EPTEuropean Politico-economics QA Mega-thread - Page 1116
| 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. | ||
|
Dan HH
Romania9118 Posts
| ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6209 Posts
On June 02 2018 01:27 IgnE wrote: are you punting on the US question? do you think european (non)growth looks different than the graphs in the US? id have to do it later, but im wondering what your intuition is on this Growth or inequality? I thought you meant income inequality when you said the economic opportunities only go to the top 10%. I do think there are large differences between the US and Europe. A lot of European countries are much more egalitarian cultural and policy wise. I know for a fact that The Netherlands didn't have much of a rise in income inequality if any. Then again there are also large differences between Euopean countries. With the UK probably much closer to the US and Scandinavia on the other extreme. On June 02 2018 01:59 IgnE wrote: we're all converging on $50 a day? or you mean europe is converging within the EU? or the bolded assertion in the middle of the essay that global inequality is still high and will remain so for the foreseeable future? if your point is that now some people in southeast asia are making $50 a day instead of $5, then great, I'm glad we could incorporate them into our neoliberal paradise. it's too bad that convergence is an overfit illusion and that the first rule of development is that its always underdevelopment Yet underdeveloptment was there before liberalism. The market economy coupled with a strengthening of institutions is crucial to economic development and has proven it's worth time and time again. It's no coincidence China started to grow after Dengs market reforms. The richest of China's regions have a GDP as high as some European countries. Free markets were key in CHina: More impressively, the increase in private urban employment, almsot entirely the result of the formation of new privately owned or privately controlled business, accounts for 95% of the growth of the urban labor force since 1978. piie.com The same with countries which developed after communism: GDP per capita in the median country was 47% higher in 2011 than is 1990- and this figure probably underestimates the increase, given inflated reporting of output at the outset. Consumption by households was 53% higher. reforms followed a characteristic sequence: first liberalization, then privatization, and finally reforms to create market instutitions. Countries that led on one type tended to lead on the others, and countries that lagged on one tended to lag on alkl. piie.com | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
as for underdevelopment, can you point me to a country which has opened its borders to trade with the West and which ended up surpassing any of those western countries? has the hare ever caught the tortoise? | ||
|
Yurie
11836 Posts
On June 04 2018 05:34 IgnE wrote: you can't have "new" economic opportunities going to anyone (the 10% or the 100%) if there is no new growth right? see Nyx's posts referring to "growth" and "opportunities." so i was asking why you specifically focused on europe, which doesn't seem to be developing a whole lot of opportunities for anybody (in Europe). as for underdevelopment, can you point me to a country which has opened its borders to trade with the West and which ended up surpassing any of those western countries? has the hare ever caught the tortoise? Japan. South Korea. Kind of China. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
On June 04 2018 05:34 IgnE wrote: you can't have "new" economic opportunities going to anyone (the 10% or the 100%) if there is no new growth right? see Nyx's posts referring to "growth" and "opportunities." so i was asking why you specifically focused on europe, which doesn't seem to be developing a whole lot of opportunities for anybody (in Europe). as for underdevelopment, can you point me to a country which has opened its borders to trade with the West and which ended up surpassing any of those western countries? has the hare ever caught the tortoise? Czechia and Slovenia are well on the way to surpass Spain and Portugal in due time. Europe still has plenty of solid economic growth. Eastern and Central Europe, as well as Scandinavia, are doing well enough. Which also shows that the adoption of policy really makes a difference. Few people would have thought that Eastern European countries would be more prosperous than Southern Europe 20 years ago. And as Yurie pointed out, the Asian tigers. Singapore literally was a swamp three generations ago. It's one of the most prosperous countries on the planet now. | ||
|
warding
Portugal2394 Posts
| ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
Dragnea laid out an ambitious progamme of market-focused economic reform linked to social investment. Romania’s economy is actually one of the best performing in the EU with 5 per cent growth expected this year and the overall economy increasing by 25 per cent in the last five years. Its debt and deficit are comfortably within EU Treaty requirements – significantly lower than post-Brexit Britain – and Dragnea wants to create a Sovereign Investment Fund that that will take under its wing 200 companies that are still partly owned by the state and prepare them for listing on the stock exchange. He plans to zero rate dividend tax with no tax on profits for the first €100,000 made by SMEs and a cut in VAT to encourage consumptions with zero VAT on house sales. If all this sounds proto-Thatcherite there is an interesting social programme with a hike in the minimum wage and tax deductions worth £300 for each child provided the child attends at least 90 per cent of school classes. (the end of 2018 to 2019 will show the program merits(if any); 2017 fared well because previous austerity measures gave it a boost. these days were talks about raising the tva/vat and about progressive taxation mainly because the budget is out of money and between our central bank and other international financial institutions, something is stopping Dragnea to take in more debt to finance all this.) on the other hand, that dude and the clique he runs are pure '60s like mobsters(he looks to old there to be a '70s porn star + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](https://static.independent.co.uk/s3fs-public/thumbnails/image/2016/12/06/17/liviu-dragnea.jpg?w968h681) legally lobbying the left or illegally bribing the right, nothing actually changes for the populous so, my take on all of this is that people will do what they can with what they have regardless of the economic model currently in place. Edit: more general details on this coming from Dragnea's opposition thou - http://www.nineoclock.ro/president-iohannis-psd-is-mortgaging-countrys-future-evolution-of-public-finance-totally-unsatisfactory-hence-pm-dancilas-resignation-paramount-psds-dragnea-ms-prime-minister-has-no/ if Dragnea manages to remove/replace our central bank president, we'll be following Greece pretty soon. | ||
|
Silvanel
Poland4729 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain17992 Posts
On June 04 2018 16:26 xM(Z wrote: Edit: more general details on this coming from Dragnea's opposition thou - http://www.nineoclock.ro/president-iohannis-psd-is-mortgaging-countrys-future-evolution-of-public-finance-totally-unsatisfactory-hence-pm-dancilas-resignation-paramount-psds-dragnea-ms-prime-minister-has-no/ if Dragnea manages to remove/replace our central bank president, we'll be following Greece pretty soon. Unlike Greece, tho, investors can drop the leu like a hot potato, thereby devaluing it, which means the ECB shouldn't need to do anything. Won't be much fun for Romanians, but should still be better than mandatory intervention in all finances by the EU. | ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
Yesterday's results in Slovenia (number of seats obtained between brackets, 90 in total). | ||
|
xM(Z
Romania5281 Posts
On June 04 2018 18:56 Acrofales wrote: technically true but they voted to change to the euro currency in 2024 so i don't know, how much is five and a half years?.Unlike Greece, tho, investors can drop the leu like a hot potato, thereby devaluing it, which means the ECB shouldn't need to do anything. Won't be much fun for Romanians, but should still be better than mandatory intervention in all finances by the EU. | ||
|
Sent.
