Acropolis Now

[Louis VI the Fat]

the second link notes that our structural deficit is probably closer to 5% rather than 12%, because a large part is short term debt relating to bank bailouts rather than decades of spending on credit.

In the UK election thread, we don't hear the end of it how Labour has mortgaged Britain's future with its irresponsible deficit spending.

In this thread, we don't hear the end of how the UK - which is always right! - has done so much better than the rest of Europe because the deficit spending is really only short term and should not be confused with a structural deficit.

pensions were set at 54 on top of the 14 months a year

Considering the high level of unemployment, the early retirement age is of little consequence. It merely speeds up of the rotation of government jobs.

Basic civil service wages are very low. The taxpayer won;t have it otherwise. To compensate, civil servants get payed in bonuses and a 13th and 14th month. The end result is a normal wage. Not an excessive wage structure is at work here, but smoke and mirrors, and a lack of transparancy, as is the custom in Greece.

Both are the result of the problems, not the cause of the problems.

[Furunculus]

In the UK election thread, we don't hear the end of it how Labour has mortgaged Britain's future with its irresponsible deficit spending.

In this thread, we don't hear the end of how the UK - which is always right! - has done so much better than the rest of Europe because the deficit spending is really only short term and should not be confused with a structural deficit.

no contradiction:

5% is still too much.

the additional 6% is a shocking indictment of labours tripartite system of financial governance, system implemented in 97 which failed the first time it faced a financial crisis.

[Kagemusha]

Oh, I consider Greece very much the main culprit.

But it's not a matter of either / or. Both ill-disciplined Greek governments and culture are to blame, and the financial markets.
After the last round of bailouts, I made a sharp left political turn. Been browsing the anarcho-communist www, because they seem to be the only ones who share my frustration at this endless transfer of money from the taxpayer to the financial institutions.

As for where I think the hedge funds will expand to: nowhere. They'll stay nicely put in the Cayman Islands, undermining our pensions and financial stability away from regulatory oversight and tax.
Me, I think the death penalty was devised specifically for this, but I'll settle for the government at last forcing them to pay taxes on their billion euro profits.

We just need to start taxing stock exchange. The speculation with stock, currency, bonds, metals and many other things these days is just ridiculous. It doesnt profit anyone else then the speculators, who use it as means to pump money out of the market by using money. It has nothing benefitial in it for the economy.

[gaelic cowboy]

We just need to start taxing stock exchange. The speculation with stock, currency, bonds, metals and many other things these days is just ridiculous. It doesnt profit anyone else then the speculators, who use it as means to pump money out of the market by using money. It has nothing benefitial in it for the economy.

The stock exchange is taxed thats what capital gains tax is for I mean you do have capital gains tax in Finland right.

I take your point on speculation in resources but since they are finite it really is impossible to stop speculation.

The real danger is really when we defang our regulators too much or give them too big a chopper neither is desirable hence the terrible performance of the Irish financial regulator and the governor of the Irish central bank.

Thankfully two new outsiders have been appointed to both positions and they are causing ructions here like you would not believe which gives me enormous pleasure seeing the banks forced to admit there recklessness.

We should look at taxing the big investment banks or forcing them to become real banks they are so big but are technically not covered in any bailout but in the end the US had to bail them out or collapse the world there is your danger then.

on a side note I foolishly long believed that our finacial regulator and the govenor of the Irish central bank had the best interests of the monetary system at heart ie you and me at the end of the day. Amazingly the finacial regulator here was spun off from the central bank in an attempt to ensure that conflicts of interest between a healthy banking system and and trying to grow the finance industry did not occur. What turned out is they were all gloriously incompetent even possibly criminally negligent due mainly to govermental interference in the property market.

[Beskar]

They should pass a bill which states that the country can only got into debt during a national emergency. That would revolutionise the system.

[gaelic cowboy]

They should pass a bill which states that the country can only got into debt during a national emergency. That would revolutionise the system.

That would ignore the massive private debt which is the actual problem in the wider world unlike in Greece. Better to regulate the banks more by getting tighter on deposit to lending ratios and to ensure tax breaks are ended for property development. Also the simple old time rules on having money down to get a loan need to come back long live boring banks.

plus we cannot all save Beskar some countries have differant fundamentals and so may need to borrow even in good times never mind bad times. Say it quietly but german and french savers can only save because we the debtors borrow from them this is because on repayment we pay them extra back which increases the total for them.

