The more I read about austerity and the effects it has on the health of entire populations, the more I am surprised at its prevalence throughout the planet, especially in Europe during the recession. It seems with each chapter less like well-intentioned policy with nasty effects and more like a malevolent plot to cull the herd of tired, huddled masses yearning to eat today. I mean, I’ve always been a sort of conspiracy theorist in that way, but let’s face it, I’m kind of right. I mean, austerity as described by Stuckler and Basu honestly just sounds evil. I mean, the IMF offered exorbitant amounts of money in loans in exchange for policies and budget cuts that were directly detrimental to the populace of Greece. “We’ll offer you 110 billion euros if you cut social protection programs.” Like, seriously? That’s not offering help, that’s pouring salt into a wound. And the people who suffer most are the people at the bottom who didn’t even create the economic crisis in the first place, because now they can’t get the healthcare they need. Pure evil. Like, movie supervillain evil.
On a less sad note, it was interesting to read about how Iceland found ways to revitalize its economy at the outset of the economic crisis. The country started out as a rather small rural nation before it began to boom as a result of a newfound banking economy much like that of Dubai. Greece experienced something similar with a turn toward tourism. Unfortunately, neither of these changes could save either country from economic downturn and the inevitable damage austerity would cause, but they were valiant efforts in and of themselves. I’m curious as to how observable the change in lifestyle is when a country’s economic structure shifts so drastically. Will your average Icelandic farmer notice a change in their lifestyle when their country’s central source of income changes to commerce? Will a Greek baker’s life change forever when their country opens its gates to tourists to make ends meet?
I was glad to read that Iceland didn’t give in to austerity, and eventually enacted policies for social protection. In doing so, they were able to put their economy back on its feet. Austerity just causes damage wherever it’s implemented. In the short term it’s a viable solution, but is it worth the consequences?
I say this all with full knowledge that I am neither an economist nor a policy-maker and I have never had the responsibility of saving an entire nation’s economy.
