Moving average tutor2u

Publikasi Investor Panduan Pemula untuk Laporan Keuangan Dasar-dasar Jika Anda bisa membaca label nutrisi atau angka kotak baseball, Anda dapat belajar membaca laporan keuangan dasar. Jika Anda bisa mengikuti resep atau mengajukan pinjaman, Anda bisa mempelajari dasar akuntansi. Dasar-dasar arent sulit dan mereka arent ilmu roket. Brosur ini dirancang untuk membantu Anda mendapatkan pemahaman dasar tentang bagaimana membaca laporan keuangan. Sama seperti kelas CPR yang mengajarkan cara melakukan dasar-dasar resusitasi paru jantung, brosur ini akan menjelaskan bagaimana membaca bagian dasar dari sebuah laporan keuangan. Ini tidak akan melatih Anda untuk menjadi seorang akuntan (seperti kursus CPR tidak akan membuat Anda menjadi dokter jantung), namun harus memberi Anda kepercayaan diri untuk dapat melihat serangkaian laporan keuangan dan memahaminya. Mari kita mulai dengan melihat apa yang laporan keuangan lakukan. Tunjukkan pada saya uangnya Kita semua mengingat garis abadi Kuba Gooding Jr dari film Jerry Maguire. Tunjukkan uangnya Nah, itu yang laporan keuangannya lakukan. Mereka menunjukkan uangnya. Mereka menunjukkan dari mana uang perusahaan berasal, ke mana arahnya, dan di mana tempatnya sekarang. Ada empat laporan keuangan utama. Mereka adalah: (1) neraca (2) laporan laba rugi (3) laporan arus kas dan (4) laporan ekuitas pemegang saham. Neraca menunjukkan apa yang dimiliki perusahaan dan apa yang harus dibayar pada titik waktu tertentu. Laporan laba rugi menunjukkan berapa banyak uang yang dibuat dan dihabiskan perusahaan selama periode waktu tertentu. Laporan arus kas menunjukkan pertukaran uang antara perusahaan dan dunia luar juga selama periode waktu tertentu. Laporan keuangan keempat, yang disebut pernyataan ekuitas pemegang saham, menunjukkan perubahan dalam kepentingan pemegang saham perusahaan dari waktu ke waktu. Mari kita lihat tiga laporan keuangan pertama secara lebih rinci. Neraca Neraca memberikan informasi rinci tentang aset perusahaan. Kewajiban dan ekuitas pemegang saham. Aset adalah barang yang dimiliki perusahaan yang memiliki nilai. Ini biasanya berarti mereka dapat dijual atau digunakan oleh perusahaan untuk membuat produk atau memberikan layanan yang dapat dijual. Aset termasuk properti fisik, seperti tanaman, truk, peralatan dan inventaris. Ini juga mencakup hal-hal yang tidak dapat disentuh namun tetap ada dan memiliki nilai, seperti merek dagang dan hak paten. Dan uang itu sendiri merupakan aset. Begitu pula investasi yang dilakukan perusahaan. Kewajiban adalah jumlah uang yang dimiliki perusahaan kepada orang lain. Ini bisa mencakup semua jenis kewajiban, seperti uang yang dipinjam dari bank untuk meluncurkan produk baru, menyewa bangunan, uang yang harus dibayarkan kepada pemasok untuk bahan, penggajian perusahaan kepada karyawannya, biaya pembersihan lingkungan, atau pajak yang harus dibayar pemerintah. Kewajiban juga mencakup kewajiban untuk menyediakan barang atau jasa kepada pelanggan di masa depan. Ekuitas pemegang saham terkadang disebut modal atau kekayaan bersih. Its uang yang akan ditinggalkan jika perusahaan menjual semua aset dan lunas semua kewajibannya. Uang sisa ini milik pemegang saham, atau pemilik perusahaan. Rumus berikut merangkum apa yang ditunjukkan oleh neraca: KEWAJIBAN AKUNTANSI PEMEGANG SAHAM EKUITAS Aset perusahaan harus sama, atau sama dengan kuota, jumlah ekuitas dan ekuitas pemegang saham. Neraca perusahaan disusun seperti persamaan akuntansi dasar yang ditunjukkan di atas. Di sisi kiri neraca, daftar perusahaan aset mereka. Di sisi kanan, mereka mencantumkan kewajiban dan ekuitas pemegang sahamnya. Terkadang neraca menunjukkan aset di atas, diikuti oleh kewajiban, dengan ekuitas di bagian bawah. Aset umumnya tercantum berdasarkan seberapa cepat mereka akan dikonversi menjadi uang tunai. Aset lancar adalah hal yang diharapkan perusahaan mengkonversi menjadi uang tunai dalam waktu satu tahun. Contoh yang bagus adalah persediaan. Sebagian besar perusahaan berharap untuk menjual inventaris mereka untuk uang tunai dalam waktu satu tahun. Aset tidak lancar adalah hal-hal yang tidak diharapkan oleh perusahaan untuk dikonversi menjadi uang tunai dalam waktu satu tahun atau akan memakan waktu lebih dari satu tahun untuk dijual. Aset tidak lancar meliputi aktiva tetap. Aset tetap adalah aset yang digunakan untuk menjalankan usaha tetapi tidak tersedia untuk dijual, seperti truk, perabot kantor dan properti lainnya. Kewajiban umumnya tercantum berdasarkan tanggal jatuh tempo. Kewajiban dikatakan lancar atau berjangka panjang. Kewajiban lancar adalah kewajiban perusahaan mengharapkan untuk melunasi dalam tahun ini. Kewajiban jangka panjang adalah kewajiban yang harus dibayar lebih dari satu tahun lagi. Ekuitas pemegang saham adalah jumlah pemilik yang diinvestasikan dalam saham perusahaan ditambah atau dikurangi laba atau rugi perusahaan sejak awal. Terkadang perusahaan mendistribusikan pendapatan, alih-alih mempertahankannya. Distribusi ini disebut dividen. Neraca menunjukkan potret aset, kewajiban dan ekuitas pemegang saham perusahaan pada akhir periode pelaporan. Ini tidak menunjukkan arus masuk dan keluar dari akun selama periode tersebut. Laporan Laba Rugi Laporan laba rugi adalah laporan yang menunjukkan berapa pendapatan yang diperoleh perusahaan selama periode waktu tertentu (biasanya satu tahun atau beberapa tahun dalam satu tahun). Laporan laba rugi juga menunjukkan biaya dan biaya yang terkait dengan pendapatan pendapatan tersebut. Inti literal pernyataan tersebut biasanya menunjukkan laba atau rugi bersih perusahaan. Ini memberitahu Anda berapa banyak perusahaan memperoleh atau kehilangan selama periode tersebut. Laporan laba rugi juga melaporkan laba per saham (atau EPS). Perhitungan ini memberitahu Anda berapa banyak uang yang akan diterima oleh pemegang saham jika perusahaan memutuskan untuk membagikan seluruh laba bersih untuk periode tersebut. (Perusahaan hampir tidak pernah membagikan semua pendapatan mereka. Biasanya mereka menginvestasikannya kembali dalam bisnis ini.) Untuk memahami bagaimana laporan pendapatan dibuat, anggap mereka sebagai tangga. Anda mulai di atas dengan jumlah total penjualan yang dilakukan selama periode akuntansi. Lalu Anda turun, selangkah demi selangkah. Pada setiap langkah, Anda melakukan pengurangan biaya tertentu atau biaya operasional lainnya yang terkait dengan pendapatan. Di bagian bawah tangga, setelah dikurangi semua biaya, Anda belajar berapa banyak perusahaan benar-benar mendapatkan atau kehilangan selama periode akuntansi. Orang sering menyebut ini sebagai garis bawah. Di bagian atas laporan laba rugi adalah jumlah uang yang dibawa dari penjualan produk atau jasa. Bagian atas ini sering disebut sebagai pendapatan kotor atau penjualan. Ini disebut kotor karena biaya belum dikurangkan darinya. Jadi jumlahnya kotor atau tidak dimurnikan. Baris berikutnya adalah uang yang tidak diharapkan perusahaan untuk mengumpulkan penjualan tertentu. Ini bisa jadi karena, misalnya, untuk diskon penjualan atau pengembalian barang dagangan. Bila Anda mengurangi imbal hasil dan tunjangan dari pendapatan kotor, Anda sampai pada pendapatan bersih perusahaan. Yang disebut bersih karena, jika Anda bisa membayangkan jaring, pendapatan ini tertinggal di net setelah dikurangi pengembalian dan tunjangan telah keluar. Menuruni tangga dari garis pendapatan bersih, ada beberapa jalur yang mewakili berbagai jenis biaya operasional. Meskipun baris ini dapat dilaporkan dalam berbagai pesanan, baris berikutnya setelah pendapatan bersih biasanya menunjukkan biaya penjualan. Jumlah ini memberi tahu Anda jumlah uang yang dikeluarkan perusahaan untuk memproduksi barang atau jasa yang dijualnya selama periode akuntansi. Baris berikutnya mengurangi biaya penjualan dari pendapatan bersih sampai pada subtotal yang disebut laba kotor atau kadang-kadang marjin kotor. Ini dianggap kotor karena ada beberapa biaya yang belum dikurangkan dari itu. Bagian selanjutnya berkaitan dengan biaya operasional. Ini adalah biaya yang digunakan untuk mendukung operasi perusahaan untuk periode tertentu, misalnya gaji pegawai administrasi dan biaya untuk meneliti produk baru. Biaya pemasaran adalah contoh lain. Beban usaha berbeda dengan biaya penjualan, yang dikurangkan di atas, karena biaya operasional tidak dapat dikaitkan langsung dengan produksi produk atau layanan yang dijual. Penyusutan juga dikurangkan dari laba kotor. Penyusutan memperhitungkan keausan pada beberapa aset, seperti mesin, peralatan dan perabotan, yang digunakan dalam jangka panjang. Perusahaan menyebarkan biaya aset ini selama periode yang digunakan. Proses penyebaran biaya ini disebut penyusutan atau amortisasi. Tagihan untuk menggunakan aset ini selama periode tersebut merupakan sebagian kecil dari biaya awal aset. Setelah semua biaya operasional dikurangkan dari laba kotor, Anda akan sampai pada laba operasi sebelum bunga dan beban pajak penghasilan. Ini sering disebut pendapatan dari operasi. Perusahaan berikutnya harus memperhitungkan pendapatan bunga dan biaya bunga. Penghasilan bunga adalah uang yang dihasilkan perusahaan dari menyimpan uang mereka di rekening tabungan berbunga, dana pasar uang dan sejenisnya. Di sisi lain, biaya bunga adalah uang perusahaan yang dibayar dengan bunga uang yang mereka pinjam. Beberapa laporan laba rugi menunjukkan pendapatan bunga dan beban bunga secara terpisah. Beberapa laporan laba rugi menggabungkan dua angka tersebut. Pendapatan bunga dan biaya kemudian ditambahkan atau dikurangkan dari laba operasi sampai pada laba operasi sebelum pajak penghasilan. Akhirnya, pajak penghasilan dikurangkan dan Anda sampai pada intinya: laba bersih atau rugi bersih. (Laba bersih juga disebut laba bersih atau laba bersih). Ini memberitahu Anda berapa banyak perusahaan benar-benar memperoleh atau kehilangan selama periode akuntansi. Apakah perusahaan menghasilkan keuntungan atau kehilangan uang Laba Per Share atau EPS Sebagian besar laporan laba rugi mencakup perhitungan laba per saham atau EPS. Perhitungan ini memberi tahu Anda berapa banyak uang yang akan diterima pemegang saham untuk setiap saham yang mereka miliki jika perusahaan membagikan seluruh pendapatan bersihnya untuk periode tersebut. Untuk menghitung EPS, Anda mengambil total laba bersih dan membaginya dengan jumlah saham