EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 103
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On April 21 2015 06:42 Nyxisto wrote: Italy definitely, especially Southern Italy which is pretty much run by families instead of the government. And you believe corruption in italy is responsible for its difficulties ? | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
| ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On April 21 2015 06:46 WhiteDog wrote: And you believe corruption in italy is responsible for its difficulties ? Partially, sure. It's hard to create businesses in a country that does not have a reliable legal framework and where families and dynasties dominate politics for their own interest. (not true for all of Italy, but some parts of the country) If that isn't a big part of the problem I don't understand why Eastern Europe and the Baltics seem to be doing well under the common currency, despite starting from disastrous economic situations after the end of Communism. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On April 21 2015 06:22 WhiteDog wrote: You're funny always pointing out at corruption and putting aside the elephant in the room. What about Italy, or Spain ? Or Portugal ? Is it corruption there too ? Definitely. Maybe not all that much compared to other parts of the world, but compared to the northern EU memberstates, yes. All these countries have another thing in common: they are low-trust societies (little trust in people outside the immediate family) that urbanised before the advent of any meaningful form of industrialisation. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On April 21 2015 07:32 cLutZ wrote: They all have the same problem: Trying to live like the French in 2010, when they have the economy of the French in 1950. Hahahahaha, and when do you think the french invented their social security net, their paid vacancies and all those type of benefit ? First in 1930, then in 1945... On April 21 2015 13:43 maartendq wrote: Definitely. Maybe not all that much compared to other parts of the world, but compared to the northern EU memberstates, yes. All these countries have another thing in common: they are low-trust societies (little trust in people outside the immediate family) that urbanised before the advent of any meaningful form of industrialisation. It's a borderline racist comment. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On April 21 2015 16:07 WhiteDog wrote: Hahahahaha, and when do you think the french invented their social security net, their paid vacancies and all those type of benefit ? First in 1930, then in 1945... It's a borderline racist comment. Please elaborate. I have a hard time seeing how realising that people in one society have an easier time trusting nonkin than in others is racist. Unless you truly believe that there is nu such thing as cultural differences between different countries, and that people everywhere will behave the same way when confronted with a problem, both as individuals as in groups. Actually, I'd go even further than that. Greece is a country that not only urbanised without having an industrial base, it also democratised before having a powerful bureaucracy in place, allowing the system to be captured by clientelistic politicians who, instead of spending the money on things that would benefit all of society, decided to use state assets to hand out presents (in the form of jobs, pensions, contracts and other perks) to their voters in return for their votes. Of course, all that is fun and games as long as there is money coming in. However, when the source of the money suddenly dries up you end up in the current situation: no money to provide basic services for your citizens (who have by now gotten used to a rather high standard of living), no money to pay your public servants (one civil servant lost his job for every four private sector employees fired) and no private sector to buffer. Exiting the Euro would allow Greece to go back to the drachma and devalue it like crazy, but it would not take away all the other, non-currency related problems. Problems any Greek government has been and will be very reluctant to fix for the simple fact that it is political suicide. I believe in Tsipras' and Varoufakis' best intentions, but I would not want to be in their shoes. They have to walk a very, very thin line between keeping their electorate happy and the EU happy (although it would obviously help if the EU gave them some more leeway). The welfare state is a great invention but it does require a functional economy (and a large tax base) in order to sustain itself. Part of having a functional economy is having a private sector that is not outcompeted by the public sector, both in terms of fincancial rewards and social status. There is no such thing as One Theory To Solve All Problems. The solutions offered by external parties, however well-meant they are, will be coloured by their world view, their values, their biases. That world view or those values are not necessarily shared by or compatible with the people whom the solution is meant for. Marketeers have realised this ages ago, and will rely on local agencies to draw up marketing campaigns specifically for that region. Politicians and policy makers, on the other hand, are yet to realise that simple truth, and will insist on imposing their values (which they often find superior) on others, with disastrous effect more often than not. The best and most relatable example is the US' attempt to democratise Afghanistan and Iraq without looking into the elements that made democracy come about in the West. We all know how well that went. If you want another blunt statement: some countries' cultural values are more compatible with a competitive, market-based economic system than others, making it a system that is unfair at its very core. It may sound politically incorrect and borderline racist to you, but an African country in which people massacre each other based on which tribe or religion they belong to will have a hard time competing with a country that has a functional liberal democracy. | ||
