Printable View
The eurozone is in crisis. Nobody has any money, they're spending more than what they can generate in tax, their growth is negative, unemployment is sky rocketing, yet the Germans have all the money, and their economy is growing. What makes Germany the powerhouse of Europe?
Swiss bank accounts from 1945?
Although not mentioned in the segment, social trust is very high in Germany, it is also very high within the scandinavian countries, which are also prospering.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
Social trust is extremely low in Greece, but very high in Turkey, whose economy is on fire with growth.
What d you mean by "social trust' ?
The belief that the government, your neighbor and your employer are not out to screw you. In Greece, Greeks do not trust any of the aforementioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
In the USA, we are witnessing a dramatic breakdown in social trust which is likely to have omnious consequences.
Thanks - well yes, I agree with that statement regarding social trust. And I agree that the future for the US in the event of a further disintegration of this social trust is indeed ominous.
It may be that a community's or a nation's economic success together with a perception of general political and economic equity fosters social trust; i.e. social trust is not the cause of economic success but rather trust and success, under the right circumstances, foster each other.
Agreed, social trust alone is not enough, but it allows you to get through the really tough times. We never heard the German's whine during unification. Without any help from the rest of the world, they were faced with the prospect of cleaning up the mess that the old Soviet Union had left behind. They use to use East Germany as the dumping ground for toxic waste and raw sewage. I bet the cleanup was very expensive.Quote:
Originally Posted by trish
On the otherhand, Japan has enormous social trust, but their economy is in the third decade of a stuborn malaise.
Actually there was considerable social unrest in Germany during unification - with outbreaks of racist violence, especially in the former East Germany. And savage attacks on Turkish immigrant workers in the West also.
If there is ever unification of the two Koreas, I wonder how well the Koreans will deal with the social unrest? Although, I don't expect to be alive to see it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
I am not sure what it meant by 'social trust' it sounds to me like someone is afraid of using words or concepts that come perilously close to socialism. The German economic miracle of the 1950s was based, in part, on capital imported from the USA under the Marshall Plan, so on one level Germany wouldn't have recovered so quickly from devastation without American money. Germany was also smaller than it is now, as we are talking about West Germany. Secondly, the Germans, like other European countries, introduced social welfare, and nationalised industries such as the railways which would be unthinkable in the USA where the idea of state ownership of industry is anathema. The Germans had centuries of education,science and culture on which to base their economic and moral recovery, indeed the need to be different from the strident nationalism of the 19th century and the appalling concept of race that destroyed Germany from within in the 20th century, created in Germany, in spite of re-armament in 1955, and its position as a front-line state in the Cold War a strong pacifist strain in public politics. In addition, Germany was the initial signatory of the Iron and Steel Pact which formed the basis of economic co-operation that evolved into the European Union, an economic venture that was -and remains- a major benefit to the Europan area as a whole.
Other factors include Germany's ability to make things that sell at home and worldwide, that German workers get higher wages than other Europeans, that immigrant or 'guest-workers' from Turkey, Italy and the former Yugolsavia formed an important part of the unskilled labour force at a time when demand was high, and you have a multi-skilled, multi-national workforce funded from international sources receiving generous wages and benefits with the state providing a wide range of services. I am sure others can provde more reasons, I recall some interesting insights from RobertLouis in a thread last year I think.
Here is a big difference between the mentality in Germany and other country.
In USA UK and many countries, a jeans cost $234 i only have $120 in my pocket: this jeans look awesome, i'll take some debt on my credit card.
So when things are good, you see more growth in countries where people spend easier.
Germany, go to a bar of coffee shop: the €2 coffee they pay it with 0.10cents peaces.
In London, go to a coffee shop, the £2 coffee people will often pay it with a £50 bill.
So in case of a crises Germany has still some money left and they feel confident in their economy and don't spend less.
Social Trust!
Interesting stuff, in the UK, the Government, your neighbor and employer, aswell as every other tom dick and harry are out to screw you, so this is where we are all going wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by fastingforlife
Merkel says German multicultural society has failedQuote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11559451
It could also be that there's more income equality in Germany. I mean, America has deep income inequality. And hence the social ills that come with it. According to English epidemiologist Richard Wilkinson:
Does Income Inequality Hurt Countries? w/ Richard Wilkinson - YouTube
Richard Wilkinson: Equality & wellbeing (UCL) - YouTube
I believe Wilkinson's points are worth considering. Medical doctors back in the 1950's made a nice income. As soon as insurance companies got into the act, during the mid 1960's, incomes skyrocketed, creating enormous inequality, and runaway inflation which shows no sign of abating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben
He may be on to something.