[Jolt]

They should pass a bill which states that the country can only got into debt during a national emergency. That would revolutionise the system.

Depending on the sanctions for going into debt, and the actual rationale for calling a situation "national emergency", the end result of such a bill would range from Eurozone members ignoring it to not being viable.

Notice even Germany (European economical engine) went against its rules and ran a deficit above 3% a couple of years ago (before the crisis).

You cannot stop countries from running deficits. Doing that would have catastrophic effects on people's lives; and limit even further the financial policy of the Eurozone countries whose policies are already severely constrained by the common currency.

[Louis VI the Fat]

So, the Portuguese government is duly doing its job in reducing the large deficit incurred from the crisis at a nice pace so far.

So much that the doomsday theories being forwarded by Paradox members now effectively exclude Portugal as a country on the brink of collapse or with a risk for it to happen.

Portugal is structurally the weakest economy of the Western EU member states. Growth has remained dissapointingly sluggish for decades. Not that this is the final word about Portugal. By purchasing power, a lot of the gap dissappears. There is a good quality of life too. Provided I was not poor, I, for one, might prefer a life in Portugal over one Finland, but that's highly subjective.

Three differences with Greece: Portugal did not falsify statistics, Portugal is on the whole a valued and reliable EU member, and the national debt of Portugal stands in fact at only the same level as that of Germany. This last bit is important. There are three main determinants for 'on the brink of collapse': a high deficit, a high debt as % of GDP, and a weak economy. Greece fails on all three. Portugal only two.



For comparison:

In 2009 the largest government deficits in percentage of GDP were recorded by the BIGS (and not PIGS), the southern rim and the spendthrifty neo-liberal islands:
Ireland (-14.3%)
Greece (-13.6%)
United Kingdom (-11.5%)
Spain (-11.2%)
Portugal (-9.4%), Latvia (-9.0%), Lithuania (-8.9%), Romania (-8.3%), France (-7.5%) and Poland (-7.1%). No Member State registered a government surplus in 2009.


Twelve Member States had government debt ratios higher than 60% of GDP in 2009:

Italy (115.8%)
Greece (115.1%)
Belgium (96.7%)
Hungary (78.3%)
France (77.6%)
Portugal (76.8%)
Germany (73.2%)
Malta (69.1%)
the United Kingdom (68.1%)
Austria (66.5%)
Ireland (64.0%)
the Netherlands (60.9%).

Interesting is that the new member states have very low government debt.

[aimlesswanderer]

Well, salvation for Greece is at hand, Wog Boy 2 is out next week.

A large part of the Greek population might move out here if things go down the gurgler, since the city with the largest Greek population outside of Greece is Melbourne.

[Hosakawa Tito]

"The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" - Margaret Thatcher

The tradition continues.

[Louis VI the Fat]

"The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" - Margaret Thatcher

The tradition continues.

Why indeed. And the troubles in Greece, which are at last being tackled by the socialists who got in power a few months ago, are too a great extent the result of the rightwing party that ruled Greece for most of the decade. The party that gave endless benefits to corporations, that refused to properly collect taxes, that disbanded the financial police unit that investigates tax evasion, the party that gave government orders for endless public works to corporations which are unusually tightly connected to these same politicians.

The problem with the rightwing is that eventually the working classes can't be squeezed out like a lemon any further.

[Jolt]

Portugal is structurally the weakest economy of the Western EU member states. Growth has remained dissapointingly sluggish for decades. Not that this is the final word about Portugal. By purchasing power, a lot of the gap dissappears.

