Everyone looks at GDP as the panacea for our ills, but ... ... ... ....
The problem should be seen under the aspect of "growth possible."
Italy has a "growth can be" far less than those countries' emerging as China (we are talking about increases in GDP which stood at around 0.5 to 1.5%) and China traveling on an increase of 9% per year.
We are not China. Never will ... ... ....
We can not compete with a similar COLOSSUS.
Our potential is considerably lower, and we also hurt.
The value of GDP in 2005 was € 1,422,718,000 of
The value of GDP in 2006 was € 1,475,043,000 of
So the GDP has increased by 52.325 million euro, equivalent to 3.55% instead
The debt in 2005 was € 1,510,926,000
of debt in 2006 was € 1,575,346,000 of
So the debt has increased to 64.42 billion euro, equivalent to 4.09%.
a GDP that is completely eroded by debt in excess of its capacity will never take off.
So what remains is to act on debt
The problem is that governments established so far (all), have all found a state of the art, and have considered logical and conveniente non modificare…………….. (Per la famosa teoria del paniere di voti)
Per cui (TUTTI), facendone arricchire pochi (ma di tanto), per ripianare la bilancia, hanno affamato tanti (e non di poco).
Solo un governo che mette SERIAMENTE le mani nella spesa pubblica, può risolvere il problema………… ma voi ne conoscete ????
Il debito può calare soltanto agendo sulla spesa pubblica e riversando quindi sulle imprese, quei costi estemporanei ma costosi che le imprese girano, per convenienza, allo stato.
Esempio :
la cassa integrazione
la mobilità
il prepensionamento
la disoccupazione
Certo caricando le imprese di questi cosi, bisognerà concedere qualcos’altro (uno sconto fiscale sull’incremento delle esportazioni – sull’incremento d’acquisti non da importazioni – all’incremento dell’occupazione - o il diavolo sa cosa) ma qualcosa che tenda a mantenere i costi dove si creano ed i ricavi anche.
Altro punto è la completa eliminazione delle Assistenze clientelari (pensioni e indennità a chi non spettano).
La revisione totale degli emolumenti dei dirigenti pubblici, domenica sera (18-03-2006) (a W l’Italia) il senatore Salvi diceva a denti stretti che buona parte dei dirigenti pubblici, nel privato sarebbero a malapena normali employees.
The imposition of fees for the usufruct of state assets to fair values \u200b\u200b(not the miseries of the dealers who pay the beaches to the land ... ... ... ... for example).
The fight against tax evasion and social security contributions.
waste in various services (health - local - etc. Etc.) Would, if put in place, sufficient to improve the services with a reasonable savings.
Because the street is not that of spending cuts, but that the fight against waste in spending. All this would
:
• a debt that weighs less than GDP,
· the state to ease the tax burden and, consequently, to an automatic enrichment of the consumer, who is at that point, more willing to consume (with beneficial effect on real GDP and the state coffers).
Because there is an incontrovertible truth ... ... If the consumer has no ability to consume, the product does not consume any.
looks like a cat chasing its tail ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... And it is.
But someone, somewhere will have to begin ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... The property does not change anything.
The problem should be seen under the aspect of "growth possible."
Italy has a "growth can be" far less than those countries' emerging as China (we are talking about increases in GDP which stood at around 0.5 to 1.5%) and China traveling on an increase of 9% per year.
We are not China. Never will ... ... ....
We can not compete with a similar COLOSSUS.
Our potential is considerably lower, and we also hurt.
The value of GDP in 2005 was € 1,422,718,000 of
The value of GDP in 2006 was € 1,475,043,000 of
So the GDP has increased by 52.325 million euro, equivalent to 3.55% instead
The debt in 2005 was € 1,510,926,000
of debt in 2006 was € 1,575,346,000 of
So the debt has increased to 64.42 billion euro, equivalent to 4.09%.
a GDP that is completely eroded by debt in excess of its capacity will never take off.
So what remains is to act on debt
The problem is that governments established so far (all), have all found a state of the art, and have considered logical and conveniente non modificare…………….. (Per la famosa teoria del paniere di voti)
Per cui (TUTTI), facendone arricchire pochi (ma di tanto), per ripianare la bilancia, hanno affamato tanti (e non di poco).
Solo un governo che mette SERIAMENTE le mani nella spesa pubblica, può risolvere il problema………… ma voi ne conoscete ????
Il debito può calare soltanto agendo sulla spesa pubblica e riversando quindi sulle imprese, quei costi estemporanei ma costosi che le imprese girano, per convenienza, allo stato.
Esempio :
la cassa integrazione
la mobilità
il prepensionamento
la disoccupazione
Certo caricando le imprese di questi cosi, bisognerà concedere qualcos’altro (uno sconto fiscale sull’incremento delle esportazioni – sull’incremento d’acquisti non da importazioni – all’incremento dell’occupazione - o il diavolo sa cosa) ma qualcosa che tenda a mantenere i costi dove si creano ed i ricavi anche.
Altro punto è la completa eliminazione delle Assistenze clientelari (pensioni e indennità a chi non spettano).
La revisione totale degli emolumenti dei dirigenti pubblici, domenica sera (18-03-2006) (a W l’Italia) il senatore Salvi diceva a denti stretti che buona parte dei dirigenti pubblici, nel privato sarebbero a malapena normali employees.
The imposition of fees for the usufruct of state assets to fair values \u200b\u200b(not the miseries of the dealers who pay the beaches to the land ... ... ... ... for example).
The fight against tax evasion and social security contributions.
waste in various services (health - local - etc. Etc.) Would, if put in place, sufficient to improve the services with a reasonable savings.
Because the street is not that of spending cuts, but that the fight against waste in spending. All this would
:
• a debt that weighs less than GDP,
· the state to ease the tax burden and, consequently, to an automatic enrichment of the consumer, who is at that point, more willing to consume (with beneficial effect on real GDP and the state coffers).
Because there is an incontrovertible truth ... ... If the consumer has no ability to consume, the product does not consume any.
looks like a cat chasing its tail ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .... And it is.
But someone, somewhere will have to begin ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... The property does not change anything.