|
Shiragaku
Hong Kong4308 Posts
| ||
|
Apotek
Taiwan34 Posts
On April 21 2015 02:49 WhiteDog wrote: That's the opposite actually. The country benefitting the most from the euro is Germany (and thus the one which would lose the most from the end of the euro). There is another study about that actually from Natixis - in english this time (cib.natixis.com/flushdoc.aspx?id=67288) : So you're saying Germany's a benefactor from the EU and not the other way around? If you look at GDP, this is false. However I guess it's true if you take into account that the competitiveness of German exports will diminish if Germany leaves the eurozone. However there's still no proof that the added benefit to Germany's export competitiveness exceeds to amount of credit that Germany is injecting into the PIGS nations. | ||
|
phil.ipp
Austria1067 Posts
On April 21 2015 17:16 maartendq wrote: There is no such thing as One Theory To Solve All Problems. The solutions offered by external parties, however well-meant they are, will be coloured by their world view, their values, their biases. That world view or those values are not necessarily shared by or compatible with the people whom the solution is meant for. Marketeers have realised this ages ago, and will rely on local agencies to draw up marketing campaigns specifically for that region. Politicians and policy makers, on the other hand, are yet to realise that simple truth, and will insist on imposing their values (which they often find superior) on others, with disastrous effect more often than not. The best and most relatable example is the US' attempt to democratise Afghanistan and Iraq without looking into the elements that made democracy come about in the West. We all know how well that went. If you want another blunt statement: some countries' cultural values are more compatible with a competitive, market-based economic system than others, making it a system that is unfair at its very core. It may sound politically incorrect and borderline racist to you, but an African country in which people massacre each other based on which tribe or religion they belong to will have a hard time competing with a country that has a functional liberal democracy. yeah and thats exactly why its not good to have vastly different economys in one currency union. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On April 21 2015 21:25 phil.ipp wrote: yeah and thats exactly why its not good to have vastly different economys in one currency union. Whether Greece is in a single currency union or not, it will be in trouble and unable to compete. As I mentioned before, its problems run far deeper than financial issues. | ||
|
phil.ipp
Austria1067 Posts
On April 21 2015 21:49 maartendq wrote: Whether Greece is in a single currency union or not, it will be in trouble and unable to compete. As I mentioned before, its problems run far deeper than financial issues. you make no sense at all. first you tell us that every culture is different, and base on that difference we cant force a competition driven system on them. that outsiders try to force their values on them. in the next post, you do exactly that: "problems run deeper" = judging = wishing they would accept your rules/values and you want to enforce the competition driven system - cause forcing them into a currency union is nothing else. so maybe you decide soon, what it is that you really want, there are only two choices 1. you think we should force our economy system and values on them 2. you leave them alone (and for that option, it doesnt matter if they have other deeper runing problems, cause they arent your problems anymore) | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On April 21 2015 16:07 WhiteDog wrote: Hahahahaha, and when do you think the french invented their social security net, their paid vacancies and all those type of benefit ? First in 1930, then in 1945... It's a borderline racist comment. HAHAHA. I was talking about the underlying industrial base and education level, etc. All the things that actually make a country rich. Also 1950 might be an exaggeration given its proximity to the war and occupation, but the idea is the same. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
On April 21 2015 22:41 cLutZ wrote: HAHAHA. I was talking about the underlying industrial base and education level, etc. All the things that actually make a country rich. Also 1950 might be an exaggeration given its proximity to the war and occupation, but the idea is the same. You're saying Greece today is less advanced than 1950's France, and also less educated ? Hahahahaha On April 21 2015 21:18 Apotek wrote: So you're saying Germany's a benefactor from the EU and not the other way around? If you look at GDP, this is false. However I guess it's true if you take into account that the competitiveness of German exports will diminish if Germany leaves the eurozone. However there's still no proof that the added benefit to Germany's export competitiveness exceeds to amount of credit that Germany is injecting into the PIGS nations. "If you look at GDP, this is false" ????? I just gave you a study that evaluate the benefit of the euro on german's economy in % of GDP compared to the supposed loss it had due to the amount of credit injected in the "pigs". Just look at numbers, they're pretty clear. On April 21 2015 13:43 maartendq wrote: Please elaborate. I have a hard time seeing how realising that people in one society have an easier time trusting nonkin than in others is racist. Unless you truly