Combine this with a heavy social services burden and the demographic collapse we've posted about at WOC, including here, and the next few years may be very dicey on the Continent. Lest we indulge in schadenfreude, keep in mind that our economy is greatly linked to that of Europe and elsewhere around the world.
Here are some quick tips for adding simple Textile formatting to your comments, though you can also use proper HTML tags:
*This* puts text in bold.
_This_ puts text in italics.
bq. This "bq." at the beginning of a paragraph, flush with the left hand side and with a space after it, is the code to indent one paragraph of text as a block quote.
To add a live URL, "Text to display":http://windsofchange.net/ (no spaces between) will show up as Text to display. Always use this for links - otherwise you will screw up the columns on our main blog page.
Unemployment skyrockets, troops begin pullout, has occupation failed...in Germany?
Sorry, childish but couldn't resist.
On a serious note, I have a small issue with what's reported in the BBC piece. Maybe it's just me, or perhaps merely a US phenomenon, but I almost always think of a nation's unemployment in percentage terms, not raw numbers. If that's the case as well in Germany (the big IF here) why would a raw number threshold be more psychologically important, as the piece implies, than say, crossing the 10% mark? Unless of course the European media makes it so, by calling it such.
Well, over 12% unemployment is pretty painful -- and that is probably understated, as there are many people who are underemployed. The 5 million figure doesn't count people working for very low wages due to the recent changes in welfare laws there, nor does it count young adults who can spend many years at university at the public expense.
To put this in perspective, think about the public concern, the TV talk shows and newspaper columns, as our unemployment rose to less than 6% before dropping in 2004. And THAT level was, arguably, overstated as it did not capture some who are self-employed. Self-employment is difficult in Germany due to regulations and custom ...
I don't doubt that these are worrying figures, even as the higher European usually go. But it was the opening paragraph of the BBC piece, invoking the psychological effect of the raw number threshold that had me scratching my head a bit.
The Germans have a more serious problem than just their unemployment rate.
Is all of Europe going nucking futs?
12 percent unemployment? Maybe they should ask some of the Turkish guest workers to pack it up and go home. Ooh, that would not be nice and we can't offend any of our Moslem residents.
You know, I read that story too. If you read it carefully, however, the Telegraph doesn't claim she was being asked to prostitute herself specifically, "just" to work in a brothel, perhaps as a receptionist.
My understanding is that since there is no formal apprenticeship program for prostitutes in Germany, no forced participation has occured to date. But -- and I think it's the point of this article and other commentary -- the last quote is where the problem lies: Now that prostitution is no longer considered by the law to be immoral, there is really nothing but the goodwill of the job centres to stop them from pushing women into jobs they don't want to do
When immorality is considered to be nothing other than what the law currently says, and when the state has a lot of power, the combination can and probably will eventually override personal conscience.
Several thoughts:
1. Where are the offshoring R&D jobs going? It's one thing if they're going to, say, the United States, another if they're going to India, and more strategic consequences if they're going to China.
2. Why and how does one "off-shore" R&D? Do you subcontract it to Harvard or Beijing University? Do you relocate your entire facility, including your own scientists?
3. Since Schroeder's attempts to reform the German economy appear to have failed, one is left to wonder about the viability of the so-called "third way" of European social democracy (capitalism with fewer sharp elbows, as the Germans used to put it). Apparently, capitalism, in the long-run, is not divisible into an Anglo-Saxon and a Continental version?
4. IIRC, the US, while having a significant portion of GDP from trade, is far less reliant on international trade than, say, Western Europe. A Europe that collapsed would reduce US markets, but our own internal markets, I believe, would be able to sustain our economy (albeit w/ significant pain). It's a lot less clear whether Europe could survive an American economic collapse.
Someone else will take up the slack. Countries rise and fall, but money keeps moving into the hands of people with the best ideas and best system.
They danced, let them pay the piper.