perusahaan yang beredar. Laporan Arus Kas Laporan arus kas melaporkan aliran masuk perusahaan dan arus kas keluar. Hal ini penting karena perusahaan perlu memiliki cukup uang tunai untuk membayar biaya dan membeli asetnya. Sementara laporan laba rugi dapat memberi tahu Anda apakah sebuah perusahaan menghasilkan keuntungan, pernyataan arus kas dapat memberi tahu Anda apakah perusahaan menghasilkan uang tunai. Pernyataan arus kas menunjukkan perubahan dari waktu ke waktu daripada jumlah dolar mutlak pada satu titik waktu. Ini menggunakan dan mengingatkan kembali informasi dari neraca perusahaan dan laporan laba rugi. Intinya dari laporan arus kas menunjukkan kenaikan atau penurunan bersih kas untuk periode tersebut. Umumnya, laporan arus kas dibagi menjadi tiga bagian utama. Setiap bagian menelaah arus kas dari salah satu dari tiga jenis kegiatan: (1) aktivitas operasi (2) aktivitas investasi dan (3) aktivitas pendanaan. Aktivitas Operasi Bagian pertama dari laporan arus kas menganalisis arus kas perusahaan dari laba atau rugi bersih. Bagi sebagian besar perusahaan, bagian dari laporan arus kas ini mendamaikan laba bersih (seperti yang ditunjukkan pada laporan laba rugi) terhadap uang tunai yang sebenarnya diterima atau digunakan perusahaan dalam kegiatan operasinya. Untuk melakukan ini, ia menyesuaikan laba bersih untuk barang non-kas (seperti menambahkan kembali biaya penyusutan) dan menyesuaikan uang tunai yang digunakan atau disediakan oleh aset dan kewajiban operasi lainnya. Aktivitas Investasi Bagian kedua dari laporan arus kas menunjukkan arus kas dari semua aktivitas investasi, yang umumnya mencakup pembelian atau penjualan aset jangka panjang, seperti aset tetap, dan juga efek investasi. Jika sebuah perusahaan membeli mesin, laporan arus kas akan mencerminkan aktivitas ini sebagai arus keluar dana dari kegiatan investasi karena menggunakan uang tunai. Jika perusahaan memutuskan untuk menjual beberapa investasi dari portofolio investasi, hasil penjualan akan muncul sebagai arus masuk dana dari aktivitas investasi karena menyediakan uang tunai. Kegiatan Pembiayaan Bagian ketiga dari laporan arus kas menunjukkan arus kas dari semua aktivitas pendanaan. Sumber tipikal arus kas termasuk uang yang dihasilkan dengan menjual saham dan obligasi atau pinjaman dari bank. Demikian juga, membayar kembali pinjaman bank akan muncul sebagai penggunaan arus kas. Baca Catatan Kaki Seekor kuda yang disebut Read The Footnotes berlari di Kentucky Derby 2004. Dia finish di urutan ketujuh, tapi jika dia menang, itu akan menjadi kemenangan bagi pendukung literasi finansial di mana-mana. Its sangat penting untuk membaca catatan kaki. Catatan kaki untuk laporan keuangan dikemas dengan informasi. Berikut adalah beberapa hal yang menarik: Kebijakan dan praktik akuntansi yang signifikan Perusahaan diminta untuk mengungkapkan kebijakan akuntansi yang paling penting bagi penggambaran kondisi keuangan perusahaan dan hasilnya. Ini sering membutuhkan pertimbangan manajemen yang paling sulit, subjektif atau kompleks. Pajak penghasilan Catatan kaki memberikan informasi rinci tentang pajak penghasilan perusahaan saat ini dan yang ditangguhkan. Informasi tersebut dipecah berdasarkan tingkat federal, negara bagian, lokal dan asing, dan item utama yang mempengaruhi tingkat pajak efektif perusahaan dijelaskan. Program pensiun dan program pensiun lainnya Catatan kaki membahas rencana pensiun perusahaan dan program pensiun atau pasca kerja lainnya. Catatan berisi informasi spesifik tentang aset dan biaya program ini, dan menunjukkan apakah dan berapa banyak rencana tersebut di atas atau di bawah dana. Opsi saham Catatan juga berisi informasi tentang opsi saham yang diberikan kepada petugas dan karyawan, termasuk metode akuntansi untuk kompensasi berbasis saham dan dampak metode pada hasil yang dilaporkan. Baca MDA Anda dapat menemukan penjelasan naratif mengenai kinerja keuangan perusahaan di bagian laporan triwulanan atau tahunan yang berjudul, Diskusi dan Analisis Manajemen mengenai Kondisi Keuangan dan Hasil Operasi. MDA adalah manajemen yang memberikan pandangan investor terhadap kinerja dan kondisi keuangan perusahaan. Manajemennya memberi kesempatan kepada investor untuk mengetahui apa yang ditunjukkan dan ditunjukkan oleh laporan keuangan, serta kecenderungan dan risiko penting yang telah terbentuk di masa lalu atau kemungkinan besar akan membentuk masa depan perusahaan. Aturan SEC yang mengatur MDA memerlukan pengungkapan tentang tren, kejadian atau ketidakpastian yang diketahui oleh manajemen yang akan berdampak material terhadap informasi keuangan yang dilaporkan. Tujuan MDA adalah untuk memberi informasi kepada investor bahwa manajemen perusahaan merasa perlu untuk memahami kondisi keuangannya, perubahan kondisi keuangan dan hasil usaha. Hal ini dimaksudkan untuk membantu investor melihat perusahaan melalui mata manajemen. Hal ini juga dimaksudkan untuk memberikan konteks bagi laporan keuangan dan informasi mengenai pendapatan perusahaan dan arus kas. Rasio dan Perhitungan Laporan Keuangan Anda mungkin pernah mendengar orang mengoceh seputar frasa seperti rasio PE, rasio lancar dan marjin operasi. Tapi apa arti istilah-istilah ini dan mengapa tidak mereka muncul dalam laporan keuangan? Tercantum di bawah ini hanyalah beberapa dari banyak rasio yang investor hitung dari informasi mengenai laporan keuangan dan kemudian digunakan untuk mengevaluasi perusahaan. Sebagai aturan umum, rasio yang diinginkan bervariasi menurut industri. Rasio hutang terhadap ekuitas membandingkan total hutang perusahaan dengan ekuitas pemegang saham. Kedua angka ini dapat ditemukan di neraca perusahaan. Untuk menghitung rasio hutang terhadap ekuitas, Anda membagi total kewajiban perusahaan dengan ekuitas pemegang sahamnya, atau Rasio Hutang-terhadap-Ekuitas Jumlah Kewajiban Ekuitas Pemegang Saham Jika perusahaan memiliki rasio hutang terhadap ekuitas 2 banding 1, itu berarti bahwa Perusahaan tersebut memiliki dua dolar hutang kepada setiap pemegang saham dolar yang diinvestasikan di perusahaan tersebut. Dengan kata lain, perusahaan mengambil utang dua kali lipat tingkat yang pemilik investasinya di perusahaan. Rasio perputaran persediaan membandingkan biaya penjualan perusahaan dengan laporan laba rugi dengan rata-rata saldo persediaan untuk periode tersebut. Untuk menghitung saldo persediaan rata-rata untuk periode tersebut, lihatlah jumlah inventaris yang tercantum di neraca. Ambil saldo yang tercantum untuk periode laporan dan tambahkan ke saldo yang tercantum untuk periode yang sebanding sebelumnya, lalu bagilah dua. (Ingat bahwa neraca adalah snapshot pada waktunya. Jadi, saldo persediaan untuk periode sebelumnya adalah saldo awal untuk periode berjalan, dan saldo persediaan untuk periode berjalan adalah saldo akhir). Untuk menghitung rasio perputaran persediaan, Anda membagi Biaya penjualan perusahaan (tepat di bawah pendapatan bersih pada laporan laba rugi) dengan persediaan rata-rata untuk periode tersebut, atau Rasio Perputaran Inventaris Biaya Inventaris Rata-rata Penjualan untuk Periode Jika perusahaan memiliki rasio perputaran persediaan 2 banding 1, artinya Bahwa persediaan perusahaan berbalik dua kali dalam periode pelaporan. Margin operasi membandingkan pendapatan operasional perusahaan dengan pendapatan bersih. Kedua angka ini dapat ditemukan di laporan laba rugi perusahaan. Untuk menghitung marjin operasi, Anda membagi pendapatan perusahaan dari operasi (sebelum beban bunga dan pendapatan) oleh pendapatan bersihnya, atau Laba Operasi Pendapatan dari Pendapatan Operasional Operasi Margin laba biasanya dinyatakan sebagai persentase. Ini menunjukkan, untuk setiap dolar penjualan, berapa persen keuntungannya. Rasio PE membandingkan harga saham biasa perusahaan dengan pendapatan per sahamnya. Untuk menghitung rasio PE perusahaan, Anda membagi harga saham perusahaan dengan pendapatan per sahamnya, atau PE Ratio Price per share Laba per saham. Jika saham perusahaan dijual dengan harga 20 per saham dan perusahaan tersebut menghasilkan 2 per saham, maka perusahaan PE Rasio 10 sampai 1. Stok perusahaan terjual 10 kali lipat dari pendapatannya. Modal kerja adalah sisa uang jika perusahaan membayar kewajiban lancarnya (yaitu, hutangnya jatuh tempo dalam satu tahun dari tanggal neraca) dari aset lancarnya. Modal Kerja Aset Lancar Kewajiban Lancar Membawa Semua Bersama Meskipun brosur ini membahas setiap laporan keuangan secara terpisah, ingatlah bahwa semuanya terkait. Perubahan aset dan kewajiban yang Anda lihat di neraca juga tercermin dalam pendapatan dan beban yang Anda lihat pada laporan laba rugi, yang mengakibatkan keuntungan atau kerugian perusahaan. Arus kas memberikan informasi lebih lanjut tentang aset kas yang tercatat di neraca dan terkait, namun tidak setara dengan laba bersih yang ditunjukkan pada laporan laba rugi. Dan seterusnya. Tidak ada satu laporan keuangan yang menceritakan keseluruhan cerita. Tapi gabungannya, mereka memberikan informasi yang sangat kuat bagi investor. Dan informasi adalah alat terbaik bagi investor dalam hal berinvestasi dengan bijak. Kanan dan Thatcherisme yang Baru Dokumen ini agak panjang tapi saya membayangkan bahwa materi di dalamnya dapat dibahas dalam sekitar 5 pelajaran yang tampaknya merupakan alokasi waktu yang masuk akal dalam sebuah pengantar Kursus tentang Ideologi Politik. Theresa May and One Nation Conservatism Untuk sebagian besar periode pasca Perang Dunia ke-2 Partai Konservatif dipimpin dan didominasi oleh apa yang disebut Right Progressives atau One Nation Conservatives seperti R. Butler, I. Macleod, H. Macmillan dan Q. Hogg yang Kembali ke tradisi Disraeli dari Konservatisme Satu Negara dan siap untuk menerima secara pragmatis perluasan aktivitas negara yang diantar melalui program pemerintah Buruh 1945-51 yang melibatkan nasionalisasi selektif, perluasan negara kesejahteraan, kebijakan ekonomi Keynesian dan pembuatan keputusan tripartit. Sekali di Pemerintahan Konservatif Satu Bangsa secara luas mempertahankan prakarsa program Ketenagakerjaan ini sambil menekankan bahwa sektor ekonomi yang paling menguntungkan akan tetap berada dalam kendali pribadi dan mendukung kelanjutan ketidaksetaraan ekonomi karena kepercayaan mereka bahwa kepemilikan pribadi merupakan prasyarat untuk kebebasan dan Bahwa ketidaksetaraan ekonomi kapitalis dapat mendorong