believe that there is nu such thing as cultural differences between different countries, and that people everywhere will behave the same way when confronted with a problem, both as individuals as in groups. Actually, I'd go even further than that. Greece is a country that not only urbanised without having an industrial base, it also democratised before having a powerful bureaucracy in place, allowing the system to be captured by clientelistic politicians who, instead of spending the money on things that would benefit all of society, decided to use state assets to hand out presents (in the form of jobs, pensions, contracts and other perks) to their voters in return for their votes. Of course, all that is fun and games as long as there is money coming in. However, when the source of the money suddenly dries up you end up in the current situation: no money to provide basic services for your citizens (who have by now gotten used to a rather high standard of living), no money to pay your public servants (one civil servant lost his job for every four private sector employees fired) and no private sector to buffer. Exiting the Euro would allow Greece to go back to the drachma and devalue it like crazy, but it would not take away all the other, non-currency related problems. Problems any Greek government has been and will be very reluctant to fix for the simple fact that it is political suicide. I believe in Tsipras' and Varoufakis' best intentions, but I would not want to be in their shoes. They have to walk a very, very thin line between keeping their electorate happy and the EU happy (although it would obviously help if the EU gave them some more leeway). The welfare state is a great invention but it does require a functional economy (and a large tax base) in order to sustain itself. Part of having a functional economy is having a private sector that is not outcompeted by the public sector, both in terms of fincancial rewards and social status. There is no such thing as One Theory To Solve All Problems. The solutions offered by external parties, however well-meant they are, will be coloured by their world view, their values, their biases. That world view or those values are not necessarily shared by or compatible with the people whom the solution is meant for. Marketeers have realised this ages ago, and will rely on local agencies to draw up marketing campaigns specifically for that region. Politicians and policy makers, on the other hand, are yet to realise that simple truth, and will insist on imposing their values (which they often find superior) on others, with disastrous effect more often than not. The best and most relatable example is the US' attempt to democratise Afghanistan and Iraq without looking into the elements that made democracy come about in the West. We all know how well that went. If you want another blunt statement: some countries' cultural values are more compatible with a competitive, market-based economic system than others, making it a system that is unfair at its very core. It may sound politically incorrect and borderline racist to you, but an African country in which people massacre each other based on which tribe or religion they belong to will have a hard time competing with a country that has a functional liberal democracy. I love how you argue to defend your racist comment and don't even understand the problem with it... You put in the same category Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece, like they are one culture, opposed to "the north", and attribute specific caracteristics / behavior to those two "bloc" that you made... There are as much differencies - cultural or even genetic differencies if we go that far - between Spain and Greece as there are between Greece and Germany. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On April 21 2015 22:13 phil.ipp wrote: are you schizophrenic? you make no sense at all. first you tell us that every culture is different, and base on that difference we cant force a competition driven system on them. that outsiders try to force their values on them. in the next post, you do exactly that: "problems run deeper" = judging = wishing they would accept your rules/values and you want to enforce the competition driven system - cause forcing them into a currency union is nothing else. so maybe you decide soon, what it is that you really want, there are only two choices 1. you think we should force our economy system and values on them 2. you leave them alone Every culture is different which means that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for certain problems that may arise, and that external parties who want to impose a solution risk not taking into account the cultural sensitivities of the country, region, etc. That doesn't mean that a properly informed external party, with the help of people who know the terrain, so to speak, cannot come to some solutions that have a chance of working. Should we force anything upon them? That depends. From a purely creditor-debtor perspective, you could argue that loans come with certain requirements that have to be met. One of those requirements is to get rid of the many barriers to a competitive internal market that exist in the country, although I personally think that the Troika is going too far in their demands to just wildly privatise everything.Things like public transport and social security are in the importance of all citizens and should not be left to the private market. On the other hand I do not see why cleaning personnel has to be on the government's payroll. From the sovereign nation perspective we have no right to enforce anything upon them, even though letting them have their way is likely to spell disaster for the whole EU. However since the European Union is a union of countries whose trade paradigm is "market economy", it is in everyone's best interest that each country has a functional state and economy that can compete both internally with member states and externally as part of a large trading block with the US, Russia, China or whoever else. If they no longer want to "play", they have to leave the union, but they can also no longer expect other countries to foot their bill or help them out either. I personally doubt they'd be better off that way. | ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