That article on "forced prostitution" reads like missing chapters from Kafka's The Castle. Every little fact makes perfect sense (except perhaps that "it would be too difficult to distinguish [brothels] from bars"), leading to the undeniable conclusion that in a modern, enlightened society, the jobless must become whores.
No, Europe was always nucking futs. Europe is considered civilised because they discover new ways to go insane at a rate higher than any other culture.
Mmm. Tasty socialism. Yummy.
Snopes reports that the German brothel story may just be a runaway hypothetical.
And I agree with what others above have implied -- to my mind, whatever harm German or broader European economic ills may do to the US economy is worth the satisfaction of watching Euro-socialism swing in the breeze...
Europa Europa
lurker (#4), yes if you assume "Europe" is continental Europe. In fact Spain tried to follow a different way but, casually, its government was blown up.
Rich Walden (#5) Turks in Germany do the works no one else wants and they may become EU citizens in ten years (sorry, no more guests)
Lurking Observer (#7). I agree with points 3 and 4.
Colt (#10) True. From Hitler to Milosevic Continental Europe is the cradle of totalitarism (nationalism, socialism, fascism....)
I'm not so sanguine as some of you all seem to be about the invulnerability of the US economy.
For one thing, while it is true we have a large internal market for goods and services, a collapse of the European market would not only remove much demand from our manufacturers / suppliers -- it would also have a significant impact on capital flows. Let's not forget who is deeply in debt to the capital markets right now -- and will continue to be, as we fund the war on terror.
Re: Schroeder's reforms, it's rather early to declare them failed. I could perhaps think of other adjectives, but they are just being implemented so you can't dismiss them based on evidence. (You might, perhaps, do so as a matter of belief re: their likely results, but that is not the same thing.)
Re: totalitarianism, the same continent (if we include the UK) that gave us Hitler and Marx also gave us John Locke, Adam Smith, common law, a significantly powerful parliament, Bach, Mozart and, in the case of the Romans, hot baths and engineering. If you go further back to the Greeks of the classical period, you get the idea of liberty, of philosophy as opposed to cult ritual, of the demos (people) choosing their leaders and laws. I for one am not willing to forget all of that, even as I am glad that my grandparents were among those who came here rather than among the family members who stayed during the horrors of Stalin.
re #5, Rich: They won't send the Turks home, and it has nothing to do with PC or sensitivity to Muslims. It is more a case of The Master Race is not about to start sweeping their own floors or scrubbing their own toilets again. Jobs like that aren't Aryan, you know!
Collapse of Europe would also cut demand for many goods and raw materials, making them even cheaper for the US (remember the Asian financial crisis of 1998?). It would eliminate a lot of competition for capital, and the lower prices for imports would eliminate much of the need; I don't see US borrowing having any trouble as a consequence.
Of course, anything which gets Europe to smell the coffee is a good thing in the long run.
#1 chthus: It's common for british media to report unemployment in absolute terms rather than a percentage. I don't think there's any particular reason for it beyond force of habit.
#4, 10 (Lurker, Colt): Curiously, that's what a lot of europeans think about America.
#12 Umbriel: thanks for the Snopes link. I'd seen the prostitution story but not that comment on it. Re: european socialism swinging in the breeze, I think you'll be waiting for a while longer for that. My own country (the UK) isn't showing any signs (that I know of) of going economically downhill despite our socialist features. Germany's not necessarily a good yardstick for european socialism anyway - not only are they (in)famously beaurocratic, but also the economy's pretty resilient (as proven, principally, by how long it's been bearing up under beaurocracy). I'm hopeful they can weather the current problems for long enough to muster the political will to do something about them.
(Some suggest we may see our economies collapse anyway under geometric growth of EU regulations, but even if that's not being excessively paranoid, I think that'll be a way off.)
