Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Germany must renew its commitment to reform.

XYZ must renew its commitment to reform.

I see that written so often and am always miffed that noone in any position to do so will ask them "at what point would you say the reforms are done?"

The true answer would be never, short of de facto slavery. (of course, if they meant environmental reform, I'd be inclined to agree with the need for ever more).

I'm all for going down fighting if going down I must, but when you are not on a clear course to oblivion, why should change, any change, be necessarily better than no rush to change?
Or indeed, should Germany commit to reform, why not consider the possibility of reforming wages upwards?

Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed. Gandhi

by Cyrille (cyrillev domain yahoo.fr) on Mon May 19th, 2008 at 07:20:35 AM EST
Be serious.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Mon May 19th, 2008 at 07:22:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]
As the Economist notes with regularity, the tragedy of France and Germany is that things are not going badly enough to justify "reform" (which is, btw, the core insight of Naomi Klein's "Shock Therapy": that "reform" is only implemented when a big enough crisis, whether natural or man-made (coup, etc...) happens).

In the long run, we're all dead. John Maynard Keynes
by Jerome a Paris (etg@eurotrib.com) on Mon May 19th, 2008 at 08:01:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Occasional Series