To be honest, the Euro plus common market plus WTO "Most favoured nation" clause plus MFA, crippled Portugal. To be fair, we had plenty of years recieving bucketloads of money, and it was in those years where we had the biggest growth of the last 30 years. But most of the money was misspent or used to improve the country's infrastructures (Which became quite good, especially in the coastal parts). Unfortunately competitivity didn't rise that much and our industries still struggled to remain competitive. Nevertheless, prospects were good, going into the 2000's. But those things combined crippled much of our industry and thus we now have a very large number of people (Like my own family) which were middle-class before the Euro (Some ten years ago), and now are the "new poor" (people who can't even afford to pay the bills). For instance, some 15 years ago, my father managed to rack up as much as 10000 € per month. In the last 5 years, he has had to settle with 0 €. Much of our industry has been smothered by the lack of protection measures, which accounts for our sluggish growth. Small steps are being taken to try and build industries of high added value, but due to the current economical climate and the said cost of building these industries from scratch (Bringing know-how and technology, etc), makes it an infant project (Much like the industries which collapsed after the Euro)

I am a firm believer in Protectionism as a means to protect nascent industries and to build-up industrial or economical competitiveness. This crisis and particularly this speculation which is happenning has made me very critical about the free capital mobility and the impact and structural rules assigned to financial markets.

What Portugal needs is to put its budget back into a reasonable deficit level to return to try and build a proper profitable economy.

[Kagemusha]

Portugal is structurally the weakest economy of the Western EU member states. Growth has remained dissapointingly sluggish for decades. Not that this is the final word about Portugal. By purchasing power, a lot of the gap dissappears. There is a good quality of life too. Provided I was not poor, I, for one, might prefer a life in Portugal over one Finland, but that's highly subjective.

Three differences with Greece: Portugal did not falsify statistics, Portugal is on the whole a valued and reliable EU member, and the national debt of Portugal stands in fact at only the same level as that of Germany. This last bit is important. There are three main determinants for 'on the brink of collapse': a high deficit, a high debt as % of GDP, and a weak economy. Greece fails on all three. Portugal only two.



For comparison:

In 2009 the largest government deficits in percentage of GDP were recorded by the BIGS (and not PIGS), the southern rim and the spendthrifty neo-liberal islands:
Ireland (-14.3%)
Greece (-13.6%)
United Kingdom (-11.5%)
Spain (-11.2%)
Portugal (-9.4%), Latvia (-9.0%), Lithuania (-8.9%), Romania (-8.3%), France (-7.5%) and Poland (-7.1%). No Member State registered a government surplus in 2009.


Twelve Member States had government debt ratios higher than 60% of GDP in 2009:

Italy (115.8%)
Greece (115.1%)
Belgium (96.7%)
Hungary (78.3%)
France (77.6%)
Portugal (76.8%)
Germany (73.2%)
Malta (69.1%)
the United Kingdom (68.1%)
Austria (66.5%)
Ireland (64.0%)
the Netherlands (60.9%).

Interesting is that the new member states have very low government debt.

And as you can see all the Nordic countries are missing from this list.I guess our horribly socialistic policies have really done their job.

[Louis VI the Fat]

And as you can see all the Nordic countries are missing from this list.I guess our horribly socialistic policies have really done their job.

Your pityful socialist nightmare states even have the world's highest social mobility rates.

That's what you get with all these handouts to the poor. A lot of them turn into middle class.

Tsk. Way to keep the peasantry in check.

[rory_20_uk]

Your pityful socialist nightmare states even have the world's highest social mobility rates.

That's what you get with all these handouts to the poor. A lot of them turn into middle class.

Tsk. Way to keep the peasantry in check.

They're not middle class. They're merely well off unemployed people.

[al Roumi]

I am a firm believer in Protectionism as a means to protect nascent industries and to build-up industrial or economical competitiveness. This crisis and particularly this speculation which is happenning has made me very critical about the free capital mobility and the impact and structural rules assigned to financial markets.

I certainly think that it's appalingly unfair of the EU to request/demand deregulation from its smaller partners or new entrants, while its larger states do not play by those rules. A free market only really works for all if the playing field is even/flat, when it's not (and people cheat by tilting it), all the money tends to concentrate a bit... Protectionism is a bit of a strong word though...

[Jolt]

I certainly think that it's appalingly unfair of the EU to request/demand deregulation from its smaller partners or new entrants, while its larger states do not play by those rules. A free market only really works for all if the playing field is even/flat, when it's not (and people cheat by tilting it), all the money tends to concentrate a bit... Protectionism is a bit of a strong word though...