The reason for the focus on the absolute number, I believe, is that in the last election, Schroeder made a point about getting unemployment under 4 million. In his first run, he promised to get it under 3.5. In a stable population, the use of absolute number versus percentages is indifferent. Use of the absolute figure seems to be common over there.
What is remarkable is that we are talking YEARS of 10+ percent unemployment. The way Schroeder won re-election in the face of these numbers was Anti-Americanism. My concerns about the effect of German economic stagnation on the U. S. economy are far less than Robin's. But my fears about the German political reaction to the economic crisis are far greater. I expect to see more and more irrationality from the Germans as the refuse to take the steps necessary to get their economic house in order. The same problems will spread to France. This will put tremendous stress on the Euro, and the other countries in the Eurozone. It seems to me this kind of economic crisis will inevitably lead to more problems than just the abandonment of the Euro.
James --
I admit to succumbing to wishful thinking re Euro-socialism. I shall try to return to my customary pragmatic cynicism with all deliberate speed. ;)
And I was really lumping the constipating EU bureaucracy in with Euro-socialism, though I guess they don't technically go hand in hand.
My perception regarding the UK, by the way, is that the current Labour government has backed off somewhat from its traditional socialist agenda regarding the economy, replacing it with a rather horrifyingly evangelical "nanny state" social regulatory agenda. I'm not sure which I'd consider more hellish, and you have my sympathy.
Somehow, the US will be responsible for this.
Robin:
{python}"But apart from John Locke, Adam Smith, common law, a significantly powerful parliament, Bach, Mozart, hot baths and engineering, what have the Europeans ever done for us?"{/python}
"...no formal apprenticeship program for prostitutes."
On the job training, then?
:)
(If that translates from the British)
More seriously, Engineer-Poet suggests that "...cut demand for many goods and raw materials, making them even cheaper for the US" and that capital flows would not be a problem. But if German (and French) economies seize up, and the rest of Europe slips into recession, even depression, as a consequence, the world (not just the US) would likely lose a major source of demand for all sorts of goods and an important source of both direct investment and capital flows.
Maybe the US would not suffer too much from direct effects, but if chain of consequences included economic dislocation of China, India and many other countries, the collective impact could be a massive loss of capital inflows to the US, damaged export markets, loss of financial services demand.
In short, global depression = bad news all round.
Not to mention the dire potential global political consequences.
Somewhere in the back of my head, the cynic in me is saying...
The Europeans have been so smug about the strong Euro, and look where it has brought them. Perhaps W is pretty bright and also has a bit of a mean streak that he keep hidden (ala Jimmy Carter). And keeping the dollar weak has been his way of getting back at France and Germany for their very bad behavior over the Iraq war.
But then that's just the cynic in the back of my head talking.
DRK
The issue isnt that Germanys Economy is in trouble, its that history shows that the solutions that europeans tend to use to solve economic problems are often worse than the problem that started it.
This isnt a crisis in economics, its the bottom falling out of the rotten floor of socialism.
#7 regarding outsourcing R&D:
First of all, note that German law effectively prohibits hiring anyone for a short-term project by "protecting" workers from firing. Thus a company considering something new may well try it out in a more startup-friendly invironment.
I have a friend in Chicago, a CAD designer by trade, who is working at the design department of a German company which is located here for that exact reason.
Excellent post. I linked to this post, tried to send trackback, but was unable to.
"This isnt a crisis in economics, its the bottom falling out of the rotten floor of socialism."
Exactly. This isnt an out of control spin, its a long (predictable) slide. Labor laws, overregulation, dissinsentives to work... there is nothing wrong with the fundamentals, its the regulatory drain on business that is to blame.
The scary part is that there is no relief in sight. The leftist propensity to escalate failure seems likely to kick in, micro-regulating businesses even more and imposing defacto tarriffs to protect European jobs and markets. Those are the worst things they can do. Still, this isnt an acute crisis, its a long term illness.
Now just imagine if they had to fund actual credible militaries...
