfers in fact aiming to allow the respect of the stability criteria and its neoliberal and monetarist a-social logic which led to the crisis of 2007-2008 and to the current crisis of which the Covid-19 only revealed;
c ) the environment according to the debilitating anti-CO2 logic of the Green New Deal;
d ) the preservation of “sovereignty” via normative and or tariff protection measures still to be decided and above all via the logic of building of economic “European champions”. The so-called « national champions » were created by privatizing state enterprises, the European champions do follow the same logic of “global private governance” and free trade largely determined by the current definition of anti-dumping. As we know, the latter induces a run toward the lowest salary and lowest environmental protection.
Such a logic is likely to reinforce economic hyper-centralization – concentration, centralization of capital – for the benefit of the countries with the strongest enterprises while the crisis will open a series of bankruptcies and mergers. This without changing anything from the hyper-centralism of the pitre Mundell who disastrously informed the creation of the ECB with all the problems we know today. (3) The most peripheral countries and those most in demand of ” aid ”will simply be swallowed economically, starting, of course, with strategic sectors and companies. The companies themselves only benefit from ECB purchases and EIB guarantees according to their rating decided by the various BlackRocks of this poor world. The EU’s free and undistorted competition will grant no gift to the most naive or subservient member countries.
Aid to the most affected sectors and regions will reinforce this logic of imperialist centralization-concentration in favor of the Center. In addition, under the guise of aid to the most affected sectors and regions, this will infringe on exclusive national competences, in particular Social Affairs. In fact, this is already illegally the case with the creation of SURE – for social shock absorbers against unemployment – and for the part made available by the MES to alleviate the health emergency – for example, 37 billion for Italy which, ironically, correspond to linear cuts in the health sector since 2011…
This is a very serious violation of the EU Functioning Treaty because it calls into question the division of exclusive and shared powers between the EU and its member states. This must be brought to court, as it is completely unacceptable. Furthermore, regionalization will destroy national sovereignty in the perverted framework of this division of powers, without any specific negotiation on the subject and without a democratic mandate. It’s worse than the real constitutional coup that led to the adoption of the mini-Lisbon Treaty after the defeats of the pseudo European constitutional treaty by referendum, especially in France.
In the end, the Green New Deal remains an anti-CO2 nonsense – CO2 is beneficial to vegetation (4). It will have the inevitable consequence of accelerating the privatization of what remains of public companies in transport, electricity, gas, posts etc., under the guise of ecology. It’s a shame. It has nothing to do with ecomarxism or popular ecology. And this will be done without any compensation in terms of income for workers to whom ministers and institutes – ex Montaigne – plan to impose more work by removing what remains of the RTT, including in terms of weeks of paid leave – the Gilets jaunes already know something about it, having been able to assess the effect of rising fuel prices on their standard of living. (5)
Countries requesting this kind of aid to be repaid on terms still to be negotiated will save a few points on the spread and may save themselves from drifting towards the junk status facing their public debt; but they will pay dearly for it by agreeing to the de facto transfer of their budgets to the Commission – which is much worse than the late Fiscal Compact. And this will be done by regionalizing and accepting the logic of “European champions” whose businesses will pay the price.
I repeat what I have been saying for years. The only solution compatible with diversity and virtuous European integration operated from below remains the building of a Social Europe based on the Europe of nations, which involves replacing the decision-making rule of the qualified majority by the opting out clause – which would induce integration through emulation of the best models. This also implies the return to deeper cooperation, in particular between public enterprises, as has been the case with great success in the past, in order to protect the rights of citizen beneficiaries and the strategic interests of member countries and therefore the return to public credit by through a public bank with a specific mandate to finance public and para-public debt.
I remind you that the distinction between money and credit is an essential scientific distinction. (6) In fact, the Statute of the ECB only conceded to the ECB the management of money by maintaining price stability – CPI, PPI – and by fixing the exchange rate of the euro – joint power with member states – while the Maastricht Criteria were a matter of fiscal and economic policy in member states to transit toward a more harmonized socio-economic community level. Note that the FED no longer measures the M3 monetary aggregate – QE and other liquidities – although it is the basis of the speculative bubble or “inflation” of derivatives and other financial instruments. That says a lot about money and credit. The Maastricht Treaty, which still prevails, protected public enterprises for those States which wished to protect them and provided for the principle of subsidiarity rather than a brutal hyper-centralism for the sole benefit of a hegemonic center, which can only induce recurrent crises and Euroscepticism.
I would also remind you that the Karlsruhe Court Opinion questions the extent of the liquidity issued by the ECB. These liquidities have been outside its mandate ever since Trichet’s Facility 1 and 2 and even more so with the other FSEF, MES, OMT, Ltro, Tltro 1,2,3, QE and corporate assets purchases programs. In fact, Trichet presented his Facilities as exceptional measures … They are now permanent and they do illustrate the debilitating drifts linked to the hegemonic speculative finance regime. The Court of Karlsruhe does so under the guise of proportionality by specifically emphasizing the problem of inflation. This means that it is not so much the proportionality of the purchase of bonds on the secondary market that is targeted, because it is done in proportion to the weight of the member States, but rather the proportionality of the liquidity policy according to the stated objective and the statutory control of inflation to be maintained at around 2%. This is also a fraudulent objective since no Marginalist or bourgeois theorist is able to say what inflation and what is genesis are – inflations should be written in the plural -, neither the FED nor the BIS nor anyone else. (7)
This very clearly means that the ECB manages money, not credit. In fact, the latter is abandoned to private banks and their fractional system, in particular the few large so-called “primary” banks. Article 47 of the Italian Constitution dictates that the State must protect the credit and savings of citizens. Better still, when the Constitution was written and voted by referendum, the economy had to be mixed and the management of public credit was the responsibility of the Italian Public Central Bank. Period. This made it possible to finance the vast post-war reconstruction – the “Italian miracle” – with minimal public debt because it corresponded to the annual anticipation in the form of credit of the additional investments required by the real economy, and therefore not speculative. Ditto for France before the privatization of the Banque de France in 1973.
