The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Yesterday I argued that Latvia's cost-cutting efforts are evident compared to a cross-section of European Union countries. Latvia's efforts, while commendable, were very much a function of the emergency IMF loan in December 2008 and the ensuing recession in 2009. After an email exchange with Marshall Auerback, and thinking more about the cross-section of Europe, I now see a very scary trend emerging across Europe: the fight for exports. ... Latvia's model: drop wages to increase export income. Greece: drop wages to increase export income. France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, etc., etc. It's impossible that the whole of the Eurozone will drop wages to increase export income. It's especially bad for countries like Latvia or Hungary, where the lion's-share of trade occurs withing the boundaries of Europe. And what happens when export income does not provide the impetus for aggregate demand growth? Well, there's not much left. Can't devalue the currency (via printing money), and tax revenues will fall faster than a ten-pound weight: rising deficits; rising debt; rising debt service (via surging credit spreads). Sovereign default seems like a near-certainty somewhere in the Eurozone!
Yesterday I argued that Latvia's cost-cutting efforts are evident compared to a cross-section of European Union countries. Latvia's efforts, while commendable, were very much a function of the emergency IMF loan in December 2008 and the ensuing recession in 2009.
After an email exchange with Marshall Auerback, and thinking more about the cross-section of Europe, I now see a very scary trend emerging across Europe: the fight for exports.
...
Latvia's model: drop wages to increase export income. Greece: drop wages to increase export income. France, Germany, Spain, Portugal, etc., etc. It's impossible that the whole of the Eurozone will drop wages to increase export income. It's especially bad for countries like Latvia or Hungary, where the lion's-share of trade occurs withing the boundaries of Europe.
And what happens when export income does not provide the impetus for aggregate demand growth? Well, there's not much left. Can't devalue the currency (via printing money), and tax revenues will fall faster than a ten-pound weight: rising deficits; rising debt; rising debt service (via surging credit spreads). Sovereign default seems like a near-certainty somewhere in the Eurozone!
http://www.newsneconomics.com/2010/03/end-game-for-europe-wage-cutting-and.html
So the problem is that labor is too expensive, ergo those lazy bums that work on the line want to much money! It's envy I tell you.
And of course, it's absolutely not the case that the problem is that this fixation on cheap labor has stopped capital investments that could increase productivity.
That we ask them to make bricks without hay only shows that they are lazy, and undeserving of the bread and water we give them. Of course, it's not that we are causing the problem because we're trying to pump up our profits by asking workers the impossible. Because that would suggest that we are engaging in precisely the type of socially harmful rent-seeking behavior that we say that workers asking for a raise are doing. If this were true, our wealth would only come at a cost to society as a whole.
But, no. We are the innovators! If we go on strike, civilization collapses. We are the creators of value. (Note to self, must invent robot slaves.) And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
Do as I say, not as a do. The oldest rule in the book for people who want to stay in power when they can't get their shit together, let alone everyone elses. And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
you are the media you consume.
More seriously, it depends very much on how targeted it is. If you simply walk away from all sovereign bonds and let the chips fall where they may, then there's a realistic possibility that you'll break the global monetary system. And even if you don't, the hysterical children on the capital markets almost certainly would.
A more targeted default... that's a different kettle of fish, and depends very much on how you do it, how you justify it and how many of the hysterical children you manage to put out of business in the first blow.
there's a realistic possibility that you'll break the global monetary system.
Again.
How can you break something that already belongs in an asylum? I suppose you could have an extended period of Extreme Bad while something better had the chance to organise itself.
But I still think controlled demolition followed by a rewrite of the rules is the best way to avoid future crises.
I meant "break the monetary system" as in "causing wheat to not be shipped from Ukraine because the seller doesn't trust the buyer's escrow service."
Having the largest (and arguably most trusted) GDP on the planet simply walk away from its sovereign debt overnight is not "controlled" in any version of the English language with which my thesaurus is familiar.
People still seem to think the system is not just workable, but almost the best of all possible worlds - even though it explodes regularly, with increasing oscillations.
I think that's quite an unusual point of view.
Wheat continues to be shipped from the Ukraine for the moment, but that's not a consolation if you're one of the long term unemployed in the US, or about to become one of the long term unemployed in Greece.
Politics aside, the most pressing criticism of the system is that it simply doesn't work for many people, and is close to not working for anyone.
However, as much as the "nuke and pave" solution appeals to the part of my brain that's schooled in engineering, there is an appalling number of things that could go Seriously Wrong with that strategy.
And if you're in a political position to prevent disastrous fallout, you are also in a position to engineer a new system without having to nuke and pave.
by JakeS - May 15 7 comments
by ARGeezer - May 16 10 comments
by Nomad - May 10 14 comments
by Metatone - May 14 84 comments
by gmoke - May 17
by DoDo - May 12 10 comments
by Migeru - May 6 100 comments
by Migeru - May 7 8 comments
by ARGeezer - May 1610 comments
by JakeS - May 157 comments
by Metatone - May 1484 comments
by DoDo - May 1210 comments
by Nomad - May 1014 comments
by Migeru - May 78 comments
by marco - May 782 comments
by Migeru - May 6100 comments
by Ted Welch - May 35 comments
by afew - May 340 comments
by ceebs - May 26 comments
by gmoke - Apr 301 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 3067 comments
by joelado - Apr 2954 comments
by Metatone - Apr 2854 comments
by ATinNM - Apr 275 comments
by ceebs - Apr 265 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 2686 comments
by In Wales - Apr 2136 comments