The most effective business practices occur when both parties are trying for a win/win solution. I wish that Europe's economy was soaring--just think how much stronger our's would be. Robin, you are correct in pointing out that we should not see any joy in this.
However, Germany needs to change. Their heavily socialist systems do not provide a mechanism that can sustain growth, especially with their demographic problems. Here's to hoping for reforms for the benefit of them and us.
Hmm, European socialism.
I have my doubts. Back in the mists of memory I recall debates over British membership of the EEC (as was) and the Labour Party almost disintegrating due to left-wing oppostion on account of the EEC being too inherently "capitalist" an institution.
And I'd have to say, they had a point.
(Enter the Ghost of Marxists Past...)
"So, European countries are socialist now. State expropriation of the means of production and distribution enforced? Agriculture collectivised?"
No.
"State direction of all capital and labour, and allocation of markets, then?"
Nope.
"Well, nationalisation of key industries, allocation of subsidies, price and wage controls, surely?"
Nah.
"Compulsory contol by workers cooperatives? Or subsidised buy-outs by labour? Union control of labour resources?"
Not so's you'd notice, no.
"At the very least, confiscatory taxation of profits and incomes, exchange controls and state determination of interest rates, money supply and credit?"
Welll...no.
"And this is socialism how, exactly, comrade?"
Umm. Extra holidays and welfare benefits funded by taxation?
"Bah! Bismarck was doing that in the nineteenth century, you miserable lackeys of capital! I'm outta here."
Frank, very well put.
Note also that Japan is a much more important trading partner than Germany and its economy has been in the tank at least as deep for about a decade with minimal economic impact on the U. S. though with substantial pain for the Japanese.
"So, European countries are socialist now. State expropriation of the means of production and distribution enforced? Agriculture collectivised?"
Ahh lets not confuse socialism with communism. Moreover this is Socialism 2000, where the government only defacto controls the market through regulation.
"Compulsory contol by workers cooperatives? Or subsidised buy-outs by labour? Union control of labour resources?"
I dont know, ask the French when their unions get grumpy.
"At the very least, confiscatory taxation of profits and incomes, exchange controls and state determination of interest rates, money supply and credit?"
What do you consider confiscatory?
"And this is socialism how, exactly, comrade?"
Umm. Extra holidays and welfare benefits funded by taxation?"
Strict hiring and firing regulation. Zealous market regulation through safety and 'cultural protection' regimes. Subsidies. Malicious taxation. Yeh, i'd call that socialism, or the next thing to it.
#14 Robin Burk
Common law is all but gone. Locke is now an excuse for increasing the welfare state, and Smith has next to no support in the public. European parliaments have given birth to European bureaucracies.
As for the example of classical period advances, Socrates was murdered by the Greeks, the Romans put Christians in the arena and Europe chose centuries of Dark Ages, followed by more centuries of medieval feudalism, over the advances made by Rome and Greece. And the Germans who murdered every single member of my European Jewish family probably liked Mozart and Bach.
Hmmm...
I've been rattling this around for years: call it if you will "GoatGuy's Hypothesis"
First, I believe that all sophisticated systems (governments, companies, telephone exchanges, emergency services, computer programs, complex machinery, legal frameworks, ...) do not 'evolve' in the classic concept, but are simultaneously both made more economical to operate on a 'unit-work' basis, and accumulate ever increasing loads of special features that diminish their 'surge capacity' over time. The combination of cheaper/lighter/less combined with push-harder/squeeze-more-profit works to undermine the intrinsic resilience of the system. Under novel stress, such systems fail nearly catastrophically, and unusually spectacularly.
