I’ll admit to being no expert in the matter of debt, but I have a serious problem with the fundamental notion of private debt being socialised and made public, as is now the case with banking debt.
I also have a problem with being told by some “pragmatist” experts or vocal opinion-holders that this is somehow magically our debt or that there aren’t any alternatives but to divvey up and pay it. And not only must we pay it, but we must commit future generations to paying it without as much as a by your leave.
We live in a so-called republic, Res publica, translates as the public good. It is a moral principle, and it is not difficult for anyone to understand. It’s obvious to the least expert amongst us that morally actions done by one person cannot & should not be laid at the door of another; this is contrary to the very notion of the public good, yet we are asked to sign up to it by the majority of parties in this election, and by commitments made on our behalf and on behalf of future generations by the present government. This, in my view, is simply immoral and agreeing to it, we undermine more important principles that underpin republican democracy, and will damage its very foundations.
If one principle is inconvenient, then all principles can be set aside. It may not be “convenient” or “practical” to repudiate the debt, but is it not obviously the right thing to do?
I also have a problem with being told by some “pragmatist” experts or vocal opinion-holders that this is somehow magically our debt or that there aren’t any alternatives but to divvey up and pay it. And not only must we pay it, but we must commit future generations to paying it without as much as a by your leave.
We live in a so-called republic, Res publica, translates as the public good. It is a moral principle, and it is not difficult for anyone to understand. It’s obvious to the least expert amongst us that morally actions done by one person cannot & should not be laid at the door of another; this is contrary to the very notion of the public good, yet we are asked to sign up to it by the majority of parties in this election, and by commitments made on our behalf and on behalf of future generations by the present government. This, in my view, is simply immoral and agreeing to it, we undermine more important principles that underpin republican democracy, and will damage its very foundations.
If one principle is inconvenient, then all principles can be set aside. It may not be “convenient” or “practical” to repudiate the debt, but is it not obviously the right thing to do?