Poland9198 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10705 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
TheDwf
France19747 Posts
On June 05 2018 02:11 Velr wrote: They won't let the euro fail, no matter what. Yes, but that is not completely in their hands. An interesting French poll about the Italian "crisis" and the future of the EU: 1) Polled people are asked to judge Mattarella's veto of an "euro-incompatible" minister: It was a good decision [because of financial stability and not endangering the European construction]: 34% It was a bad decision [because the will of the Italian people should be respected]: 31% No answer: 35% + Show Spoiler + Differential [good - bad] per political proximity: Overall: +3 (34/31) FI (left): -11 (33/44) PS (S&D): +19 (44/25) EM (Macron): +50 (66/16) LR (right): +30 (56/26) FN (far-right): -38 (16/54) 2) In 10 years, do you think the EU will be... Stronger and more solid: 23% Weaker and more fragile: 58% No change: 19% + Show Spoiler + Differential [stronger - weaker] per political proximity: Overall: -35 (23/58) FI (left): -40 (23/63) PS (S&D): -21 (32/53) EM (Macron): +16 (50/34) LR (right): -16 (29/45) FN (far-right): -73 (7/80) | ||
|
RvB
Netherlands6209 Posts
On June 04 2018 05:34 IgnE wrote: you can't have "new" economic opportunities going to anyone (the 10% or the 100%) if there is no new growth right? see Nyx's posts referring to "growth" and "opportunities." so i was asking why you specifically focused on europe, which doesn't seem to be developing a whole lot of opportunities for anybody (in Europe). as for underdevelopment, can you point me to a country which has opened its borders to trade with the West and which ended up surpassing any of those western countries? has the hare ever caught the tortoise? I focused on Europe because we're in the EU thread. ANyway it's true growth in western Europe hasn't been stellar. Then again their are many reasons for that like demographics, politics etc. Growth has been quite strong the last few years though. Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, Slovenia, Czech, Macau, Ireland. There arent that many honestly but there aren't really many developed countries in general. The IMF lists 39. Anyway what I'm frequently missing from critics of current day capitalism is their lack of an alternative. I'd be interested in what your proposal is to replace and/or improve what we have now. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Developed_country#cite_note-qq-9 On June 04 2018 18:56 Acrofales wrote: Unlike Greece, tho, investors can drop the leu like a hot potato, thereby devaluing it, which means the ECB shouldn't need to do anything. Won't be much fun for Romanians, but should still be better than mandatory intervention in all finances by the EU. A currency devaluation isn't some magical move. The problem in Greece was that nobody was willing to buy their bonds due to their insane deficit and large debt. So they had two options. Go bankrupt and crash out of the EU or take their emergency loans. Romania will have the same choices if it comes that far. Go belly up or go to the IMF for funding with strings attached. Romania does have another option since they have their own currency which is to fund their deficit by printing money but that (coupled with large deficits) will only cause mass inflation as we're seeing in Venezuela. A currency devaluation can cushion the blow but it doesn't solve the deeper issues. | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
You can see a similar thing happen in the US right now. Trump's genius tariff on steel is leading to increased imports of foreign products because the rising prices of steel, an intermediate product at home, are screwing over everyone but the steel producers. This sort of isolationism inevitably backfires. Especially in small countries. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
South Korea is an interesting case and may be an example of what I asked for. I would rule out city-states like Singapore and HongKong as special cases. Of all the examples mentioned here in this paragraph, though, its not clear to me that neoliberalization of markets, finance, and foreign debt were critical to their success, and I suspect that they were actually able to avoid Western neoliberalization to a degree that is not comparable to other former colonized territories, primarily because they were able to leverage unique geopolitical positions to protect markets, encourage direct support from countries like the US on favorable terms for political rather than purely economic reasons, and/or benefit from their borderlands trading location (HK, Macau) with formerly unincorporated (into the liberal democratic market) territories | ||
|
Nyxisto
Germany6287 Posts
it's also not really true that Singapore had a lot of support from the US or anyone else for that matter. In the book he describes how British support quickly faded as soon as Labour came into power and started a policy of retrenchment in the Asia Pacific, the US was useful insofar as the cold war with Russia provided enough balance of power for the country to develop independently. Also, neoliberalism isn't colonialism. If you read neoliberal economists like Acemoglu or development economics like Amartya Sen, there's a clear consensus against colonisation and in favour of strong property rights and inclusive political institutions. Colonialism is an extension of historical mercantilism, not modern liberalism. | ||
| ||
