Long live the social and united State!

29
Long live the social and united State!
Long live the social and united State!

Africa-Press – Mauritius. To date, the coronavirus pandemic in the world has done enough damage, in particular in the number of people infected or dead and the suspension of certain economic activities with inevitable job losses.

It raises questions about the viability and resilience of the systems in place in the face of unpredictable shocks and the capacity of affected countries to bounce back from the present slump. What the immediate future holds is uncertain, but some lessons can be learned from this crisis that no one saw coming.

There are points of rupture compared to the status quo ante (the situation before the crisis) that are obvious: they will have a definite influence on economic thinking and policy in the years to come. Will these breaking points be sufficient to give rise to an overhaul of politics and the economy? The question is relevant. Destigmatize the State

Before the onset of the crisis, the neoliberal theory that “government is the problem, not the solution to the problem” was gaining ground almost everywhere in the Western world, at the mercy of right-wing populisms that took hold. power to advocate the disengagement of the State in public services, in particular the health and education sectors through privatization.

Mauritius was not spared by this “libertarian” ideology, as evidenced by the flowering of clinics and private schools on national soil according to the rationality of a two-tier system, one for the better off and one for the less fortunate.

For a long time, neoliberal economists, professing an absolute faith in the logic of the market, stigmatized the role of the state as the provider of public services, arguing that the government collected too many taxes to finance public spending.

They wanted less government, therefore less taxes. However, the health crisis has revealed to the citizens of some countries the extent of the lack of protective masks, respirators and beds in their hospitals.

The unpreparedness of the health system for the epidemic is the result of the state’s disinvestment for years in essential services. In the United States, for example, we have seen the Third World of health in a country that boasts of being the richest on the planet with exceptional medical skills.

Now the central state has regained its leadership role in many countries to respond to the crisis, both health and economically. Even in the United States, Congress voted in favor of substantial aid to hospitals despite its president’s desire to trade economic recovery against public health (one at the expense of the other) in the process.

development of the economic rescue plan. There is a realization on the part of the American public of the need for a government funded public health system.

It is an irony of fate that the British Prime Minister’s admission to hospital this week highlighted the importance of the National Health Service (NHS), which was said to be threatened with cuts in the wake of the Brexit. No to economic runoff

In a remarkable televised address a few days ago, French President Macron promised to fight the epidemic and revive the hibernated economy “whatever the cost”, meaning that the French state would spend as much as necessary to find a way out of the crisis.

He said he wanted to preserve the welfare state, “a precious commodity”, and put certain essential services “outside the market”. In other words, the logic of the market, by virtue of which everything is bought and everything is sold, cannot be applied to public health.

You would have thought you heard a socialist. Macron is, however, the politician who claimed to overcome the left-right antinomy in the search for a third way.

Economically, the social and united state has been deployed in many countries to compensate employees suddenly deprived of employment as well as the self-employed.

This marks a radical difference from the 2008 financial crisis when all affected countries, including Mauritius, offered bailouts aimed at businesses only.

At the time, the approach was to help employers according to the logic of the trickle-down economics which wants that the public money given to the companies makes it possible to maintain the activities and to produce wealth which flows.

from high to low. The runoff had only accentuated economic inequalities with staggering salaries and performance bonuses paid to executives of companies rescued by the state.

Keynesianism back This time around, the state favors assistance to employees through subsidized wages and the allowance paid to workers in the informal sector. There will undoubtedly be a business rescue plan with repayable credits, but it will not be the exclusive step of the state.

What is innovative about the new approach is that it gives credence to the idea of ​​a guaranteed basic income for each family, whether in the form of negative tax in addition to the salary of an employee. underpaid, the minimum living wage or a direct allowance for those in precarious employment.

The financing of the Guaranteed Basic Income is said to be a subject of fierce ideological debate between the progressives, supporters of higher marginal tax rates on the rich, and the Conservatives, supporters of the minimum flat tax.

While the world seemed stuck in a wave of relentless neoliberalism, the crisis makes it possible to reconnect with the economic approach based on Keynesianism, the philosophy which wants the State to make the necessary public investments in infrastructure and collective equipment in order to revive the economy after a recession.

It is the reasonable alternative to the endless demands for lower corporate taxes, deregulation of markets and the privatization of public services that the bosses are hounding at us year round. These proposals, when put into practice, have never ensured balanced and inclusive growth.

For More News And Analysis About Mauritius Follow Africa-Press

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here