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.
Edit: Also. Why are people trying to separate institutions from culture? The are inseparable, at least as much as trying to determine what aspects of something are caused by "institutions" or "culture" is impossible.
Culture is subjective. Institutions are objective. You can change institutions through political reform, you can't change culture through political reform.
Also, current leading academic research on economic development focuses on institutions.
zlefin, when was the last time a nation gathered around to decide if they wanted to change their own culture? That sounds like an awfully awkward proposition.
Look at how Sweden handled its road safety with Vision Zero. They lowered speed limits in cities, installed road bumps, analyzed all problem roads where accidents happened and changed them. Change the institutions/system and you change behaviors.
But isn't it the culture and populace that demanded those changes to the institutions? And the culture that basically acted as the driving force to create them in the first place. I still don't see a real difference, unless you are currently occupied by a foreign army. But, after they leave, they may leave behind institutions that you either choose to dismantle, change, or keep based on your culture.
Institutions just seems like an easier measure outcome of culture, while also being a driving force in influencing culture.
warding -> I'm not sure how often the entire culture agrees with it; I know lots of people talk about trying to have cultural change often, and some efforts are done in that vein, but they often don't gather enough buy-in from all involved. It also tends to be a less formal process. As to instances, trying to reduce racism often has that as a component, as do the changes for environmentalism; the attempts to cut down on the binge drinking culture (in US).
I already agreed that institutional changes are easier to do than cultural changes.
On April 22 2015 06:05 Taguchi wrote: edit: Also, if you have the time, you need to take a long, hard look on where various EU economies were prior to the 2008 crash and currently. And compare to other parts of the world that also suffered greatly from the crisis but followed vastly different policies to tackle the issues, like the USA.
I don't buy the US recovery story. Median household income is on the level of 1985 and way below it's peak in 2000. QEing yourself into the next bubble economy is not economic recovery.
The much hated 'structural reforms' aren't supposed to make your account balance look nice five years in the future, the goal is to restructure economies in a way to make long term competitiveness and growth possible.
You're mixing two completly different things : unemployment and growth on one hand (which is the point about recovery) and income inequalities on the other (which is a question of redistribution). That their recovery benefitted to the richest only does not mean there was no recovery. Their unemployment is 5% lower than ours, it is pretty self explanatory. But it's true that in the long run redistribution problems can become macroeconomic problem and hurt potential growth, altho that's an entirely different subject.
Edit: Also. Why are people trying to separate institutions from culture? The are inseparable, at least as much as trying to determine what aspects of something are caused by "institutions" or "culture" is impossible.
Culture is subjective. Institutions are objective. You can change institutions through political reform, you can't change culture through political reform.
Also, current leading academic research on economic development focuses on institutions.
zlefin, when was the last time a nation gathered around to decide if they wanted to change their own culture? That sounds like an awfully awkward proposition.
Look at how Sweden handled its road safety with Vision Zero. They lowered speed limits in cities, installed road bumps, analyzed all problem roads where accidents happened and changed them. Change the institutions/system and you change behaviors.
But isn't it the culture and populace that demanded those changes to the institutions? And the culture that basically acted as the driving force to create them in the first place. I still don't see a real difference, unless you are currently occupied by a foreign army. But, after they leave, they may leave behind institutions that you either choose to dismantle, change, or keep based on your culture.
Institutions just seems like an easier measure outcome of culture, while also being a driving force in influencing culture.
The events that lead to the creation and change of/in institutions are often random and fortuitous. A momentary balance of power can lead to the Magna Carta, or even the institution of parliamentary democracy and limitation of the monarchical powers in England. External forces can lead to the division of North and South Korea and East and West Germany. Disillusionment with a war and army pay can lead to a revolution that is then taken over by communist fanatics that then shape the institutions of Portugal for decades. The existence of valuable minerals, metals or oil can lead to the creation of extractive regimes that enslave entire populations in Africa, South America and other places. One eloquent priest can make half a continent break away from Catholicism with impacts on public policy and education.
The point is, it's much easier to focus on understanding which institutions lead to better social and economic development and pursue those, than to try to understand what's wrong with a culture and try to change it. Therefore it's much more productive to think in terms of institutions.
On April 22 2015 06:05 Taguchi wrote: edit: Also, if you have the time, you need to take a long, hard look on where various EU economies were prior to the 2008 crash and currently. And compare to other parts of the world that also suffered greatly from the crisis but followed vastly different policies to tackle the issues, like the USA.
I don't buy the US recovery story. Median household income is on the level of 1985 and way below it's peak in 2000. QEing yourself into the next bubble economy is not economic recovery.
The much hated 'structural reforms' aren't supposed to make your account balance look nice five years in the future, the goal is to restructure economies in a way to make long term competitiveness and growth possible.
There is no story to buy, only numbers. Europe did better post 1929 than it is doing post 2008, per Krugman - I don't have access to the data that enable him to make this claim but it doesn't seem too out there at all. The rest of the world is doing better than Europe.
