Euro Area

[Kagemusha]

Sasaki, thanks for pointing that out. I guess we have come a long way from medieval times. It could be that those two great butchers of 20th century have also helped a bit.

Actually my question wasn't a serious question. You obviously know that economies are incredibly complex and affected by a number of factors. You're also constructing a, strawman, is it? He stated that is the rough percentage for *best* growth (or least damage?), not that spending at that level equals prosperity.

I have to plead guilty as charged. To me giving an abstract percentage and making it somehow "perfect" without further details.Is just too abstract to let pass. Im unlucky in that sense that i believe such percentage does not exist as there are several aspects to consider with public spending and the cultural aspects are one of the decisive ones.

Governments don't make money, they take it and spend it. The more it takes the more is lost through normal inefficiency. Even if a company or profit-making venture is wholly owned and controlled by a government it is still a business, and runs best under the private sector you despise.

With this line of thought for example Nordic countries would be among the poorest among the World. Or in matter of fact any countries with Social Market economies. Which means majority of "Western" Nations. Is this the case? And why it isnt? The government is what it is created for. In a sense i agree with you.In other sense i do not agree with you at all.
The Public government, both in national and local level is good for providing essential services. Like for example: Military, Police and firemen. Now i hope in this we can agree?

Why? In my opinion, because these services are not based on idea of profit, but decided by quality of service. As im an Euro Weenie and you are Yankee devil, we dont agree upon education, healthcare and quite likely unemployment benefits plus the other social political aspects of government. To me this is a cultural difference. The same applies with the UK conservatives in lesser sense.

So we are deadlocked in these issues. Other side claims that limiting the government spending to absolute minimum is guarantee for better efficiency. Other side doesnt. Let me ask you this question:

With a private service provider. From where does the profit stem from? If we say that profit constructs from the better efficiency of private firm compared to less efficient public provider. Do you in the end get the same service then i do? The only difference being that in my case the government with its lack of cost efficiency looses some of my money along the way, while in your case the difference goes to firm as a profit.

I can accept such scenario generally, but the nuances are what matter the world. Can government be just bit less wasteful in order to provide a superior service, can the need for profit in order to make the business profitable jeopardize the quality of service?

Interesting questions indeed, but unlike Furunculus i dont have a black and white "truth" to give about the issue. Btw i really dont hate private firms that much. Im after all a project manager for one myself. So i get paid for maximizing profits.

[Furunculus]

Interesting questions indeed, but unlike Furunculus i dont have a black and white "truth" to give about the issue.

i stick with facts and figures. ;)

[Sarmatian]

i stick with facts and figures. ;)

Not meaning to derail, but what are you by trade?

[Furunculus]

Not meaning to derail, but what are you by trade?

Business development manager for a 3D animation company producing the marketing for engineering multinationals.

[gaelic cowboy]

Business development manager for a 3D animation company producing the marketing for engineering multinationals.

How did you swing that gig I thought you were a geologist or something

[InsaneApache]

The more I hear of Nige, the more I think he's talking sense.

[Fragony]

He's my hero, it is rare to find a politician who understands something. Why can't I vote for him. And who is that Flemish ferret who always looks like an owl that just dropped from his tree. Who are you, who elected you, by what mechanism.

Farrage always +infinite

The nation state + infinite

EU misunderstood Keynes. Just because there will be a lot of broken windows doesn't mean it's good for the economy

[Furunculus]

How did you swing that gig I thought you were a geologist or something

lol, never used my geology degree professionally.

after uni helped start up a engineering R&D firm creating electric recycling vehicles

did an e-business masters

then shifted to newly created 3D animation company, helped them find and grow a sales strategy.

i like technology and the culture of business start-ups, so if it seems a little random it works for me. :)

[Fragony]

Lol. If thet 7% raise for the EUSR can't be realised holding on to the 3% isn't all that important anymore. Dear eurocrats, I will come for you one day, and there will be no reason, I will kill you if if I have the chance.

[Sarmatian]

lol, never used my geology degree professionally.

after uni helped start up a engineering R&D firm creating electric recycling vehicles

did an e-business masters

then shifted to newly created 3D animation company, helped them find and grow a sales strategy.

i like technology and the culture of business start-ups, so if it seems a little random it works for me. :)

So basically, neither your education nor your business experience has anything to do with macroeconomics or political economy or anything that is even close to what we're talking about. So, how can you present a single opinion and be absolutely certain that it is right?

[Vladimir]

SasakiSo we are deadlocked in these issues. Other side claims that limiting the government spending to absolute minimum is guarantee for better efficiency. Other side doesnt. Let me ask you this question:

With a private service provider. From where does the profit stem from? If we say that profit constructs from the better efficiency of private firm compared to less efficient public provider. Do you in the end get the same service then i do? The only difference being that in my case the government with its lack of cost efficiency looses some of my money along the way, while in your case the difference goes to firm as a profit.