pertumbuhan ekonomi dan meningkatnya standar hidup. Namun mereka juga menyadari bahwa pekerjaan penuh dan perluasan negara kesejahteraan diperlukan untuk memperbaiki kesehatan, perumahan, pendidikan dan mengurangi kemiskinan jika Inggris menjadi komunitas One Nation yang kohesif. Akibatnya, sejak akhir tahun 1940-an sampai akhir tahun 1960 sebuah konsensus politik bipartisan ada antara partai Buruh dan Partai Konservatif dalam kaitannya dengan bidang kebijakan pemerintah yang paling penting walaupun sejauh mana konsensus politik tidak boleh dilebih-lebihkan karena Partai Buruh dan Partai konservatif tentu saja tidak setuju mengenai rincian kebijakan yang penting. Namun bahkan di era konsensus pasca perang banyak Konservatif terus mengadakan pasar pro-liberal klasik atau pandangan Tory tradisional dan terutama dari tahun 1970an dan seterusnya pandangan Progresif yang Tepat ditantang oleh kerangka gagasan New Right yang neo-liberal yang terkait. Terutama dengan gagasan teoritis akademisi seperti Friedrich Hayek dan Milton Friedman dan dengan perkembangan mereka di Inggris dalam kelompok pemikir pro-Konservatif seperti Institute of Economic Affairs. Institut Adam Smith dan Pusat Studi Kebijakan. Di antara politisi Konservatif Inggris modern yang pertama untuk mendukung elemen pemikiran Kanan Baru adalah Enoch Powell dan Keith Joseph meskipun baru pada saat Nyonya Thatcher, yang telah menjadi pemimpin Partai Konservatif pada tahun 1975 mengkonsolidasikan kekuasaannya pada awal tahun 1980an bahwa gagasan-gagasan Hak Baru Menjadi lebih berpengaruh di pemerintahan. Klik di sini untuk beberapa klip YOUTUBE menarik Milton Friedman yang menguraikan gagasan politiknya. Klik di sini untuk kritik baru-baru ini Agustus 2010 tentang ekonomi neo-liberalisme dari ekonom Universitas Cambridge Ha-Joon Chang Klik di sini untuk kritik baru-baru ini tentang Privatisasi di Inggris dari Guardians Seamus Milne Mrs Thatcher dan para pendukungnya sangat kritis terhadap Right Progressive Kecenderungan yang mendominasi Partai Konservatif selama periode yang disebut konsensus pasca perang sebelum pengaruh Mrs. Thatchers. Orang-orang Thatcher berpendapat bahwa pemerintahan Konservatif berturut-turut pada tahun 1951-1964 kurang lebih menerima kebijakan dan kerangka kerja kelembagaan yang dikembangkan oleh pemerintah Partai Buruh 1945-1951 yang telah menghasilkan konsensus yang disebut konsensus pasca bayar antara pemerintah Buruh dan Konservatif dari tahun 1945 sampai Mungkin tahun 1970. Menurut Thatcherites the Right Progressive Conservatives telah mendorong pertumbuhan sebuah negara birokrasi yang terlalu berlebihan, mereka telah membantu menghancurkan inisiatif individu karena penerimaan mereka terhadap tingkat pajak penghasilan yang tinggi yang mengurangi insentif untuk bekerja, menyelamatkan dan berinvestasi mereka telah mengizinkan Pertumbuhan Negara Kesejahteraan yang mahal dan tidak efisien yang menciptakan budaya ketergantungan semacam itu yang mencegah individu untuk membantu diri mereka sendiri mengarah pada pengembangan Kelas Bawah yang disebut mereka mendukung industri nasional yang tidak efisien dengan mengorbankan sektor swasta dan mereka bergantung pada Cacat Keynesian t Echniques manajemen makroekonomi. Ketergantungan mereka pada proses tawar-menawar tripartit atau korporat merusak kemampuan pemerintah untuk mengelola proses politik. Akibatnya, karena pemerintah Konservatif antara tahun 1951-64 dan 1970-74 tidak melakukan upaya serius untuk membalikkan kebijakan Ketenagakerjaan tahun 1945-51, administrasi Buruh berikutnya pada tahun 1964-1970 dan 1974-1979 mampu mendorong Inggris lebih jauh lagi sepanjang Jalan menuju apa yang Hak Baru dianggap sebagai mimpi buruk sosialis akhirnya. Oleh karena itu, jika dan kapan pemerintahan Konservatif yang baru dikembalikan ke kekuasaan, akan diperlukan untuk membalikkan kecenderungan ini melalui pengenalan kebijakan pemerintah yang lebih sesuai dengan ideologi Hak Baru. Metode Keynesian tentang manajemen permintaan akan diganti dengan penekanan teori monetaris yang menekankan pentingnya pengendalian jumlah uang beredar sebagai alat untuk mengendalikan inflasi dan kebijakan sisi penawaran berbasis pasar akan diperkenalkan yang dirancang untuk meningkatkan efisiensi keseluruhan sektor swasta. Ekonomi yang mengarah pada peningkatan pasokan barang dan jasa dan meningkatnya standar hidup. Kebijakan sisi penawaran berbasis pasar ini akan mencakup langkah-langkah untuk membatasi ukuran sektor publik sehingga sumber tambahan tersedia untuk meningkatkan produksi sektor swasta, privatisasi industri yang dinasionalisasi, deregulasi sektor swasta, pengurangan tingkat perpajakan terutama Tarif pajak penghasilan untuk meningkatkan insentif keuangan, pengurangan kekuatan serikat pekerja / buruh. Pembatasan manfaat jaminan sosial sebagai alat untuk membatasi pengembangan apa yang Hak Baru dianggap sebagai kelas bawah yang bergantung pada kesejahteraan dan pengenalan pasar kuasi ke dalam layanan kesehatan dan pendidikan. Namun harus diingat bahwa proses pemerintahan begitu kompleks sehingga tidak mungkin pemerintah hanya diperintah oleh ideologi. Dan bahwa dalam praktiknya metode pemerintahan Thatcherite sangat dipengaruhi oleh pragmatisme dan juga ideologi. Jadi, terlepas dari adanya oposisi Hak Baru terhadap gagasan Keynesian dan dukungannya terhadap prinsip monetaris, prinsip monetaris ini secara efektif ditinggalkan oleh pemerintah Konservatif pada awal tahun 1980an dan Konservatif kembali berlatih lebih banyak metode Keynesian terutama ketika mencoba merancang ledakan ekonomi pra-pemilu dan Meskipun komitmen Hak Baru untuk mengurangi tingkat pengeluaran pemerintah yang riil, Mrs. Thatchers Pemerintah konservatif benar-benar memimpin peningkatan pengeluaran pemerintah yang sebenarnya, sebagian karena tingkat pengangguran yang lebih tinggi mengharuskan tingkat pengeluaran keamanan sosial yang lebih tinggi meskipun tingkat keuntungan sebenarnya nyata dibatasi dan karena jelas tidak mungkin Secara politis mengurangi pengeluaran pemerintah untuk NHS. Polisi dan militer. Bukan karena tidak ada kartunis yang menggambarkan Mrs. Thatcher berdiri di buku akademis Hayek dan Friedman tapi membaca laporan penasihat pemasaran politik Saatchi dan Saatchi. Hak Baru, Neo-Liberalisme dan Neo-Konservatisme: Daftar Periksa Hak Baru, Neo-Liberalisme dan Neo-Konservatisme: Daftar Periksa Dimensi Dukungan Neo-Liberalisme untuk Kebebasan Individu Dukungan untuk Mekanisme Pasar dan Dukungan Sektor Swasta untuk Ketimpangan Ekonomi Dikombinasikan dengan Kesetaraan Kesempatan Melawan Sosialisme Terhadap Konsensus Pasca-Perang Dukungan untuk tingkat pengeluaran pemerintah yang lebih rendah dan tingkat pajak yang lebih rendah Dukungan untuk metode pengelolaan makroekonomi dari Monetaris daripada Keynes. Dukungan untuk privatisasi sebagai alternatif untuk nasionalisasi Dukungan untuk tingkat pengeluaran yang lebih rendah untuk kesejahteraan Dukungan untuk privatisasi layanan kesejahteraan Dukungan untuk layanan Kesehatan Swasta dan Dukungan Pendidikan Swasta untuk pasar kuotot-kedepan dalam layanan Kesehatan dan Pendidikan Negara Mendukung pengurangan otonomi pemerintah daerah Mendukung Pengurangan kekuatan serikat pekerja quotexcessivequot Dimensi Dukungan Neo-Conservatism untuk Dukungan Otoritas Dukungan Tradisional untuk Dukungan Negara untuk pendekatan hukuman dan hukum yang kuat dan kuat Dukungan untuk pendekatan kuarsadisional terhadap moralitas Dukungan untuk dukungan keluarga kuadratik Dukungan untuk pendekatan kuartalan untuk pendidikan Dukungan Untuk kultur quotnasional daripada multi-budayaisme Kecenderungan terhadap Euroscepticisme Hak Baru, Neo-Liberalisme dan Neo-Konservatisme: Analisis Telah ditunjukkan bahwa pemikiran politik Hak Baru sebenarnya terdiri dari dua elemen terpisah yang terkadang saling melengkapi. Ementary dan kadang-kadang kontradiktif: Unsur liberal ekonomi yang menekankan pentingnya kebebasan individu dan tanggung jawab dan superioritas mekanisme pasar sebagai alat alokasi sumber daya yang pada gilirannya berarti bahwa intervensi pemerintah dalam ekonomi dan masyarakat harus dibatasi dan terbatas pada Penciptaan kondisi di mana sektor swasta ekonomi dapat beroperasi paling efisien Elemen neo-konservatif yang mengekspresikan reaksi tradisionalis terhadap permisif liberal yang progresif. quot Dengan demikian, neo-Konservatif cenderung meminta penegasan kembali nilai-nilai tradisional dalam kaitannya dengan Isu seputar sifat keluarga, keluaran media massa, sistem pendidikan, agama, hukum dan ketertiban, mengendalikan konsumsi alkohol, tembakau dan obat-obatan terlarang, pembelaan kedaulatan nasional misalnya dalam kaitannya dengan UE, Perlindungan lingkungan. Menyerukan kontrol imigrasi yang lebih ketat dan menentang pertumbuhan multi-budayaisme di masyarakat Inggris. Dari daftar periksa masalah yang diberikan di awal dokumen ini, jelas bahwa di dalam ketegangan Hak Baru yang benar ada kemungkinan ada antara liberal ekonomi atau pasar dan neo-Konservatif, sehingga neo-Konservatif akan mendukung intervensi pemerintah dalam bentuk Kontrol perencanaan untuk melindungi lingkungan, kontrol imigrasi untuk melindungi cara pengambilan data quotBritish lifequot, penyensoran untuk mempertahankan moral dan peraturan publik guna membatasi konsumsi alkohol, tembakau dan tembakau. Terutama obat-obatan keras, untuk kaum liberal pasar. Inilah hal-hal yang dapat ditinggalkan terutama pada mekanisme pasar. Dimensi ideologis New Right yang neo-liberal melibatkan dukungan terhadap prinsip inti liberalisme klasik: terutama individualisme, laissez faire dan intervensi pemerintah minimal di masyarakat yang melibatkan pengamanan tatanan sosial dan pemeliharaan kondisi yang diperlukan agar mekanisme pasar dapat beroperasi. Efektif. Dalam pandangan neoliberal karena individu adalah hakim terbaik untuk kepentingan pribadi mereka, mereka harus diizinkan untuk mengejar kepentingan pribadi mereka sendiri baik dalam urusan ekonomi maupun dalam kehidupan pribadi mereka dengan peraturan yang terbatas oleh negara. . NeoLiberal dalam Hak Baru berpendapat bahwa individu itu rasional dan oleh karena itu merupakan hakim terbaik untuk kepentingan mereka sendiri dan bahwa efisiensi ekonomi secara keseluruhan dapat dicapai dengan sebaik-baiknya oleh laissez faire yang tidak