Giavazzi always reminds us how liberalism can be a valuable tool for the economic policies of the center-left.
is widespread elevates the concept of "compassionate liberalism".
In this way we try to give a label to a concept of social world and social person who is not. The market is a game between players competing for a goal. The competition is the basis of the functioning of both supply and demand when it comes to electricity market, labor, or financial. If agree to compete there will always be someone who benefits from it and someone loses. So there will be those who are better off and those who are worse. The incentive to the individual should be to always improve. By this logic underlying the more developed economies.
Giavazzi always reminds us how to help the weak is not so much to help the retirees, but to help young people. I also think it is true. The problem of the left, Giavazzi not stress is that its leadership is unable to conceive of the aid, if not through "take one to give to another."
This is nothing but a concept of class, that can only lead egalitarianism, in fact enemy of those who profess liberal liberal.
be "compassionate" I do not think the flexibility or accept the rules.
In a system that is evolving with the flexibility and mobility are physiological in the labor market. The difference is those who accept it before and after. But sooner or later we all come.
Same thing for the rules. In markets like the present, uncertain, unstable and constantly at risk bubble, think about free markets and let the "invisible hand" Smithian fa sorridere.
Da un mercato libero a un mercato delle regole il passo è stato breve. Il punto non è che chi accetta le regole è meno liberista di chi le regole non le concepisce nel mercato. Il punto è che spesso senza regole sparisce il mercato stesso.
Da liberale invece si dovrebbe sottolineare come gli eventi e la società dovrebbero plasmare la classe politica e le sue idee. Se il mondo si evolve, la politica dovrebbe recepire ed adeguarsi, senza usare come una clava principi ed etichette in nome della stessa competizione politica.
Clinton e Blair non erano liberalisti convinced. They just realized that the fiscal and economic revolutions of years earlier were maintained as a "right", not when politically acceptable.
The principles remain, the policy is evolving. Label as "compassionate" who is liberal but "not quite" part of politics and demagoguery that Deform intellectual typical of those who preach well and in many cases Razzola own.
Alesina and Giavazzi bargained for a party. E 'physiological in a world that constantly takes sides. They try to make their contribution to the reformist cause and hope that is born do not take conservative tendencies. They do a dirty job, however.
Liberalism is a valuable weapon, but that should be used in a certain way. The problem is who needs reform.
is not whether Adam Smith, Mill, and Ricardo had the right or left. These reforms must be made in the interest of the people, not the ruling class.
Liberalism can not be labeled right or left for the simple fact that it is uncomfortable because of what's here and there, just as free.
The idea same policy is not entirely in conformity with freedom. Politicians and economists would do well to think of giving labels less and make more reforms. Only those who will tell us is liberal or not, regardless of political color.
0 comments:
Post a Comment