I spend quite a lot of time in Germany, and have my own views :
The Germanic race have always "fallen in line" into a successfull hierarchical society, built from the bottom up, where the manual workers / producers are valued in society - all the way up to the top of the triangle. This probably explains why their manufacturing sector is so strong.
Their Politicians have also been more logical and less short term than the US / Britain, probably because they have had to deal with serious issues (such as unification) which required long term planning, rather than 4 year cycles. No doubt the fact that coalition governments in Germany has also been a benefit, although this maybe argued.
Germany has also always been very good at looking after their own self interests. They pushed hugely for the creation of the EURO, and since its implementation have benefitfed HUGELY. Dont kid yourselves. They have exported, exported, exported more and more of their goods since the euro because of the "one size fits all" exchange rate, that simply wouldnt have been their if the DM had been around. Combine this with their low borrowing rates......
I agree with most of your post Jimbo except the concept of the 'Germanic race' which does not exist. The Nuremberg laws of the 1930s exposed the difficulty the Nazi's had in defining either a Jew or a German. In addition, where in your contemporary Germany do you place the Turks, the Italians, the Yugoslavs and all the other 'non-Germans' without whom there would have been no economic 'miracle'? But yes, workers are valued more in Germany than in the UK, they even have guaranteed seats on the boards of major companies, which would be considered eccentric here.
Ok - replace the words germanic race, with Germans, or the majority of Germans.
Indeed! But if there is something in the argument about northern and southern Europeans, I wonder if it is the way that people have responded to the modern state. The unification of Germany did not take place so long after Italian 'unification' in 1861, yet the experience of the modern state was so different for both, more heavily contested in Italy for example, and some have argued that the defeat of the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily is the foundation of the instability that has undermined economic and political progress in the Mezzogiorno. It can't be about some inability to create, because Italian motor cars have been in the top quartile since the industry began, and Italy is famous for its design culture. So I am thinking there must be issues at the level of tax collection, regional and national identity, and maybe even the lack of immigration that explain why in some respects the Italian state and the performance of its economy has been weaker than Germany.
germany dont tolarate immigration shit like the UK does ... Germany actually has a plan and a structure in place to further their country and economic growth unlike the UK which seems to be the blind leading the blind ...
Immigration policy was different in Germany before or after 1990, and was based on the Gastarbeiter system which meant that agreements with specific countries, Turkey, Greece, Portugal, Yugoslavia, Morocco and Tunisia enabled West Germany to import cheap labour on the premise that they would 'return' at some future point; their children however were allowed to claim German citizenship. In Britain, the Empire/Commonwealth has always complicated the rights of immigrants and anyway, numerically, the UK has the third highest volume of non-EU immigrants after Germany and France. In addition, there was a time when some South Asians realised that if you could get on a plane to West Berlin, an immediate claim for political asylum would normally be met. This lasted until 400,000 claimed political asylum in 1992 and the law was then changed. One faction of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria has been based in Aachen and the Ruhr since the 1960s. East Germany also imported cheap labour, mostly from the Communist bloc such as Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, and the so-called Marxist regimes in Africa, Angola and Mozambique. These days it is easier for immigrants to become German citizens, as long as they have lived in the country for8 years, speak German, dont claim welfare (a significant difference from the UK) and also sign a pledge of loyalty.
The UK has been receptive to immigration, with obvious examples of the Caribbean and the Indian sub-continent; the largest foreign nationals living in the UK are French, London is I think the sixth largest French city in the world. But they are EU immigrants. The scale of immigration in the UK is low and relatively unimportant, whereas your comment on economic growth is apt, I don't think anyone in the UK in politics can see a way ahead that leads to the 'sunlit uplands'...
Liberty - it is sad that the nations from which the bulk of the UK's immigrants come had to tolerate the "shit" of British imperial occupation.