diatur. Dukungan neo-liberal untuk laissez faire di bawah-disematkan oleh teori-teori ekonomi yang digariskan oleh Adam Smith dalam studinya 8220The Wealth of Nations82211776 di mana dia berpendapat bahwa ekonomi kapitalis yang kompetitif berdasarkan keuntungan pribadi dan kepentingan pribadi individu dapat melalui apa yang disebut tangan 8220invisible8221 Mekanisme pasar menjamin standar hidup terbaik bagi semua anggota masyarakat. Intinya, teori tersebut menyarankan bahwa jika sejumlah besar perusahaan bersaing satu sama lain, mereka akan berusaha mempertahankan harga mereka serendah konsisten dengan tingkat keuntungan yang wajar karena khawatir jika menaikkan harga, mereka akan kehilangan penjualan ke pesaing mereka. Selanjutnya dalam persaingan antar perusahaan, perusahaan efisien yang bisa menghasilkan produk dengan harga murah dapat memperluas biaya perusahaan dengan biaya lebih tinggi yang akan dikeluarkan dari bisnis. Akibatnya persaingan ekonomi antara perusahaan berarti konsumen dapat membeli dari perusahaan yang paling efisien dengan harga yang wajar dan semua ini dapat dicapai tanpa campur tangan pemerintah dalam ekonomi antara lain melalui laissez-faire. Readers interested in a graphical exposition of the theoretical model of perfect competition as approximating to the operation of free market capitalism may click here for a very useful presentation from the Tutor2U website Addition. January 2013 However critics of neo-liberalism have argued that Adam Smiths Theory of Moral Sentiments clearly showed that he also believed that capitalism also promoted excessive individualism and self - interest and that the principles of division of labour on which capitalism is heavily based also undermined the capacities for individual self-development among routine factory workers. Consequently these critics have argued that neo-liberals have unjustifiably characterised Adam Smith as a supporter of neo-liberalism whereas in reality Adam Smith should certainly not be regarded as a supporter of the kind of deregulated capitalism supported by neo-liberals but rather as a supporter of gradualist reform of the capitalist system and it is for such reasons, for example, that former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown emphasised the importance of Adam Smith for the development of Centre - Left policies rather than neo-liberal policies. Click here and here for some further information on these elements of Adam Smiths thought . Be that as it may the neo-liberals argue that private sector companies, motivated by the search for profit will be able to respond more flexibly and dynamically to the ever changing tastes of consumers than can nationalised industries and other state organisations. Neo-liberals believe also that international trade should be organised according to the principles of laissez-faire and be free rather than restricted so that international specialisation can generate further increases in economic efficiency as individual countries concentrate on the production of the goods which they can produce relatively efficiently while importing from abroad the goods that can be produced relatively efficiently abroad. It follows that neo-liberals believe that globalisation based upon neo-liberal principles will result in greater international economic specialisation the benefits of which are assumed to trickle down to poor countries and to promote development there. Suffice to say that many experts in the field of the politics of development reject these conclusions entirely. For example click here to view Dr. Sarah Brackings critical assessment of neo-liberal development theories at Amazon. If capitalist market mechanisms are left to operate freely with little or no offsetting government intervention they are almost certain to result in very unequal distributions of income and wealth but according to all Conservatives and especially perhaps according to neo-Liberals such inequalities are natural, desirable and inevitable. This is because individuals differ genetically in their talents and abilities and in free societies with limited government intervention this will lead inevitably to economic inequality of outcome which is also desirable because it will provide the financial incentives necessary to generate economic growth, the advantages of which will also trickle down to the poor so that everyone gains from economic inequality of outcome. However neo-liberals do support equality of opportunity or meritocracy: it is only fair and just that all should have an equal chance to improve their economic situation and equality of opportunity also promotes economic efficiency. N eo-Liberals are especially likely to support this line of argument and much less likely than the Right Progressive faction of the Conservative Party to support taxation and social security policies which result in greater economic equality. However both neo-liberals and Right Progressives emphasise that although they do not believe in economic equality they do believe in equality of opportunity. Indeed both factions argue that state policies designed to increase equality inhibit equality of opportunity while those on the Left argue conversely that without actual equality, equality of opportunity is impossible. What do you think, then In recent years theorists on the Centre-Left of politics have argued that, in any case, Adam Smith was not solely a supporter of unbridled free market capitalism: he also recognised the dangers of market failure he was a supporter of redistributive taxation he recognised the potentially harmful effects of monotonous factory work in away which to some extent, although not entirely, anticipated Marxs analysis of alienation and he was a strong critic of self-interested individualism. Simon Lee, in his study quotBoom and Bust. the Politics and Legacy of Gordon Brownquot 2009 argues that it is for such reasons that the ideas of Adam Smith exercised such a considerable influence on Gordon Browns political philosophy. Readers may also click here for a Lecture on Adam Smith from the Yale University course: Foundations of Modern Social Theory given by Professor Ivan Szeleny in which he discusses competing interpretations of the thought of Adam Smith. Addition. January 2013 The Neo-Liberal critique of the government or public sector is often based on Public Choice Theory in which it is argued that state bureaucrats, far from providing neutral, objective advice to ministers, have a vested interest in the expansion of the state because it enhances their own power, prestige and career opportunities while simultaneously starving the private sector of the economy of the resources necessary for economic growth on which ultimately citizens living standards depend. Further pressures for the expansion of the state come from left-wing academics, public sector unions, pro-welfare pressure groups and vote seeking politicians all of which is said to have led to a situation of government overload whereby government had created expectations among the voters which it could not possibly meet. Socialism in all its variants has many disadvantages. In its Marxist version it involves dictatorship and the destruction of individual liberty. In its more moderate Western social democratic version, it is too bureaucratic it is economically inefficient because of its reliance on nationalised industries at the expense of the private sector and because its reliance on flawed Keynesian techniques of macroeconomic management. Its reliance on tripartite or corporatist bargaining processes undermines the ability of government itself to manage the political process it destroys individual initiative because of its reliance on high rates of income taxation which reduce incentives to work, save and invest and it is based upon the development of expensive, inefficient Welfare States which create exactly the kind of dependency culture which prevents individuals from helping themselves possibly leading to the development of a so-called Underclass. Neo-liberals are critical also of the Right Progressive tendency which dominated the Conservative Party during the period of the so-called post war consensus prior to Mrs Thatchers ascendancy. They claim that successive Conservative governments of 1951-1964 more or less accepted the policies and institutional frameworks developed by the Labour governments of 1945-1951 which resulted in the so-called post-war quotButskellite consensus between Labour and Conservative governments from 1945 until perhaps 1970. The neo-Liberals were critical also of Ted Heaths Conservative government of 1970-74 which although it showed some sympathy with New Right ideas in 1970-1972 subsequently. according to the New Right returned to the policies of the dreaded post-war consensus. In summary because Conservative governments had made no serious attempts to reverse the Labour policies of 1945-51 the subsequent Labour administrations of 1964-1970 were able to push the UK even further along the road toward what the New Right regarded as the eventual socialist nightmare and Ted Heaths government similarly had done nothing to reverse this awful scenario. Furthermore as mentioned the neo-liberals argue that individuals should be free to organise their personal relationships and leisure activities as they see fit. For example neo-liberals would support the increased employment of married women on the grounds that it increases individual freedom and economic efficiency and they might also support pre-marital sexual relationships, more liberal divorce and abortion law, same sex relationships and hard drug use as exercises in individual freedom. We should note that this type of individualism would not be accepted by traditional and neo-conservatives whose rather pessimistic view of human nature leads them to argue for controls over individualism exercised via traditional institutions such as the family, the church and the education system and also by the state. Let us consider some of these arguments in a little more detail. Neo-liberals believed for several reasons that it is necessary to reduce the scope of the state which means that overall levels of government spending should be reduced. They believed that the growth of the public sector had arisen to a considerable extent because