Protectionism is just the word used to refer to all instruments whose objective is to protect one's economy (tariffs, quotas, subsidies, regulations, etc.) The EU is fiercely protectionist together when it acts together as a block. It has single-handedly locked WTO Doha Round negotiations on its own.

EDIT: And I approve of it.

[Furunculus]

Protectionism is a bit of a strong word though...

why, it accurately defines what he describes, why dress it up otherwise?

[Louis VI the Fat]

They're not middle class. They're merely well off unemployed people.

I was a bit sarcastic. I meant handouts to the poor not as unemployment benefits, but in affordable housing, decent education for all, accessible healthcare. In the Nordic countries, people who receive more in benefits than they pay in taxes even have the right to vote!! Nor is one's economic status equated with one's moral status.

All of that empowers the working class, allows an economy to draw and develop talent from all social strata, creates social mobility.


The Hobbesian anglo jungles do not, as is so often argued by its proponents, stimulate the poor to get of their lazy behinds. They rather keep the poor in their place. Neo-liberal paradises have the lowest social mobility in the Western world.

~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~

It's all not a matter of rightwing - leftwing.

The Nordic countries are made of glass, they're so transparent. It is a miracle to behold. Everything is open, direct, accessible.

People are employed, judged, on their individual merit, instead of through personal relations. Economic exchange is done without the tedium of close connection to social exchange. No need to have six elaborate lunches before a deal is struck - these are decided upon within twenty minutes of the first contact. The merits of the deal are glossed over, not the person at the table. There is little corruption. Societies are egalitarian - people recognise themselves in each other.
Greece, within Europe, is in all of these aspects at the other end of the scale. It is all not a matter of left or right, nor even of economics. It is cultural.

[rory_20_uk]

South Korea is a prime example of a country that sheltered its high tech industries until they were more mature, then released them on the world. Free markets allow reosurces go to where they are best served - BUT this might mean that certain countries have no purpose in anything (Greece comes to mind...)

[Furunculus]

South Korea is a prime example of a country that sheltered its high tech industries until they were more mature, then released them on the world. Free markets allow reosurces go to where they are best served - BUT this might mean that certain countries have no purpose in anything (Greece comes to mind...)

you might have forgotten greece's primary function to the world; holiday destination.

[al Roumi]

why, it accurately defines what he describes, why dress it up otherwise?

Fair enough, it's just quite a strong term. Protectionism to me implies markets completely closed to foreign goods, I'm less frightened by Protectionist as a term (and policy) -i.e some degree competition and support

It's all not a matter of rightwing - leftwing.

The Nordic countries are made of glass, they're so transparent. It is a miracle to behold. Everything is open, direct, accessible.

Greece, within Europe, is in all of these aspects at the other end of the scale. It is all not a matter of left or right, nor even of economics. It is cultural.

I am wary of the term "culture" in this sense, it can imply that such countries are predestined to be as they are -either well or badly run. "Societal" might be less ambiguous a term as it is understood to be transient, changeable and fluid. After all, if we don't strive for or accept that places like Greece, never mind the UK, Italy, Russia or Sudan for that matter, can evolve in a positive manner, we might as well give up or request invasion by the superior Scandinavians.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

It's all not a matter of rightwing - leftwing.

The Nordic countries are made of glass, they're so transparent. It is a miracle to behold. Everything is open, direct, accessible.

People are employed, judged, on their individual merit, instead of through personal relations. Economic exchange is done without the tedium of close connection to social exchange. No need to have six elaborate lunches before a deal is struck - these are decided upon within twenty minutes of the first contact. The merits of the deal are glossed over, not the person at the table. There is little corruption. Societies are egalitarian - people recognise themselves in each other.
Greece, within Europe, is in all of these aspects at the other end of the scale. It is all not a matter of left or right, nor even of economics. It is cultural.

So Greek culture is crap, Germanic culture is better?

What about Frankish culture? Anglo-Saxon? Varients therof?

It's an extremely dangerous proposition, particularly because it is appealing in a way class-theory is not.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I am wary of the term "culture" in this sense, it can imply that such countries are predestined to be as they are -either well or badly run. "Societal" might be less ambiguous a term as it is understood to be transient, changeable and fluid. After all, if we don't strive for or accept that places like Greece, never mind the UK, Italy, Russia or Sudan for that matter, can evolve in a positive manner, we might as well give up or request invasion by the superior Scandinavians.