I think that is too broad a brush to use. There has been not so much a fierce debate, but a long-drawn out and currently inconclusive debate amongst imperial histroians about the benefits of Empire, for either the Uk or the colonies. It isn't an easy topic to pursue because not all of the Empire was treated in the same way, and the response to Empire within was also different. The indicators are where the problems lie -do you measure standards of education and literacy before and after Empire, and how on earth does this work in India where there had been a literate civilisation for several thousand years before the British even set foot in it? Missionary education in some parts of the Empire was the only education, it therefore became a priceless benefit of Empire, and as many of the missions also imported allopathic medicine, which included measures to clean water supplies and with it deal with malaria and other diseases, it was medically beneficial. There was a delightful old school communist at SOAS in the 1960s and 1970s, Bill Warren, whose book Imperialism: Pioneer of Capitalism, though ridiculed by many (because of Warren himself) argues for a more positive view of Empire in terms of structural change. But as I say, the jury is still out and probably will be long after I have gone to that multicultural empire in the sky.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prospero
PS, Try talking about Cricket to an Indian -benefit of empire?
Stavros I was using a broad brush in response to crude generalisation. The effect was intentional.
mehh deleted before i go off on one .. i have some harsh views on society and what i feel would benefit us a species . :)
Italy has a different mentality than Germany, Austria, Switzerland etc. There is actually a part of northern Italy, South Tyrol, that was an Austrian province until 1919. The northern part of that territory, Trentino-Alto-Adige, is still inhabitated by Germans to 70% or so. That province is the richest in all of Italy. You do the maths. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stavros
The maths maybe - but are suggesting there is an ethnic element to financial achievement femboyurge?
If it's ethnicity then there's nothing to be learned from Germany's success except that it must be nice to come from that stock.Quote:
Originally Posted by Femboyurge
Quote:
Originally Posted by Femboyurge
Lombardy is the richst province in Italy; Trentino-Alto Adige-Sud-Tirol has been an autonomous region since 1947-48; the majority are Italian, except in Sud-Tirol where German speakers are dominant, but overall account for about 33% of the population of the region.
I wonder how one decides who is responsible for economic growth in western Europe after 1945 when so much of industry and the service sector was populated by low-paid workers from Turkey, Greece, Italy, Yugoslavia, Morocco and Tunisia in the case of West Germany; consider the fact that when de Gaulle became President of France in 1958 he was told that if France wanted to industrialise on the scale of Germany, Britain, Italy and the Netherlands, it would need 100,000 immigrants a year (who duly arrived mostly from North Africa). The UK's road and rail networks relied heavily on immigrants from the Caribbean, and so on and so on. Rather like trying to work out how successful the economy of the USA would have been ante-bellum without Slavery....
Being mostly of German decent and still having relatives there, the answer to your question is muli layered. I agree with Jimbo's post and would use the word disipline to add to it. A strong economic, growth, and monetary policy is the foundation. Next comes supberb education. A strong work ethic forged by a post war generation who for decades had to go without. And let's face it...the strongest part of the German econmy is exports. Everything from autos, motorcycles, to high tech medical and communications equipment...the Germans engineer and manufacture it better than anyone. They make quality products the world wants and needs. And for those politically correct pinheads, Libby's comments are spot on, and certainly play a part in why the German economy thrives. When you're taking in the worlds poor and uneducated by the millions like the US and UK, it has a profound drag on a nations economy. If you're a denier, then you just don't understand economics. I give you California and Arizona as two examples....both are tettering on bankruptcy from the weight of illegal immigration. There's no mystery why Canada and Germany have probably 2 of the most prosprous economies in the world. Their immigration policies are restrictive. I'm not suggesting that's the only reason, it's certainly more complicated than that alone, but to discount it is folly. Unless you bring an engineering degree to the table....you'll be waiting a very long time for your visa. If you doubt me.....try to cross into Canada at one of the upstate NY crossings. You have anything more a traffic infraction, and you're not getting in....contrast that with the US southern border where thousands flood across the border each and every day.....uneducated, hungry, in need of health care and employment and shelter.
OMK,
Every German I met in the U.S is superbly educated as you say. But of course there is a sample bias. Every East Indian I've met is also superbly educated for the same reason even if there are plenty of brilliant East Indians. But the Germans are probably pretty well educated as a whole and I don't doubt this contributes to their economic success.
Stavros seemed to have a good answer to your suggestion that it was because they prevented illegal immigration and had restrictive immigration policies on the whole. I understand the potential for immigrants to take money from social services, but don't immigrants often have their labor exploited? This should only help business profits. Perhaps their strict immigration policy is helpful, but it would be interesting to see some empirical evidence of that.
It is also a bit too tempting to assume that a country that is successful is doing everything right. It could be that they are doing all of the things they should be doing a bit better than everybody else. Or there happen to have been a lot of German innovators in this generation. But not every German policy is going to be traceable to their economic success.
Why not just simplify it German style rather than going into some long winded factualness that ultimately leads to nowhere.