Systems are closely likened to building a model bridge out of toothpicks, in a competition to see how few picks can be glued together to carry the greatest weight. The main spars are conventional, but after some experimenting, side spars, and odd looking but effective cross bars, struts, girders and chokepoints are added. Eventually, a contraption is built that can take an astounding 100 kg, and has only 250 toothpicks. Say now that it is really a real-world bridge: it will be brought into service and never expected to carry more than 50 kg, under the absolute worst case load. All is well. As the bridge ages, it develops cracks, which are repaired. Struts are added to prevent weak things from snapping. More spars are added to account for some new but common heavy delivery vehicle. The roadbed is replaced to make it lighter, and replaced again in a few years for the same reason. Then one cold winter day, during rush-hour traffic, it catastrophically fails, sending a thousand cars to the inky bathynic depths. Why?
Because it did NOT evolve, but rather was buttressed, was 'polished' if you will to take a greater load, a thinner margin, a higher duty cycle. It also had invisible fracture-points that built (like an earthquake's fault) to the point where when it failed, it took out all the buttressing, further weakening the structure.
I see all systems naturally edging toward that direction without strong leadership that is willing to 'rebuild instead of repair'. We're told since childhood, "don't recreate the wheel", but often it is only by doing so that the catastrophic demise of YOUR wheel is averted.
Second, I believe that it is possible to detect in sophisticated systems the 'warning signs' indicating a collapse is imminent. (Paradoxically, it also follows from this that we will never be able to predict the tectonic spasms called 'earthquakes' with any accuracy: simply put, tectonic plate interfaces are not sophisticated! They're simple systems that have no interlocked systems of buttress and reinforcements.) The precursors to collapse are the 'creakings and groanings' of the structure under the scope: forces working in concert are translinked to may subsystems, each of which oddly shows the 'stress-meter' reaching into the red zone, and retreating.
Third, systems as diverse as economies can easily fall to this kind of undercutting.
Lastly, unless the driving forces call either for the removal-and-dismissal of a failed/failing system, or the replacement of it with a newer system, status quo will ensure that it becomes more encrusted with well-meant buttressing, but also a systematic failure to remend the underlying weaknesses. The 'cost' is too great, and it is easier to give the battleship a new paint-job than a new hull.
_______________
This said, then what of Germany's unemployment numbers and various related import/export maxims? Are the creakings and groanings beginning to line up in concert, per the indications of the article? If they are, is there action that the German Goverment might take to forestall at the worst, and remedy at best the "problem"?
I think the issues are not really all that numerous, or inaccessible [just my opinion]: the German economy has been chugging along at a historically brilliant though by no means extraordinary clip, viewed by world standards. The neo-socialist European Eutopian ideal, the open dialog and beholding-to-the-masses charge d'government has led to 35 hour workweeks [who wouldn't want them?], 6 week vacations, entitlements, constitutionally limitless soft-landing anti-destitution funding, extraordinary taxation, coverage of almost all critical services, and a dependency on the government by the common man for her employment, her living standard, her medical maintenance, and even her right-to-prosperity!
But Germany's products are too expensive to be exported successfully world-wide, they are too 'german flavored' (for better or worse) to appeal to the broad audience, they are too successful of being loftily-held ideals of perfect products. The world isn't growing poorer, it is simply growing out of considering that any product or service is going to last decades. In the end and in spite of very significant investment in robotics, automation machinery, human-effort leveraging devices, plant funding, even so -- when an economy isn't based on economy, on full employment, on letting people have meaningful jobs and earned vacations, both the carrot and the stick are gone.
And that is when economic systems fail. No amount of social buttressing can forestall the failure of an economic system where people aren't afraid of being fired, aren't afraid of being unemployed for months to years at a time. The world gives Germany (and everyone) their currency's value, and the world will begin to devalue it when the 'power of the people' begin to flag. The "spectacular" side also is real, and is very probable of happening again: hyperinflation, market collapse, bank runs, capital flight, a self-supporting vacuum that leads to a tornado of hysteria and blame, but little in the way of solutions.