successive governments, both Labour and Conservatives. had increased public spending partly to placate powerful interest groups, most especially the public sector trade unions and professional associations but also in an attempt to quotbuy votesquot to secure electoral victory. The outcome was a situation of quotgovernment overloadquot whereby government was unable to meet its increased commitments without damage to the private sector of the economy. The growth of the public sector had starved the private sector of resources which resulted in low private investment and reduced international competitiveness and in slow growth of exports and increased imports which obviously would result in balance of payments problems. They pointed out that the growth of the private sector required higher taxation andor increased government borrowing but believed that higher taxation undermined incentives to work, save and invest and that increased government borrowing was potentially inflationary. They argued that the Keynesian approach to the macroeconomic management was misguided primarily because attempts to maintain high levels of employment via high levels of government spending and or reduced taxation had resulted in higher rates of inflation which in turn would lead to more unemployment, for example due to the decline in competitiveness caused by the higher rate of inflation. The New Right critique of Keynesian economics raises some difficult issues of economic theory which cannot be considered here in any detail. Essentially New Right theorists were influenced by the monetarist theories of economists such as Milton Friedman who argued that inflation was to be controlled via control of the money supply and that any attempt to run an economy at less than the natural rate of unemployment would inevitably result in accelerating inflation. Neo-liberals believed that nationalised industries were inefficient . They were poorly managed because managers knew that if they made financial losses these could be offset by government subsidies so that the managers incentive to increase efficiency was much reduced with the result that individuals were obliged to pay higher taxes to help finance nationalised industries losses and these high taxes reduced individual financial incentives to work, save and invest. The answer, therefore was that nationalised industries should be privatised, thus extending the scope of the private sector and reducing the need for high rates of taxation both of which would, according to the neo-liberals, increase economic efficiency. Click here for a Guardian perspective on the history of privatisation 1979-2012 Furthermore the Neo-Liberals are strong supporters of financial and industrial deregulation within the private sector believing that excessive government regulation inhibits financial and industrial efficiency. In practice insufficient regulation of banks in the USA, the UK and throughout Western Europe clearly contributed to the recent Credit Crunch although it is clear that the then Labour Chancellor Gordon Brown must take some considerable responsibility for this in the case of the UK perhaps because he too espoused Neo-Liberal principles to some extent. Critics argue that such government regulations help to ensure financial stability and to ensure health and safety at work and production of healthy food stuffs. The Neo - Liberals believed also that the Welfare State had been over-extended . I t was necessary for the Welfare State to continue to provide a quotsafety netquot of public services for those citizens who were unable to provide for them selves but the current organisation of the Welfare State was criticised for several reasons. It was expensive which implied high rates of taxation which would seriously erode incentives to work, save and invest and hence reduce the long term efficiency of the economy and ultimately the living standards of the population as a whole. There is a strong similarity here between neo-liberal beliefs and the functionalist theory of social stratification. Its organisation was dominated by remote, unapproachable Welfare State professionals such as doctors, teachers and social workers who provided the kinds of services which they considered to be necessary and not necessarily the services which were best for the society as a whole. Public sector Trade unions were also very powerful within the Welfare State and this could lead to over-manning and to economic inefficiency. Some Welfare State Social security provision was essential but it should be concerned with the relief of absolute rather than relative poverty. For the neo-liberals. economic inequality was both desirable and inevitable as in the Functionalist theory of social stratification and this implied that some relative poverty was also desirable and inevitable since in an economically unequal society there would inevitably be some people receiving lower than average incomes . The taxation and social security system. taken as a whole, had been an instrument of redistribution from the rich to the poor but the effects had been to weaken economic incentives for the rich and the comfortably off which ultimately resulted in reduced living standards for the poor. Egalitarian taxation and social security policies resulted in increased equality via a levelling down of incomes whereas what was required were policies which might increase inequality but would also increase economic growth and enable some of the financial benefits of economic growth to quottrickle downquot to the poor. Furthermore it was argued by Professor Laffer that once taxation rates reached a relatively high level individuals would adopt various legal methods to reduce their taxation bills so that higher rates of taxation actually resulted in reduced tax revenues and taxation revenues could be increased by reducing rates of taxation. He demonstrated his theory with the so-called Laffer Curve which. however, some economists cynically derided although others certainly accept its validity. For example in his study quotThe State Were in 1995 Will Hutton argued strongly against the Laffer curve theory but a recent Times article supports it. Debates surrounding the possible disincentive effects of high income taxation received increasing coverage in the wake of the Coalition decision to reduce the highest rate of income tax from 50P to 45p. Click here for some additional information. The Social Security system had also been abused by many welfare recipients who were claiming benefits to which they were not actually entitled and the system was helping to create a dependency culture in which welfare recipients came to depend more on State quothand outs quot than on their own initiative which, according especially to Charles Murray, was leading to the development of an increasingly unemployable underclass of welfare dependants. Click here for a critique of the notion of the dependency culture from Cambridge economist Ha-Joon Chang. NEW link added January 2013 According to Neo-Liberals the over extended Welfare State had undermined the potential roles of private companies, charities and families in the provision of welfare. The New Right wished therefore wished to shift the mix of Welfare Pluralism away from state provision towards private commercial, charitable and informal provision by families. friends and neighbours. As a result in the Thatcherite era: individuals were encouraged via preferential tax treatment to take out private pensions and private health insurance the private education and health sectors expanded large numbers of council houses were sold relatively cheaply to sitting tenants services previously provided by Local Authorities such as old peoples homes and home help services for the elderly, and hospital and school cleaning and catering services were increasingly provided by commercial. profit - making companies to whom Local Authorities now merely awarded contracts and then regulated the performance of the private sector companies the Conservatives Community Care initiative resulted in more elderly, disabled and mentally ill people being cared for by their own families. The net effect of these changes was to reduce the size of the government welfare sector below what it would otherwise have been and hence to reduce the cost of welfare to the government which among other things should have facilitated reduced levels of taxation, especially income taxation. New Right supporters of these initiatives argued also that they resulted in the reduction of the monopoly power of public sector providers and that commercial profit making companies could provide services more efficiently than could Local Authorities that Care in the Community was preferable to long stays in hospitals or old peoples homes and that the expansion of private health care, education, housing and pensions would enable government to spend more money providing services for those who could not afford private services. Critics argued, conversely that commercial profit making companies would reduce the quality of services provided in the interests of greater profit that the Community Care initiative was designed primarily to save government money while putting an excessive burden of care onto families, especially their female members and that as private healthcare, private education and private housing expanded, only a residual. poorly funded public sector would be available to meet the needs of those who could not afford private provision. This process of residualisation of State Welfare implies that comfortably off individuals would increasingly own their own homes, rely upon private education or at least upon state schools in more prosperous areas (combined with their own additional expenditure on educational resources) and rely upon private health care where necessary and upon private pensions to supplement the increasingly inadequate state pension. Meanwhile, the poor would be obliged to rely upon run down council housing, local schools which despite their hard work find it difficult to provide a good education for local, mainly working class children, on a health service short of resources resulting in long waiting lists and on state pensions which fail to provide adequate living standards in old age. Click here