Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
I can relate to this.

Buying properties is heavily state supported in some places (think .NL and .PT - though .PT this has been dismantled). When there is more demand than supply (which, BTW, has happened in both places above), the state subsidy has the pernicious effect of raising property prices even more. It is actually the worse kind of state intervention that I can think off: Apparently supporting working families, effectively transferring capital to banks and property developers (highly regressive), inflating market prices into bubble territory. The working families get no benefit from this has all the subsidy is destroyed through higher prices...

by cagatacos on Mon Jul 22nd, 2013 at 04:28:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Steve Keen might suggest you add Australia to your list and, of course, the USA, where home ownership was highly touted by Bush 43 in addition to verbal encouragement, prolonged low interest rates and regulatory forbearance courtesy of Greenspan and the Fed. I suppose a Job Guarantee might be a substitute when the former efforts have blown up spectacularly, as in the USA but at the cost of doing great violence to the simplistic moral economic tale that has so thoroughly been sold to the public.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Mon Jul 22nd, 2013 at 10:50:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]
"[Australian] government policy is to have expensive affordable housing. Which is rather difficult to achieve."

- Keen

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Jul 22nd, 2013 at 12:51:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
However in the JG policy, the provider of employment insurance does not bid against private employers for labor, but rather sets a price floor and gives way to anyone willing to outbid in wage or conditions.

It seems as if part of the premise is that if the political terrain in a country with employment insurance was the same as the neoliberal "do what we say or starve" countries, then any additional income will be scooped up by rentier and all that the employment insurance will do is to redistribute income among the relatively powerles middle income classes and working poor.

However, getting a Job Guarantee put into place seems like it first requires changing that political terrain, and having a Job Guarantee in place would seem to undermine much of the neoliberal disciplinary stick.

So I'm not clear on how the argument by which the income is soaked up by rentier is consistent with the premise that a Job Guarantee has been successfully put into place.

I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.

by BruceMcF (agila61 at netscape dot net) on Tue Jul 23rd, 2013 at 02:29:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Top Diaries

Occasional Series