It could be changed significantly: but the 'internal ethos' of the country would need reform as well. New spending by the government will not cure malaise, rancor and dyspepsia. Something "big", such as shaving off a whole group of entitled parasites, and reinvesting the monies into building say "a modern and credible sovereign military" might do the trick -- for awhile. Or, the repatriation of the cut-rate (and socially "invisible") foreigners to their lands-of-calling, to reemploy the remaining force more comprehensively. But nothing that will be done will be painless.
And that is what I hear in the creakings and groanings of Germany's deep rising unemployment, its inverted import/export market, its uniquely 'unfounded' basis for money value, and its sureness of 'being German first', while still apeing 'being European'.
Scheudenfreude? I think not: we are just as vulnerable to the excesses of entitlement and buttressed multi-layered system fragility. But I do think that Americans seem more 'immune' to the clarion call of the sophistry of socialism.
GoatGuy
Lurking Observer:
As someone who used to work in R&D for a German company I think I'm in a fair position to answer your questions.
A lot of them are coming here. Other favorite locations are UK and Australia.
First, the how. The typical way is to start up or buy an overseas subsidiary. You don't re-locate German workers. Now, the why. The most important reason is flexibility. It's practically impossible to terminate a German worker. You would not believe the compulsory severance packages. The way to avoid this is hiring foreigners—either in Germany or in the U. S. I was both.
When I worked in Germany when the bell rang at 5:00pm (literally) all the Germans went home. What were left were Brits, Yanks, and Aussies (and a few Nederlanders) looking at each other. We'd work as long as the job required. Small wonder they'd rather have us than the native Germans.
It's not just Europe, it's the whole world. IMO the only thing that saved the rest of the world from full-blown depression in the last few years was American consumption. That's the reason that I don't get the “boost the domestic savings rate” bugs. If our domestic savings rate goes up, that means by definition that our rate of consumption will go down. And since so many of the world's economies are export-focused that would send a shockwave through their economies.
#31 Colt:
Common law is all but gone. Locke is now an excuse for increasing the welfare state, and Smith has next to no support in the public. European parliaments have given birth to European bureaucracies.
As for the example of classical period advances, Socrates was murdered by the Greeks, the Romans put Christians in the arena and Europe chose centuries of Dark Ages, followed by more centuries of medieval feudalism, over the advances made by Rome and Greece. And the Germans who murdered every single member of my European Jewish family probably liked Mozart and Bach.
I can't argue with some of this, although it's more than disingenuous to thing that "Europe chose centuries of Dark Ages". The Dark Ages were what was left after the Roman Empire collapsed due to pressures from without (migrations / attacks by barbarian tribes) and hollowness within (moral, legal, economic).
It would be nice if the equivalent didn't happen again, say, in this century.
Some Romans put some Christians in the arena; many more adopted Christianity. Roman Catholicism is not my family's heritage nor my community, but I can appreciate the good things it preserved and nurtured.
As for the alleged superiority of the Greeks and Romans over Dark Age and Medieval Europeans, well .... the polis model of Greece had less than a century of success. It was simply not sustainable on a larger scale. Rome had different strengths and different problems, lasted longer and over a wider scale, but weakened as it grew away from an all-Roman aristocracy in charge of most of the institutions. The medieval Europeans were in some ways a step backwards -- but in other ways, the Church brought moral and legal advances. Both the Greek and the Roman systems were brutal for all but a privileged few, and in the case of Rome were often brutal for them as well.
Re: the Nazis and culture, the fact that evil, murderous thugs liked -- or pretended to like - Bach and Mozart fails to diminish the beauty and genius of their music. It also fails to redeem the Nazis, of course.
I recognize the deep cultural divide between the US and old Europe and my own values and tendencies are firmly in the American camp. But there's a bit too much swagger and bluster IMO from those who cavalierly write off the Euro-US relationship with a "who needs 'em?" shrug. I don't think that relationship is what it was 20 years ago, nor do I think we should somehow beg them to accept us. And I'm no apologist for European totalitarian oppression. Colt -- if the Germans murdered your family, the same is true for my family during the Russian revolution and then the forced famines of Stalin. Nearly every relative of my father died in those years except for the handful that had come here and their children.