for a recent edition of Radio Fours Analysis entitled quotThe Deserving and the Undeserving Poorquot New Right supporters are committed supporters of the market mechanism as an effective means of resource allocation and they have also supported the introduction of so-called quasi-markets into government health and education services . In the case of education policy it is clear that parts of the 1988 Education Reform Act were influenced by New Right thinking. The New Right, Neo-Liberalism and the Reduction of quotExcessivequot Trade Union Power By the late 1970s critics of the trade unions in all political parties argued increasingly that the trade unions had accumulated too much power. They had defeated proposed legislation of both Labour and Conservative Governments to curtail their powers the 1969 In Place of Strife Whitepaper and the 1971 Industrial Relations Act the 1970-1974 Conservative Government had been faced with major strikes and it was at least arguable that the National Union of Mineworkers had brought down the Heath Government. Once Labour returned to power in 1974 the Trade unions were involved in the construction of the Social Contract which according to some showed their excessive influence over Labour governments and according to others showed the exact opposite and the so-called Winter of Discontent was an important factor in Labours General Election defeat of 1979. It was widely believed also that the trade unions were at least partly responsible for the relatively slow growth of the UK economy: restrictive trade practices inhibited attempts to increase economic efficiency even if statistical data showed that the UK was not especially strike prone by comparison with its main industrial competitors, strikes resulted in industrial and social dislocation out of all proportion with the actually fairly low number of working days lost through strikes and the UKs reputation for industrial militancy was believed by some to be a factor which discouraged foreign investment and fuelled occasional runs on the . According to the New Right therefore it was essential to devise policies to weaken the powers of the trade unions and this was achieved by the introduction of several restrictive trade union laws and by the high levels of unemployment in the 1980s which obviously restricted trade union bargaining power while the defeat of the National Union of Miners strike in 1984-5 represented an important symbolic defeat for militant trade unionism as a whole. For theorists of the New Right . the Trade Unions were considered to be too powerful in the 1960s and 1970s but their power was certainly reined back as a result of Conservative government policies introduced in the 1980s. However we must not automatically accept the New Right analysis of trade union power at face value since there are also other important analyses of trade union power. Thus for Pluralists . the power of the Trade Unions is limited by the existence of many other pressure groups which means that the distribution of political power is relatively widely and evenly distributed. For Marxists . the power of the Trade Unions is even more limited because in capitalist societies political power is held mainly by the Capitalist Class, even if indirectly. According to the supporters of the theory of Corporatism . government decision making especially in the 1960s and 1970s in the UK was dominated by Government itself operating with business interests and the Trade Unions which implied that the Trade Unions did have rather more power than suggested in Pluralist and Marxist theories but less power than suggested in New Right theory. Dimensions of Neo-Conservatism It has been said that the ideology of the New Right contains a combination of neo-liberal and neo-conservative elements which are in some respects complementary and mutually reinforcing but in other respects generate tension and contradiction within New Right ideology. As stated above the key elements of neo-liberal ideology are the defence of individual rationality and individual freedom. defence of laissez-faire in economic affairs, defence of economic inequality as natural, desirable and inevitable, rejection of Keynesian methods of macroeconomic management due to their ineffectiveness in dealing with simultaneous inflation and unemployment and opposition to high government spending especially on social security. Contrastingly the neo-conservative dimension within New Right ideology is similar in several respects to traditional conservatism and similar in some respects also to One Nation conservatism. Neo-conservatives are critical of what they see as the excessive individualism implied by neo-liberalism. Whereas classic liberals believe strongly in individual rationality and argue therefore in favour of the maximum degree of individual freedom which is compatible with the freedom of others, the neo conservative accepts the traditional conservative8217s more pessimistic view of human nature which suggests that individuals are not always entirely rational and that they must learn to conform to the tried and trusted traditional norms and values of their society which are to be inculcated via the family, the church and the education system. Furthermore governments have a very important role to play in the defence of the nation and the maintenance of internal social order. Whereas classic liberals are all in favour of free individualistic decision making, conservatives suggest that this kind of individualism is a recipe for near anarchy and that individual freedom, albeit limited, can best be guaranteed via respect for traditional norms, values and institutions. Neo-Conservatives support the maintenance or at most only gradual change in the existing social order which implies support for traditional sources of authority, traditional institutions and traditional values. They are therefore likely to be supporters of strong but limited government, the Monarchy and the Aristocracy, the Church, the traditional family and traditional education. They claim that traditional social patterns which have stood the test of time must have done so because they have been socially beneficial so that radical change is clearly undesirable. This neo-conservative support for traditional authority and only gradual social change leads them to support traditional approaches to law and order involving quotappropriatequot punishment rather than leniency support for the traditional nuclear family involving support for traditional gender roles and opposition to divorce, abortion, single parenthood and same sex relationships support for traditional religious beliefs and for respect for teacher authority within schools opposition to quotexcessive quot portrayal of sex and violence in the mass media and to drug abuse. Much of the neo-conservative support for traditional values in general may be linked to their opposition to the liberal permissiveness of attitudes which they believe have become widespread in UK society especially since the 1960s. The neo-conservative support for traditional social order also encourages them to espouse what Andrew Heywood calls an 8220insular nationalism.8221 Their desire to protect what they see as British or even English culture leads them to oppose increased immigration and the spread of multiculturalism not because they are racists in the sense of believing that one 8220race8221 remember the important distinctions between quotrace quot and ethnicity is superior to another but on the grounds that increased immigration and the growth of multiculturalism will dilute British culture and may result eventually in open racial and ethnic conflict. Furthermore they are likely also to adopt 8220Eurosceptic8221 positions critical of closer links with the EU and to oppose globalisation on the grounds that it will ultimately undermine the importance of the nation state. Neo-conservatives see no need for changes in existing patterns of social and economic inequality. Some may continue to defend the remnants of the traditional aristocratic landed class and remember fondly an alleged golden age when the aristocracy symbolised British values and could be relied upon to defend the interests of the employees on the basis of 8220noblesse oblige8221 while the employees themselves could be relied upon to defer happily to their social superiors. Also as in the case of Roger Scruton The Meaning of Conservatism 2001 they may regard equality of opportunity as an essentially meaningless idea on the grounds that since differences in academic ability are mainly genetically determined, it is pointless to provide opportunities to those who are incapable of taking them. A very pessimistic view in my opinion. The New Right. Combining Neo-Liberalism and Neo-Conservatism There are ways in which neo-liberal and neo - conservative ideologies complement each other. Both strands of New Right ideology accept the existence of a basically capitalist system and its resultant economic inequalities and oppose excessive expansion of state expenditure on welfare and it has been argued, most notably by Andrew Gamble, that the New Right ideology represents a combination of neo liberal support for the free market combined with neo-conservative support for the strong, authoritarian state which is necessary to make free market economics effective. Thus in order to increase the scope of the free market a strong state is necessary for several reasons: to reject political pressure from welfare pressure groups such as the CPAG and Shelter demanding increased welfare spending to force through policies such as privatisation and trade union reform designed to increase economic efficiency to strengthen the police which will be necessary in order to deal with militant industrial disputes and urban disorder which may arise out of neo-liberal policies to campaign in support of the return of quottraditional forms of social and political authority. quot However there are also tensions within New Right ideology. In practice although neo-liberals wished to reduce government spending on social security, critics argued that their policies led in practice to increased unemployment which meant that total government spending on unemployment benefits increased considerably even though rates of social