In the current context, we can perfectly abandon the management of money to the ECB – its Statute – if necessary we could add the National Cooke Ratios that I advocated in my Tous ensemble (8) to avoid the foreseeable disaster inevitably caused of the kind of hyper-centralism advocated by the pitre Mundell. It is never too late to do well. On the other hand, it is imperative to take over, at least in part, public credit. It will be enough to to create a public bank with an initial financial leverage of 40 for 1 euro and to put each year two billion in assets – coming from the budget or from seigniorage payments from the ECB to the budget of the member States. This would solve the economic and budgetary problems, including by financing a large part of the new issues of public and para-public debt – strategic nationalizations – at rates close to zero while removing the Sword of Damocles of the spread, therefore the voluntary servitude to private speculative and philo-Semite Nietzschean banks.
I hope that the parties of the Left or those which remain attached to authentic national sovereignty within the framework of a virtuous and democratic European integration process – Social Europe based on the Europe of nations with the opting out clause and the democratization of the Strasbourg Parliament – will refuse this political and economic dispossession under cover of aid, a political push which will only centralize the European Union in an unacceptable manner. I hope that they will fight against this drift by all the available means, including by appealing to the courts of justice because, in any event, it is a frontal violation of the letter and the spirit not only European integration – intergovernmental and non-federalist or Spellelian integration – but above all a head-on violation of the current Operating Treaty of the EU and its division of powers between the European Commission / Council and member States.
Paul De Marco, former professor of International Relations – International Political Economy.
Notes:
1 ) See the “Costituzione” Category of this same site in particular the following article http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/la-riforma-costituzionale-renzi-gutgeldiana-distruzione-del-paese-ad-opera-del-federalismo-competitivo/
2 ) Sur l’Europe des nations et l’Europe sociale se my articles, including in English in the International Political Economy of my venerable old Jurassic site www.la-commune-paraclet.com
3 ) in my Tous ensemble for the Cooke ratios and the circuit breakers. This book proposed a reform of credit at national and international level – quotas and SDRs of the IMF, for example – as well as Workers’ funds and adapted Productivity funds based on the deferred wage which is one of the three components of “global net salary ” of the household. (see the Appeal in this same site). With regard to the Workers’ funds, I wrote following Rudolf Meidner that they had the potential to socialize private property very quickly while respecting private possession and social democracy. This is why, in homage to Jean Jaurès, I wrote that “The hour of Carmaux had come”. This strategic choice linked to the peaceful path to socialism discussed in the chapter on “revolutionary democratic reforms” opposed to the lamentable petty-bourgeois reformism remains even more topical today since the credit crunch literally suffocates SMEs, small businesses and artisan shops. The cooperative form supported by the workers’ funds would remove the credit crunch, increase the standard of living of the people concerned and above all would change the sociological and cultural base, therefore electoral, from top to bottom.
4 ) It would seem that the 11-year solar cycles are also linked to astral alignments so that we would probably entered a period of solar cooling in 2019. (v. « Le cycle solaire 25 qui démarre pourrait être le plus faible depuis 200 ans, selon la NASA» ,3 mai 2020 / Usbek, https://www.climato-realistes.fr/le-cycle-solaire-25-qui-demarre-sera-le-plus-faible-depuis-200-ans/ ) According to the testimony of satellite photos the ice cap and Antarctica is growing. (v. L’évolution de la banquise antarctique : les explications de la NOAA, 18 mai 2020 / Usbek, https://www.climato-realistes.fr/levolution-de-la-banquise-antarctique-les-explications-de-la-noaa ). Finally for the reduction of the Hole in the ozone layer before the crisis, so that the reduction of CO2 has nothing to do with it, is discussed here http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/peoples-environmentally-sustainable-policies-vs-green-speculative-bailout-and-social-regression-7-may-2020/. I also refer to the other articles in the Ecomarxismo section of this same site.
5 ) Gilets jaunes and purchasing power versus the standard of living see in this same site
http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/purchasing-power-standard-of-life-socially-necessary-working-time-and-global-net-income-of-the-households-2-31-dec-2018/
6 ) I refer to my Synopsis of Marxist Political Economy. I note that quite recently the ECB has modified its prudential ratios which comes out of my work and has already proven itself in China.
7 ) On Janet Yellen and the BIS on inflation see http://rivincitasociale.altervista.org/the-fed-finally-admits-it-does-not-know-what-inflation-is-sept-21-2017
8 ) My Tous ensemble is freely accessible in the livres-Books section of www.la-commune-paraclet.com