I can accept such scenario generally, but the nuances are what matter the world. Can government be just bit less wasteful in order to provide a superior service, can the need for profit in order to make the business profitable jeopardize the quality of service?

Interesting questions indeed, but unlike Furunculus i dont have a black and white "truth" to give about the issue. Btw i really dont hate private firms that much. Im after all a project manager for one myself. So i get paid for maximizing profits.

I was going to let you have the last word because your reply was so beautiful. However, because you asked... Plus, keep in mind that I wholly support the people of each country being able to decide how their country is run; so long as they let people leave (Cold War, I'm old). I write from the basis that I want a thriving, not comfortable, Europe because we generally share the ideals I believe are right. Europe will never thrive with the culture you advocate.

Like you said, it comes down to cultural differences. Profit-making ventures are not there to solely provide a service. I don't want to get into the weeds about the role of the private sector vs government. What I want is for you people to start making history again. Flying cars would be nice but Europe, Scandinavia, whatever, should be more than a comfortable vacation spot.

[Kagemusha]

Vlad, If you want to contact the "thrive or die department" of Euro´s.You need to go and talk to the federalist loonies.With their Europa uber alles visions. Maybe im getting old, but my interest towards larger then life goals is fading.There is quite enough interesting things in normal life as it is.

[Brenus]

“Sorting out staff rotas so theatres that are in fact closed for the last 2 hours of shifts do not have a full compliment of nursing staff doing nothing.
Giving consultants electronic dictaphones in outpatient clinics and shedding the dictation pool - faster letters and more staff for general admin
Drugs that can be given faster - as opposed to an 8 hour stay, same dose in 15 minutes. Even allowing for set up time vastly increased patient throughput. staffing the same, as the first patient needs constant monitoring.”
See, when you want. It is not difficult. These are facts.

“To recap - anything that doesn't follow your views are wrong” Most of the time. Err, do you defend a position you know as wrong? If yes, it may explain things.

“Your example gave less drivers than trucks.” All right, I should have put more drivers and fewer trucks…
But you still don’t explain why this simple example is not efficient in showing that number of staff has an impact on operational decision. I could have taken from the Army (as not enough Troopers in Iraq or Afghanistan was one of the reasons of the spread of the insurgency). To me, it is obvious that if you have less nurses they won’t be able to talk and care of the patients. But you can dismiss this as it is my sister (being a nurse for 30 years) who told me and she is not statistic.

[rory_20_uk]

“Sorting out staff rotas so theatres that are in fact closed for the last 2 hours of shifts do not have a full compliment of nursing staff doing nothing.
Giving consultants electronic dictaphones in outpatient clinics and shedding the dictation pool - faster letters and more staff for general admin
Drugs that can be given faster - as opposed to an 8 hour stay, same dose in 15 minutes. Even allowing for set up time vastly increased patient throughput. staffing the same, as the first patient needs constant monitoring.”
See, when you want. It is not difficult. These are facts.

“To recap - anything that doesn't follow your views are wrong” Most of the time. Err, do you defend a position you know as wrong? If yes, it may explain things.

“Your example gave less drivers than trucks.” All right, I should have put more drivers and fewer trucks…
But you still don’t explain why this simple example is not efficient in showing that number of staff has an impact on operational decision. I could have taken from the Army (as not enough Troopers in Iraq or Afghanistan was one of the reasons of the spread of the insurgency). To me, it is obvious that if you have less nurses they won’t be able to talk and care of the patients. But you can dismiss this as it is my sister (being a nurse for 30 years) who told me and she is not statistic.

I never said clinical staff.

And even with clinical staff, it is possible having nurses and doctor running around in circles completing pointless paperwork rather than patient contact. In cases such as this, sorting out the administrative mess might result in less staff - BUT those that are left can concentrate on patients rather than fighting the contortions of the system.

I would also say that a lot of what nurses do can be done by healthcare assistants - providing the human face to medicine - whilst the nurses can do what requires training, such as medication, wound treatment etc. Thus patient experience could be improved whilst costing less, as one can probably have two healthcare assistants instead of a nurse and still have a saving.

[Brenus]

“Thus patient experience could be improved whilst costing less, as one can probably have two healthcare assistants instead of a nurse and still have a saving.” There, I agree. It not the cutting that makes the difference, it is the allocation of the workforce to the task they are trained for. The problem of course if the Conservative cut in the administrative staff, so the clinical staff is obliged to do the necessary paperwork. And you still need to have a dialogue from the surgeon with his patient time to time. However, in most of the cases, you don’t need a qualified nurse to bath a patient. But sometimes it is necessary, as in patients under heavy drugs…