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.