QE is not what the USA did right. They had a ~800bn stimulus package in 2009, unfortunately for them the idiots (the Republicans, possibly a tautology these days) blocked the rest of it so they had to resort to QE to keep their economy out of very deep waters. The ECB raised its fckin rates in 2011 because the Bundesbank and other like minded geniouses thought inflation would come knocking - same as the Republicans! Guess what, 4 years later we have to do QE to keep deflation at bay! This isn't a story, it's reality.
And structural reforms is only a buzzword - what sort of structural reforms did the troika pass in Greece during the last ~5 years, with its highly educated technical staff strutting around in ministries? Now you get Tomsen of the IMF saying that the troika never pushed for wage and pension cuts - why the hell did you sign off on the loan disbursements then mister? Internal devaluation was the goal and you didn't push for wage cuts, really? What structural reforms has the rest of Europe passed that it is struggling so mightily 7 years after the crash? 7 effing years! At what point does anyone get to say that what you're doing isn't working?! 20 years? What is longterm in your world?
Sorry for rantish post but come on. I understand you're German so you have a certain viewpoint (because of surrounding narrative if nothing else, no one lives in a bubble after all myself included) but you can't just ignore the damn data, nor can you hide behind words like 'longterm' when it's already been 7 years since this all started and we're in as deep shit as ever - and not just Greece but some of the good boys too, like aforementioned Finland.
everything warding says about the cultural/institution topic is on point. i hope we can rest this topic.
cultural habits change, but not in an instant, they change over decades slowly, by giving often little nudges into another direction.
to talk about it in a crisis, in a macro economy discussion, is useless. it implys that people could just enter another mindset and puff all problems would be gone. it also pretends that nothing is wrong with the marco economic dynamics, that it is essentially peoples own fault and not the institutions, it just makes people angry.
i often come across this mentality, when people are pretending everybody has the same chances in life, and for example telling poor people, without knowing anything about the circumstances: you just didnt work hard enough.
to see the flaws in a system, the need for change, when this system did work for you, takes lot of work and compassion. most people take the easy way and just think: it worked for me, i guess its your own fault.
The biggest thread to Europe's economy are the PIGS nations. A lot of these countries are not economically competitive. German brand power is pretty much the driver of European economic growth IMO.
On April 23 2015 17:17 BlitzerSC wrote: Can you please avoid using that "PIGS" term please? It's quite offensive. Thank you.
Wow... Just wow.
Your name is also offensive to me because it reminds me of the Blitzkrieg and therefore of WW2 and therefore of tons of atrocities... Please change it...
On April 23 2015 17:17 BlitzerSC wrote: Can you please avoid using that "PIGS" term please? It's quite offensive. Thank you.
Wow... Just wow.
Your name is also offensive to me because it reminds me of the Blitzkrieg and therefore of WW2 and therefore of tons of atrocities... Please change it...
he's italian too, they were just as bad as the blitzkriegers
On April 23 2015 17:17 BlitzerSC wrote: Can you please avoid using that "PIGS" term please? It's quite offensive. Thank you.
Wow... Just wow.
Your name is also offensive to me because it reminds me of the Blitzkrieg and therefore of WW2 and therefore of tons of atrocities... Please change it...
he's italian too, they were just as bad as the blitzkriegers
You have it easy making fun of people, non PIGS Irish guy, don't you? :D
On April 23 2015 17:17 BlitzerSC wrote: Can you please avoid using that "PIGS" term please? It's quite offensive. Thank you.
Wow... Just wow.
Your name is also offensive to me because it reminds me of the Blitzkrieg and therefore of WW2 and therefore of tons of atrocities... Please change it...
It's funny that you put aside the fact that "blitz" is a word used in many game, such as american football, while PIGS is basically an acronyme built (by the londonian finance) to insult and to belittle southern europe. I'll call all germans the Kraut from now on. Words don't matter right ?
I am pretty sure that the reaction of any German to being called a Kraut would not be a feeling of insult, but complete confusion and the question as to whether either he or the other person has warped through a time machine to/from 1940.
But this is not the point, i agree. If someone really dislikes to be called by some term, it is quite impolite and rather pointless to keep on insisting calling them by that name.
However, we do require a good collective term for Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, because it is quite annoying to keep on having to type out the complete list. However, we have seen earlier in this thread that "Southern Europe" is apparently racist, and PIGS is problematic for obvious reasons. Is there a good term we can use for this that everyone is fine with?
On April 23 2015 20:21 Simberto wrote: I am pretty sure that the reaction of any German to being called a Kraut would not be a feeling of insult, but complete confusion and the question as to whether either he or the other person has warped through a time machine to/from 1940.
But this is not the point, i agree. If someone really dislikes to be called by some term, it is quite impolite and rather pointless to keep on insisting calling them by that name.
However, we do require a good collective term for Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain, because it is quite annoying to keep on having to type out the complete list. However, we have seen earlier in this thread that "Southern Europe" is apparently racist, and PIGS is problematic for obvious reasons. Is there a good term we can use for this that everyone is fine with?
Um, how is that racist? All the native peoples of Europe are caucasion lmao. Talk about a term that is completely overused and misunderstood.
A person who believes in his own classification of human races, tells someone can not be racist because he stereotypes people of a skintone that is only 3 shades darker than his own when racism clearly and unequivocaly stars at 5 shades. (proven by some austrian on first principles)
EPT
