Is the American Dream a Nightmare for Millions? That's the stark reality we're facing when we examine the state of US capitalism and its impact on everyday citizens. While some leaders, like Nigel Farage and Kemi Badenoch, seem to admire the US model, it's crucial to understand the potential consequences. This article delves into the heart of this issue, exploring how a specific brand of capitalism might be leaving many behind.
Next month, we might imagine Donald Trump showcasing his plans for a lavish $300 million ballroom in the White House to a poverty-stricken family, as part of National Poverty in America Awareness Month. However, the reality is likely to be quite different. Instead, we can anticipate Trump preferring to be seen with billionaires, as he did at a recent black-tie dinner with the Saudi ruler and his entourage.
Trump is expected to sidestep calls for poverty reduction policies, ignoring the annual awareness campaign. This approach frees him from any potential guilt, unlike past presidents who may have reflected on their actions.
The rising poverty levels in the US, a trend that has been apparent since the turn of the century, have significant implications for the UK and Europe. This is because the US model of capitalism, which is increasingly favored by right-wing parties, is a direct contributor to this trend.
Farage's Reform UK and Badenoch's Conservatives often praise the US. But here's where it gets controversial... They appear to overlook how this model of capitalism can leave millions struggling. This is a system that seems to prioritize the ability of the fortunate to work, spend, and save without considering those less privileged.
Consider the stark contrasts: the opioid crisis, the mental health crisis, and high levels of obesity and poverty. These issues are far more pronounced in the US than in Europe. Even after years of austerity in Europe, the US government's intervention remains significantly lower.
And this is the part most people miss... The US also exports its financial crashes globally, knowing that the cost to itself is a fraction of the repair work faced by countries that prioritize their citizens' well-being.
If you value environmental responsibility and helping those in need, there's a clear path to lower taxes and reduced regulation. This is something to consider when you hear about Europe's slow economic growth, with the UK not far ahead.
A kinder nation, one that values the views of its citizens, will grow at a more measured pace. Regulations that prevent financial crashes might slow down the adoption of new financial products, but they can also prevent or minimize the worst outcomes. It's important to remember that since 1929, it has been reckless US governments that have exported financial chaos, not the more cautious financial centers of the UK or Europe.
For those who believe in faster growth, there are numerous reports on how the UK and European governments could improve. Mario Draghi, the former Italian prime minister and ex-head of the European Central Bank, provided a comprehensive critique of Europe's lack of growth, suggesting remedies that mostly involve further integration. Draghi's reforms were designed to support a large and generous state, which is not a socialist idea.
Farage and Badenoch are unsurprisingly resistant to the ideas in Draghi’s report. They prefer to take other lessons from the US: that financial markets should be free, that monopolies are acceptable if they drive investment, and that the poor and unhealthy should understand that their situation is likely their own fault, and thus can only expect the most basic support from the state.
Studies of the modern electorate suggest that older people are most susceptible to the Farage/Badenoch argument. The only aspect of the state that is considered sacred is the health service, for obvious reasons. Everything else can be sacrificed to prevent the state from demanding more in tax from its citizens. The AfD in Germany, the National Rally in France, and Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy party all share this philosophy.
In the UK, there's a clear connection between those over 60 and those voting with frustration and anger to dismantle the society created by older voters. Without acknowledging the link to far-right parties on the continent and Trump's White House, it is baby boomers who are coming out in favor of low regulation, a finance industry free to do its worst, and leaving charity to look after the least well-off. Those with more progressive views are in a minority in this age group.
The government should advocate for gradualism and how it protects most people. It safeguards against disaster and, when disaster strikes, has the capacity to offer support where it is needed. It builds resilience. The US, however, casts its least fortunate aside in the most callous way, and it always has. But these days, its immense wealth and income make that unnecessary.
What do you think? Do you agree with the assessment of US capitalism? How do you see its influence on other countries? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