That said, we are fools if we insist on throwing out what is valuable there along with what is corrupt, dried out or simply not what we prefer. One strength of the US has been our ability to aborb and use the good while discarding the bad from the old cultures - let's not think we've reached so high a pinnacle that we no longer have anything to learn from anyone else .....
Prosperity is directly related to the amount of freedom in the economy. Virtual or physical walls of any kind don't keep others out over the long term, and if kept over the long term, they imprison the builders. The state is a poor repository for existential trust, and often does stupid things.
Lessons learned, I hope. The European Demograhic Bomb is very, very real, so if they aren't learned it's gonna be rough ssiling for everyone.
Responses...
Comment #15 Let's skip the "master race" slurs, OK? Today's Germans aren't the Nazis, they don't believe that stuff - and a country with millions of Mexicans doing menial jobs ought not to be throwing stones.
GoatGuy... fascinating hypothesis. Any chance we could clean that up into a full regular post?
Colt is right that Continental Europeans have managed to loose most of the world's Really Bad Craziness over the last few centuries, and it isn't a dumb question to wonder why that is. A.L. may be on to something with his Romanticism in politics bit, but I suspect that isn't the whole deal. That said...
Robin... agree on all counts. Europe isn't all bad, there were democracies in the world before 1775 (can't believe the Wall St. Journal actually printed that there weren't), and much of what America values comes from a European tradition and culture that needs to be understood, or those underpinings will weaken and might be lost. It's WESTERN civilization, not AMERICAN civilization, though America has made an enormous contribution to it.
Finally, an entertaining story. It involves the French:
When I did my MBA, I had a friend from France who was studying in Canada. Great guy, J.P. was. Still is, I reckon. Anyway, what set him off most? Care to guess?
Euro-Disney.
Why? Because, he said, the Americans had taken an outstanding example of European culture (Grimm's Fairy Tales), sanitized it into blandness (no argument there), packaged it all up attractively (also true), and then sold it back to the Europeans, charging all the while for the privilege.
It stuck in his craw. I can understand why it might... anyone my age know kids who thought "I Heard It Through the Grapevine" was invented by The California Raisins, and had a moment of despair?
Anyway, my response was that he'd better get used to it. That was what the Americans were good at. That's what they do. I also said this:
Anyone been in France lately, and noticed the number of Taco Bells? Enquiring minds wanna know.
Joe Katzman:
Last few times I was in France no Taco Bells sighted.
LOTS of McDonalds, though.
And a large chain called Buffalo Grill. Which is French operation using an American 'Wild West' theme. Never visited myself, but apparently they're pretty good.
Works both ways, n'est-ce pas?
Mark Buehner:
"...ask the French when their unions get grumpy."
Thats true! ROFL.
As for what tax I consider confiscatory; well my income tax for a start :)
Not to mention that VAT added on my car repair bill last week :-O
Seriously, I don't think socialism is a prcise enough definition of how (Continental)European economies are set up, or what their problem is.
The market continues, but is constrained, tramelled, eventually dammed up and stagnant.
It's an accretion of regulation that is compatible, in earlier stages at least, with business dynamics, but gradually adds a burden that smothers them.
It's labour and enterprise flexibility and reallocation crippled by rafts of regulations, mainly at national level, but increasingly "standardised" by the EU.
It's excessive state interference, pandering to unions, environmentalists, corporate interests and other lobbies.
It's politicians enthralled by consensus, set in the ways that largely worked for forty years, fearful of fragile electoral or party coaltion bases.
It's too much of good thing.
And all this is well known to politicians, but reform demands a willingness to confront opposition and spell out realities that is rare in any democracy.