Every culture is different which means that there is no one-size-fits-all solution for certain problems that may arise, and that external parties who want to impose a solution risk not taking into account the cultural sensitivities of the country, region, etc. That doesn't mean that a properly informed external party, with the help of people who know the terrain, so to speak, cannot come to some solutions that have a chance of working. All culture are different yeah, but there are two huge flaws in your discourse : - there is no united southern european culture (which is why saying all southern countries have economic problems due to their corruption is just racist) ; - it's not a problem of culture, but a problem of institutions. There are institutions, common institutions in europe, that touch all those countries and are responsible for the way this situation evolved since the economic crisis (and not the corruption, which existed before the crisis - remember that Spain had less debt than germany before the crisis) - the ECB and the european economic policy mostly. I don't understand why you are so eager to essentialize this macroeconomic problem. | ||
|
maartendq
Belgium3115 Posts
On April 21 2015 22:45 WhiteDog wrote: You're saying Greece today is less advanced than 1950's France, and also less educated ? Hahahahaha "If you look at GDP, this is false" ????? I just gave you a study that evaluate the benefit of the euro on german's economy in % of GDP compared to the supposed loss it had due to the amount of credit injected in the "pigs". Just look at numbers, they're pretty clear. I love how you argue to defend your racist comment and don't even understand the problem with it... You put in the same category Italy, Spain, Portugal and Greece, like they are one culture, opposed to "the north", and attribute specific caracteristics / behavior to those two "bloc" that you made... There are as much differencies - cultural or even genetic differencies if we go that far - between Spain and Greece as there are between Greece and Germany. Can it be denied that Italy, Greece, Portugal and Spain *are familistic? No. *are statist? No. *are home to large, non-family based corporations? No. *are dependent on the state for economic development as opposed to private entrepreneurship? No. *are known to suffer from some degree of corruption and/or clientelism? No. *have antagonistic employee-employer relationships? No. *have civil society of very limited size? No. Each of the above are characteristics of low-trust societies. I did not, as far as I know, lodge those four countries into one single culture. I merely summed up a common characteristic between them. There characteristics are not absolutes. Countries can be statist or familistic to various degrees, I hope that this much is at least obvious. But of course, it is taboo to mention that some cultural traits might put countries at a disadvantage in the current market economy. It is also remarkable how easily one is labeled a racist nowadays. On April 21 2015 23:40 WhiteDog wrote: All culture are different yeah, but there are two huge flaws in your discourse : - there is no united southern european culture (which is why saying all southern countries have economic problems due to their corruption is just racist) ; - it's not a problem of culture, but a problem of institutions. There are institutions, common institutions in europe, that touch all those countries and are responsible for the way this situation evolved since the economic crisis (and not the corruption, which existed before the crisis - remember that Spain had less debt than germany before the crisis) - the ECB and the european economic policy mostly. I don't understand why you are so eager to essentialize this macroeconomic problem. As far as I know, I was only talking about Greece when it came to corruption and clientelism being one of the main causes of that country's current state. Italy, Portugal and Spain got dragged in when I summed up characteristics of low trust societies, but I could have just as easily taken France, China or South Korea. | ||
zatic
Zurich15366 Posts
| ||
|
WhiteDog
France8650 Posts
I don't understand your points : "familistic" = ? "statist" = ? "home to large, non family based corporations" like half the world "dependant on the state for economic development as opposed to private entrepreneurship" like the entire world (look endogeneous growth theory) ; "known to suffer from some degree of corruption and clientelism" well whatever... "antagonistic employee-employer relationships" like the entire world, it's a fact, and the one who wrote about that fact was a german named Karl Marx ; "civil society of very limited size" what ? For you all those trait are enough to define the "culture" of the south ? lol On April 21 2015 23:57 zatic wrote: Yeah seriously I don't see what is racist about what you wrote. Personally I feel you are oversimplifying and generalizing, but not being racist wtf. It's not racist to say the south problem is their culture that promote corruption ... and the north has great growth because they are hard workers ? That's basically Gobineau's level, minus intelligence. You are basically saying the south is "culturally" inferior economically - they spend more, work less, doesn't respect rule, etc. | ||
| ||