security benefit increase were restricted. Neo - liberal policies have led to a decline in working class communities for example in inner city areas and mining communities and this may have resulted in declining support for traditional sources of authority which are supported by neo-conservatives. Neo-liberal policies may have resulted in increased poverty which may have undermined traditional family life which neo-conservatives support. Neo-liberal policies resulted in the legalisation of Sunday trading and the deregulation of gambling neither of which are supported by neo-conservatives. Neo-liberal policies may have encouraged increased gender equality in the work place andor forced more women to enter employment in order to avoid family poverty. Neo-conservatives seek to preserve traditional gender roles. Neo-liberals would support the increased employment of married women on the grounds that it increases individual freedom and economic efficiency and they might also support pre-marital sexual relationships, more liberal divorce and abortion law, and same sex relationships while extreme neo-liberals or right wing libertarians would also support the legalisation of hard drugs and also. possibly, prostitution all as a means of enhancing individual freedom. We should note that this type of individualism would not be accepted by traditional and neo-conservatives who would argue for controls over individualism exercised via traditional institutions such as the family, the church and the education system and also by the state. A very significant Marxist analysis of the nature of Thatcherism has been provided by Stuart Hall in his article entitled quotThe Great Moving Right Show. He agrees that Thatcherism contains both Neo-Liberal and Neo-Conservative elements much as have been described above but claims that the reasons why Thatcherite ideology proved popular with working class voters are linked with the failure of social democratic institutions to defend working class interests in the 1960s and 1970s. a failure which. from a Marxist point of view, is inevitable. Thus, according to Stuart Hall it is true that Keynesian methods of demand management failed to halt the growth of unemployment in the 1970s true that the Welfare State failed to alleviate relative poverty true that hospital waiting lists were lengthening true that the education system had failed significantly to increase equality of opportunity and true that increasing numbers of working class people were fearful of increasing crime in their area. Mrs. Thatchers success was to focus on the limitations of social democracy and then to claim that the solutions to the above problems can be found in the rejection of social democracy and the acceptance of the ideology of the New Right which Hall summarises in the phrase quotAuthoritarian Populismquot: that is: the New Right taps into real popular discontent with social democracy and proposes solutions associated with Neo-LiberalismNeo-Conservatism which are in several respects Authoritarian In the Gramscian Marxist terms favoured by Stuart Hall the New Right ideology can certainly be seen as a variant of ruling class ideology designed to secure the hegemony of the capitalist class but it is important to note that Gramsci saw the achievement of hegemony as containing both material and ideological aspects According to Stuart Hall it is the fact that the ideology of the New Right draws on real popular discontent with then real limitation of social democracy which gives the New Right ideo logy particular force. For Marxists. of course, the hope is that the recognition of the limitations of social democracy and subsequently of New Right ideology itself would lead eventually to the transition to Socialism, a hope which 30 years after the publication of Stuart Halls article still seems a long way from realisation. Click here for Stuart Halls The Great Moving Right Show Click here for Stuart Halls Gramsci and Us Interested students who require amore detailed consideration of the concept of Authoritarian Populism and indeed all aspects of Thatcherism could consult quotThatcherismquot Bob Jessop, Kevin Bonnett, Simon Bromley and Tom Ling. Polity Press 1988 I have tried above to describe the key elements of Neo-Liberalism and Neo-Conservatism which are combined in the Thatcherite version of New Right ideology. All ideologies may be criticised from other ideological positions and I provide an outline below of some of the ideological criticisms of New Right ideology which have been made mainly from a broadly socialist perspective although some of these criticisms would be accepted to some extent by some liberals and moderate conservatives while of course New Right theorists themselves would reject these criticisms. It is argued in New Right ideology that individual differences in talents and abilities are to some considerable extent inevitable because they are primarily genetically determined that individuals are driven mainly be self-interest and that in the Neo-Liberal strand of New Right thinking they are the best judges of their own interests and that in a free society with limited government the combination of the above conditions will result inevitably in unequal distribution of income and wealth. However differences in income and wealth are compatible with equality of opportunity and also desirable because they strengthen incentives to study, work, save and invest and thereby promote economic efficiency and growth from which all members of society including the poor can benefit. Therefore the pursuit of individual self-interest is entirely compatible with the interests of society as a whole. However critics would reject these arguments for the following reasons. They would argue that differences in talents and abilities are determined to a considerable extent by environmental factors and that the social and economic inequalities supported by New Right theorists actually restrict the opportunities for the poorest members of society to develop their talents to the full: that is economic and social inequalities undermine equality of opportunity which means that they are unjust. Critics might agree that in capitalist societies individuals appear to be driven to a considerable extent by financial self - interest but claim that this is because they have been socialised into the acceptance of competitive capitalist values not because financial self-interest is in some way fundamental to human nature. In more equal societies individuals would come to value collaboration rather than competition and to recognise that it results in greater human self-fulfillment. Economic inequalities may well be necessary to provide financial incentives under capitalism but in more equal collaborative societies individuals would be much more willing to work for the good of society as a whole rather than solely to further their own narrow financial self - interest. Even if economic inequalities do result in faster economic growth under capitalism the benefits of economic growth quottrickle downquot to the poor only to a very limited extent such that economic inequalities remain entrenched which restricts equality of opportunity. New Right theorists are strong supporters of private property and the capitalist market system on the grounds that private property helps to provide a defence of individual liberty and the capitalist market mechanism responds flexibly to meet the demands of consumers efficiently and cheaply. Contrastingly state socialist systems of production are seen as over-centralised, bureaucratic, inefficient and wasteful and nationalised industries as they operated in the UK were subject to similar criticisms all of which. according to New Right theorists strengthened the case for privatisation. Again several criticisms have been made of the operation in practice of the capitalist market mechanism. It is argued that patterns of consumer demand and hence patterns of output reflect the unequal distribution of income and wealth so that, for example, economic resources are channelled into the production of luxuries for the rich while the poor in many Third World countries go hungry and government services such as health, education and social services are under-resourced even in advanced capitalist countries. It is argued that capitalist firms use powerful advertising techniques to manufacture demand for their products which are essentially unnecessary while failing to meet the real needs of consumers for example for good, healthy, unadulterated food and non-polluting energy and transport. It is argued that the real strength of capitalist competition is in fact far weaker than is suggested in simplified economic models of laissez faire such as the perfect competition model and that large capitalist firms can often use their monopoly power to maintain high prices and profits in the long term. However New Right theorists may defend high profitability on the grounds that high profits may to some extent be reinvested to promote greater economic efficiency. It is argued that capitalist firms take insufficient account of the societal financial and environmental consequences of the actions: witness the recent banking crisis and massive oil leaks off the coast of Louisiana which have at least to some extent called into question the long - term viability of capitalist neo-liberalism. New Right theorists have rejected Keynesian approaches to macroeconomic management. For much of the post-war period in the era of the so-called post war consensus both Labour and Conservative governments attempted to use Keynesian policies of macroeconomic management to maintain high levels of employment. Essentially it was argued that unemployment was caused mainly by a shortfall of aggregate monetary demand and that this aggregate monetary demand could be increased by a combination of fiscal and monetary measures increases in government spending, reductions in taxation, reduced interest rates and increases in the money supply which would have the effects of reducing unemployment. However by the 1970s it came to be argued by monetarist economists that Keynesian economic policies could only reduce unemployment as far as the so-called natural rate of unemployment and that any attempts to reduce unemployment