Germans are ruthlessly efficient, they have a very strong work ethos ingrained into their society, they are well educated, take pride in what they do, they do not suffer fools gladly, and when they work their is no I in team, they are a well oiled united machine each member of that society does its role well (on the whole) for the greater good of the society.
Add to the list that they think things through a lot more than your average European (as in they're are not impulsive) and by virtue are quite logical and methodical in their thinking and approach to life, plus their is a decent level of trust in their society and generally the members believe and trust the system, partly due to the system methodology evidently working well, which is probably partly down to lack of corruption against members within the society and as all productive members (not just high society members) are valued and rewarded it is clear why they will outlast us.
Put all of the above together and ingrain it into every member of German society then it becomes obvious why German society is thriving, they have taken the best bits of Capitalism, Communism and Socialism and efficiently & effectively turned it into their very own brand of Germanism.
I am not sure that is what I meant -the 'Guest workers' who became an important part of the 'German economic miracle' it was assumed would return home at the end of their contract, but did not -and their children are Germans citizens -the last German soccer team in the European championship that ended a week ago had players with names like Gomez, Khedira, and Ozil. Illegal immigration was not as big a problem as immigrants arriving at Berlin's airport and asking for political asylum, this did become a problem in the 1990s. But yes, immigrants who do not have immediately usable professional skills are often found picking strawberries for low wages, but these days they are most likely to come from the poorer members of the EU like Romania and Bulgaria.Quote:
Originally Posted by broncofan
You have not mentioned TAXES, just as one example. If the rot set in in California it was with Proposition 13 in 1978, reducing property tax to 1% of the cash value of property as it was in 1975. The concept of taxation in Calfornia seems alien to people, yet they want 'someone' to fix the road, provide street lighting probably even schools, but they don't want to pay for it out of taxes; so the rich get what they want and the poor get the rest, whatever that is.Quote:
Originally Posted by onmyknees
You do not encounter such madness in Germany; people are taxed at a level which would be unacceptable to many Americans particularly those who bend towards the Republican Party and its Tea Party tails. If Taxes aren't enough, Germany also provides services for its citizens which would be considered socialism by the same 'many Americans..' ditto above. The problems being experienced in California and Arizona have nothing to do with illegal immigration, but the poor management of those states, inheriting decades of economic and social change that successive state administrations did not know how to manage.
That you should lay all the blame on people who were born speaking Spanish rather than your 'fellow Americans' who have actually been in government all those years, suggests you do not know what you are talking about.
Here here Stavros couldn't agree more with your assessment of the American situation, too much scapegoating going on with regards to "The Immigrants" but at the end of the day who lets said Immigrants into these countries, that's right the policy makers and why is that because they are a very cheap hard working labour force who are happy and grateful to do low paid, long hours work that the natives simply never would, as they are not desperate enough and have had it good for too long, and have literally become fat and lazy.
So simply put immigrants fill a void and policy makers know this and turn blind eyes.
Most people are media brainwashed into believing its the immigrants fault for a lot of what is going on, when in reality the ones at fault are those that fail to manage the system properly due to their incompetence and a percentage of their native citizens who want an easy ride.
If you want to take this further, this link -albeit from 1998- justifies Proposition 13 as a tax break that encouraged economic growth:Quote:
Originally Posted by joeninety
http://www.cato.org/publications/com...en-now-forever
This link, on the other hand, argues that illegal immigrants have been part of the economic success of Texas, and claims legalizing their status would benefit the USA:
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/have-...-to-its-knees/
I don't see how problems in a state as complex as California can be reduced to illegal immigration; it is likely that state government and the costs of its polcies in education, and particularly prisons, are part of the problem. This third link on Folsom Prison makes chilling reading when you calculate the cost of the Three Strikes And You're Out policy. You have to task yourself if shoplifting really is worth a life sentence.
http://www.npr.org/2009/08/13/111843...s-prison-blues
And has anybody here mentioned US economic aid in the postwar years which poured into germany to help rebuild it's economy? Millions of US dollars between 1948 and the end of 1951.
And the UK, and Italy, and Greece...but in addition to the high volume of US capital that was crucial to economic growth in Europe after 1945, European capital was instrumental in the economic growth of the USA before and after 1945...why the subsequent experience of economic life should be so different must be due to non-economic factors, such as politics. Which is why it was absurd of onmyknees to use one aspect of the economy in California to explain the whole.
I agree Stavros... but he is dancing to a singular tune as we know.