I do not believe in those neoliberal ideals anymore, because that doesn't seem to work over here, in fact it does appear to have been the cause of the fast social decay in Europe, every approach in that direction made it worse. Every little lenience that was given to the economy was exploited to the maximum extend within the shortest time, mostly at the cost of employees. [...] I don't say that economic liberalism can't possibly work, just that it won't work under the current circumstances. At the moment it's an utopia, similar to the different directions of Anarchism, while it is very nice in theory it doesn't fit human mentality.
Yea that might very well be the case.
Today it appears to be far too late to fix things just by deregulating the markets, give everyone sudden freedom. This would required radical changes in international laws since companies had the advantage to design the whole system for decades.
Yea the transition part is always a difficult one. Though I heard a great analogy which applies here: a destroyed and abandoned church is not a good indicator of what things are like without religion. If we could have a system we know works then it'd be worth it trying to get there eventually. But there are many problems, a big one being that the people in power benefit from the current system and wouldn't want to change it, plus they get people dependent on the system so people will support it as well even if ultimately they'd be better off without it.
Just take a look at the messed up financial market, it's probably the most deregulated marked, caused the most recent crisis and continues to use most ridiculous theories, because they seem to work most of the time.
While it might be deregulated, it's not really unregulated. It's more set up to guarantee profit to the bankers whatever happens. They can take risks and get paid if they succeed, or get bailed out if they don't. It's really ridiculous. The thing with regulation is that it forms an intricate net wherein if you remove any one regulation, it's hard to tell what exactly will happen because of the interaction with all the other regulations. So it's not always the case that removing a particular regulation will lead to a freer and more efficient market, because there might be another regulation that leads to ridiculous behavior unless it's checked by other regulations.
Here in Germany there are indicators that higher wages don't destroy the economy at all, throughout the states of Germany there is a positive correlation between average wages and economic power. Meaning that here in my federal state for example, unemployment is fairly low, risk of poverty is low, the average income is the highest of all states, which aren't merely a city; economically we are the 2nd strongest state.
Oh but of course, it'd be extremely unlikely for higher wages to not be correlated with economic power. I'm not arguing against higher wages. If that's what you took from my posts then you're mistaken. Higher wages are great and of course the higher wages, the better. But is it really that higher wages lead to a powerful economy, or rather that higher wages are a natural result of a powerful economy? It's like saying that high prices are a sign of a strong economy - look how expensive new york and london and moscow are - so let's artificially increase all our prices so that our economy does better. Sound ridiculous? That's just what they did during the great depression. Somehow people thought that prices being low was the cause of the depression so they paid farmers to destroy food and not work to raise the prices of food... which is ridiculous.
Anyways, nice chatting!