Culture is not set in stone. It evolves, adapts. Better or worse depend a good deal on subjective appraisal.

I must say I don't really understand the sensitivity about the subject.


Some cultures excel in certain aspects more than others do. However, it is not all that simple to change one single aspect of a culture. It is usually part of culture at large, makes sense within that entire culture. This culture at large one may even find preferable as a whole, despite its insufferable aspects.

So Greek culture is crap, Germanic culture is better?

Not at all. I said last page that I, for one, would prefer life in Portugal over Finland.


for a start, no mass suicide in winter.

[Beskar]

It's all not a matter of rightwing - leftwing.

The Nordic countries are made of glass, they're so transparent. It is a miracle to behold. Everything is open, direct, accessible.

People are employed, judged, on their individual merit, instead of through personal relations. Economic exchange is done without the tedium of close connection to social exchange. No need to have six elaborate lunches before a deal is struck - these are decided upon within twenty minutes of the first contact. The merits of the deal are glossed over, not the person at the table. There is little corruption. Societies are egalitarian - people recognise themselves in each other.
Greece, within Europe, is in all of these aspects at the other end of the scale. It is all not a matter of left or right, nor even of economics. It is cultural.

Sigurd, do you fancy having a new tenant at your place?

[Viking]

I was a bit sarcastic. I meant handouts to the poor not as unemployment benefits, but in affordable housing, decent education for all, accessible healthcare. In the Nordic countries, people who receive more in benefits than they pay in taxes even have the right to vote!! Nor is one's economic status equated with one's moral status.

All of that empowers the working class, allows an economy to draw and develop talent from all social strata, creates social mobility.


The Hobbesian anglo jungles do not, as is so often argued by its proponents, stimulate the poor to get of their lazy behinds. They rather keep the poor in their place. Neo-liberal paradises have the lowest social mobility in the Western world.

~~o~~o~~<<oOo>>~~o~~o~~

It's all not a matter of rightwing - leftwing.

The Nordic countries are made of glass, they're so transparent. It is a miracle to behold. Everything is open, direct, accessible.

People are employed, judged, on their individual merit, instead of through personal relations. Economic exchange is done without the tedium of close connection to social exchange. No need to have six elaborate lunches before a deal is struck - these are decided upon within twenty minutes of the first contact. The merits of the deal are glossed over, not the person at the table. There is little corruption. Societies are egalitarian - people recognise themselves in each other.
Greece, within Europe, is in all of these aspects at the other end of the scale. It is all not a matter of left or right, nor even of economics. It is cultural.

Sounds like paradise. How do I get to these Nordic countries?

[Louis VI the Fat]

Sigurd, do you fancy having a new tenant at your place?

Do you know the Italian movie La meglio gioventù?

They discuss this topic. One of the main characters lives in Norway. My quote about the Nordic countries being like a glass house was taken directly from him. I can't find that scene just now. Here, however, is an Italian student who just graduated, with a genius conversation with his professor:

(abridged)
'You are talented. Leave Italy. Italy is equally beautiful and useless. Doomed. The dinosaurs will never give up their place to talented youngsters'
'But, but you managed too, you made it too'
'Young man, I am one of those dinosaurs'


The movie is sheer literature. It will teach you more about Italy than a library of books would. Beautiful too, you'll fall in love with it.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Sounds like paradise. How do I get to these Nordic countries?

Try the south. Then you will discover the north.

As they say, the last thing a fish will notice is the water around him.

[Viking]

Try the south. Then you will discover the north.

As they say, the last thing a fish will notice is the water around him.

Ach, I was fearing an answer like that. It is true what you say, but I was hoping for figures, analysis, etc; something to cling onto, other than mere statements.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Loius:

Your point on culture is worthy of consideration...I get a sense of truth from it.

One thing struck me about an earlier post -- corruption. Perhaps that is THE defining element? To the extent that corruption is minimized, perhaps a culture/society can succeed under virtually ANY politico-economic system?

Thus Soviet communism failed not simply because of centrally directed economics, but because of the inherent hypocrisy of the leadership cadre in the old CCCP? What say you?