below its natural rate would lead only to accelerating inflation. This was a view which was accepted by James Callaghan in a speech in 1976 apparently written largely by his son-in law, the economics journalist Peter Jay and led the Labour government to reduce its reliance on Keynesian methods. It is then generally argued that Conservative governments under Mrs Thatcher distanced themselves even further from Keynesian methods and based their economic theories much more on monetarist policies embodied in the so-called Medium Term Financial Strategy which involved 4 yearly targets for government spending, government borrowing as measured by the PSBR i. e. the public sector borrowing requirement, and the money supply although even by the early 1980s it was being suggested the the Conservatives were actually adopting a more pragmatic approach to economic policy and adhering less strictly to the dictates of monetarist theory. Whatever the complexities of the economic debate it is the case that unemployment did rise very sharply under the Conservatives at the beginning of the 1980s. Mrs Thatcher and her supporters claimed that this was a price worth paying to reduce the rate of inflation and increase the international competitiveness of the UK economy. The rate of inflation. after rising in 1979-1980 did fall as unemployment remained high into the late 1980s. There then followed a period of severe economic instability between 1988 and 1992 as unemployment first fell with a consequent rise in inflation followed by a rise in unemployment with a consequent fall in inflation. Following the exit of the UK from the ERM in 1992 we have had relative economic stability under both Conservative and Labour governments with steady economic growth. falling inflation and falling unemployment. Supporters of Thatcherism argue that, in the final analysis, here economic policies were necessary to create the conditions for future economic stability and growth. a conclusion which is rejected by her critics. Unfortunately I cannot pursue these controversies any further at this point and interested students should consult the relevant Economics literatur e . New Right theorists have been critical of the what they believe to be the excessive growth and inefficient administration of the state in general and of the welfare state in particular. They explain what they consider to be the excessive growth and inefficient administration of the state in general and the welfare state in particular in terms of public choice theory they claim that the combination of high taxation and generous welfare benefits resulted in excessive economic equality which undermined incentives and economic growth and contributed to the development of a welfare dependent underclass. Critics dispute these views. They argue that the conclusions of public choice theory are likely to be invalid because most state bureaucrats operate in accordance with a public service ethos which priorities the national interest rather than their own narrow self-interest that attempts to increase economic equality can be justified in terms of fairness and greater equality of opportunity which itself will increase economic efficiency and that the New Right version of Underclass theory based mainly on the ideas of Charles Murray is flawed. The theory is said to overstate cultural differences in attitudes and values between members of the so-called underclass and the rest of society. The theory is said to understate the impact of structural forces such as the relocation of industrial production to low cost developing countries as factors influencing the growth of unemployment. Also according to many critics of the theory many members of the working class move in and out of poverty so that in effect no permanent underclass exists. New Right theorists have argued that the trade unions were excessively powerful New Right theorists have argued that the trade unions were excessively powerful and that their demands for excessive wage increases. their use of strike activity and restrictive practices served to reduce the attractiveness of foreign investment into the UK and to restrict the UK rate of economic growth. Their power was especially visible in the Miners Strike of 1973-74 and the Winter of Discontent 1978-79 which allegedly led indirectly to the falls of the Heath and Callaghan Governments respectively. However critics argue that there are many causes of slow economic growth that Britain has never been an especially strike prone country and that the outcome of General Elections depends upon a wide variety of factors such that if the Heath and Callaghan governments had been perceived as generally effective governments they would have won the respective General Elections. Also from a Marxist perspective it is argued that states in capitalist societies operate mainly in the interests of the dominant capitalist class which has far greater economic and political power than does the trade union movement. Neo-Conservatives have argued in support of traditional sources of authority such as the Monarchy, the State although its functions should be restricted the Aristocracy and the Church. in support of traditional attitudes to morality and family life, in support of national sovereignty as opposed to what they see as the excessive incursions of the EU into British life and against the growth of multiculturalism which they see as gradually undermining the British way of life. However critics would argue that traditional sources of authority help to underpin the political and economic inequalities which are against the interests of the mass of the people that traditional forms of morality may in some cases restrict individuals freedom to act as they see fit in their personal lives a criticism which Neo-liberals would also tend to accept that the Eurosceptic defence of national sovereignty prevents the UK from developing deeper relationships with the EU and the pooling of sovereignty which is essential if pan-European problems are to be resolved and that the growth of multiculturalism should be welcomed in recognition of the rights of British ethnic minorities to celebrate their own cultures. It is no simple matter to assess the actual validity of different ideological positions because to do so one would have to assess the extents to which individual government policies across the whole range of government activity have in practice been driven by governments professed ideologies and to quantify the effects of all policies which have been ideologically driven. To take only one policy area it might be generally agreed that taxation and social security policies have at different times been influenced by the ideologies of Social Democracy, One Nation Conservatism and the New Right: in each case we should need to assess the effects of these policies on economic equality, economic efficiency and economic growth, the extent to which any benefits of growth trickled down to the poor, whether a welfare - dependent underclass existed and if so how it was influenced by differing policies and how these differing policies affected equality of opportunity. Social researchers are of course still involved in the investigation of the practical effects of Thatcherite policies in every area of government. My own interpretation of data on the comparative effects of differing ideological approaches to taxation and social security policies would not support the ideological claims of New Right theorists but they might claim in turn that this is because my own interpretations are also ideologically biased which leads on to questions as to whether biases in social research can ever be entirely avoided. But these are questions for another day and for another website author Additions September 2011 and January 2013 Click here for Michael Portillos Radio Four two part series entitled Capitalism on Trial. Mr Portillo interviews both supporters and critics of the capitalist system but those who are familiar with Mr Portillos own political career will not be surprised by his own conclusions. Click here for a review of quotThe Strange Non-Death of Neo-Liberalism 2011 by Colin Crouch Some Further Links Click here for Michael Portillos Radio Four two part series entitled Capitalism on Trial. Mr Portillo interviews both supporters and critics of the capitalist system but those who are familiar with Mr Portillos own political career will not be surprised by his own conclusions. New Link added September 2011 Click here for a socialist analysis of Neo-Liberalism by Chris Harman Click here for a video clip: quotCapitalism: nothing to do with responsibilityquot Marxist Historian Eric Hobsbawm in discussion with Jeremy Paxman Click here for a critical assessment of the 1980s written by Andy Beckett in the Guardian Click here for a critical assessment of Neo-Liberalism from George Monbiot. Click here for a detailed UNCTAD Report assessment of the impact of Neo-Liberalism referenced in George Monbiots article Click here for After Neo-Liberalism: Analysing the Present by Stuart Hall, Doreen Massy and Michael Rustin NEW link added July 2013 Click here for Ideology in Politics: Reflections on Lady Thatchers Legacy. very significant informative, article by Sunder Katwala published by IPPR NEW link added September 2013 Link to Various BBC News Items on Baroness Thatcher The following items were all published soon after the death of Baroness Thatcher Click for Will Hutton. Michael Portillo and Andrew Rawnsley on the Life and Times of Margaret Thatcher all from The ObserverSlideshare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. Jika Anda terus browsing situs, Anda setuju dengan penggunaan cookies di situs ini. Lihat Perjanjian Pengguna dan Kebijakan Privasi kami. Slideshare menggunakan cookies untuk meningkatkan fungsionalitas dan performa, dan memberi Anda iklan yang relevan. Jika Anda terus browsing situs, Anda setuju dengan penggunaan cookies di situs ini. Lihat Kebijakan Privasi dan Perjanjian Pengguna kami untuk rinciannya. Explore all your favorite topics in the SlideShare app Get the SlideShare app to Save for Later even offline Continue to the mobile site Upload Login Signup Double tap to zoom out Jun 09 - Unit 2 Mark Scheme Share this SlideShare LinkedIn Corporation copy 2017