In short, Germany (and France, Belgium, Sweden etc) need their version of Margaret Thatcher. Because without the reforms of her premierships, the UK would be in as bad a state or worse. With them, the UK has an unemployment rate a third that of Germany.
#34 Robin Burk
Most of that I can agree with. I'm afraid I was speaking more out of anger and despair after a personal experience that really got to me.
I hope I didn't imply that you were, because I'd never think that.
True enough, though it is Europe insisting. I can sympathise with the more exasperated posters here.
Goat Guy wrote:
Systems are closely likened to building a model bridge out of toothpicks, in a competition to see how few picks can be glued together to carry the greatest weight. . . .
Comment:
There is nothing wrong with the design in this case. It fulfilled every requirement stated, but another was tacked on later. Time. You didn’t construct your toothpick bridge with the stipulation that time was a factor (or expanded demand).
When the time factor is added later, the first reaction is to “maintain”. The result is a maintenance program that may cost more than a few extra toothpicks. The design never failed. It was merely the wrong set of rules for the competition. A failure of "vision".
But don’t forget the blessings of competition. We now know how few toothpicks can be used, stress study was refined and we may have even developed new technology (lighter road base etc. during maintenance). Once the intention of the competion is more completely understood, everything learned can still be used (not throwing away the good with the bad as mentioned by others here).
Knowledge does not evolve; it accumulates. Unless it is ignored.
Because the bridge failed when another factor was added is no reason to assume knowledge would be lost. All that is needed for efficient design is a complete understanding of the intention of the competition. What is done by adding a requirement later is to change the rules of the in mid-game.
America’s highest priority in forming her government, and the economy that sustains it, was liberty. It seems to be a factor that some part of the population would be willing to sacrifice for economic security (In America’s case, some people want to change the rules in mid game by subtracting a factor). Germany is flirting with socialism. Liberty is not a primary factor in socialism. Socialists assume that material security like food, shelter and vacations can replace liberty. They make their bed, let them sleep in it. I prefer liberty as the primary factor in the design of my economy and government. Liberty has been able to supply my material needs and contribute to the emergency and material needs of vast portions of the world. American liberty allows us to change all other factors constantly, adapting to changing needs.
"Lastly, unless the driving forces call either for the removal-and-dismissal of a failed/failing system. . . "
The bridge didn't fail. It was abused.
Let's build a bridge of toothpicks, but lets decide what it is being built for first.
George
#38 George Maddox,
Had a bit of trouble following your thread there, sir. But the gist is -- if I can paraphrase -- the fault is not that the bridge failed, but that it was asked to do something it wasn't designed to accomplish. [coupled with] Liberty is America's answer to Tyranny, and Europe still hasn't embraced either a definition of tyranny-in-relation-to-the-individual, nor the concept of liberty-of-the-individual and protection of an individual from group-think.
We toy here with political correctness ourselves, periodically redefining what to call the Black Man, for instance. Negro, Colored, Black, African American, Person of Color, what next? It remains PC however to call me White, and no one bothers with "European American", or "mixed European", or "first generation American" or any other such crap. Caucasian? Hardly: no one I know came from the Caucauses. To be so named is analogous to dubbing a Black as "Nigerian" or "MButu", just because them's the only two rubrics that you know.
The challenge (which I think you missed) is not to altruistically pine that better bridges can be built, or that ignorance leaves a lot of bridges in poor shape, but to recognize that systems systematically become encrusted with carefully planned buttressing to leverage "what is", rather to invest in "what needs to be". Eventually, those systems embrittle, and their failure is catastrophic.
#35 Joe Katzman: The general answer is "sure!", it would be an honor to guest-host a 'regular article' based on the GoatGuy's Thesis. But it wasn't clear whether you would be cleaning it up, or me (I don't care either way, and will be willing to do the 'heavy lifting' if you say "do it".) I'm not familiar with the etiquette of the WoC site.
GoatGuy