Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: ukman

Productivity and unemployment.

“88% of people in Germany are also quite busy, and statistically have a higher productivity per capita than US employees, so don't be so patronising.” You said.

Well, let me refer you to an official .gov UK site. Of course they are in collusion with the “Cowboy’s” cooking the books to show that America has such a high productivity. :)

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=160

Fact is if you want I can give you DOZENS of credible sources that claim quiet the opposite of what you state. The productivity in the US is HIGHER than ANY European state. But that’s not all! Even if you look at the actual output per unit of time (Not GDP divided by employed labor force) in certain industries, the US beats nearly anyone out there.

On average the American works nearly 60 hours per year more than the average German. Less holidays and longer work weeks combined with less annual leave gives you nearly 1 ½ weeks of work more per employee per year.

More elderly or younger people are in the labor force where in Germany they are mandatory retired. More women are in the labor force as well.

Unemployment is at about 5.6% vs. 12% for Germany, which does cook the books to make it show better than it really is. Long term unemployed taking 1 Euro jobs ( http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,1564,1416143,00.html ) and in retraining programs are not counted in their unemployment statistic as certain other “exclusions” as well.




Socialism and the Germans.

http://www.spiegel.de/flash/0,5532,11922,00.html

Present day:

PDS (SED/DDR Nachfolger Partei) won OVER 35% of the votes in some former East German districts and raked in OVER 8.7% nationally!

The Greens over 8.1% nationally and filled such prominent positions as Secretary of State in the past.

The SPD (Of course they too are no “real” socialists by your definition, just in name- Soziale Partei Deutschland) took in over 34%

But there probably is no large following in this ideology in Germany. I’m just reading the situation all wrong?

History:

Karl Marx (A German and pretty much the founder of “Socialism”), starting the long tradition followed by many Western bourgeois liberals also came from Germany and was born to an upper class family. They have the luxury of thinking up such novel ideas as they live with their silver spoon in the mouth.

http://www.historyguide.org/intellect/marx.html

(abstract) What exactly is the difference between Stalin and Hitler? Who was a Nazi and who a socialist? Where is the distinction in reality? Besides semantics, the ENDSTATE of the NAZI was the same thing as the Stalinist. The NAZI’s claimed to be socialists, but as noted in an earlier post, the defenders of socialism always make the same lame defense – They claim, “Oh, that wasn’t a real socialist state.” Yet they always fail to be able to give examples of true socialist states that worked in the long run, DESPITE over half the worlds population being subjected to this experiment over a millenniums time.

(concrete)

http://www.dhm.de/lemo/html/nazi/innenpolitik/kdf/

http://www.feldgrau.com/KdF.html

When do you think MOST of the social programs Germany has today started? It was under the NSDAP! In fact, after the war it was Adenauer who rolled them back. Kindergeld was a creation under the Reichsreform of 1934. Something still paid out today and seen as, “Ordentliche Sozial Politik.”

----The NAZI regime had a command driven economy as do all other socialist regimes.----

They STARTED the Kur programs which still persist in Germany today. The Soviets sent their “Hero’s of labor” to the Black Sea, the Germans to Kur in Bad Soden ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_durch_Freude ). The whole Kur system was created under the NSDAP. The Eastblock socialists had the “Junge Pioniere” the Nazi’s the “Hitler youth”. The fact that the NAZI’s prosecuted their opposition had nothing to do with them being polar opposites, rather that they were viewed as a threat to their power. Both in reality are similar.

The Germans subscribe to socialism. They see no danger in it. They see no bad in it. The last elecetions basically prove my point.

Red6


209 posted on 09/20/2005 8:32:46 PM PDT by Red6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies ]


To: Red6

First off, I must admit rather sheepishly that when I added that throwaway remark about productivity I didn't check my facts first. I'd already posted before I did a Google search and found that US productivity is indeed higher. Per capita productivity PER HOUR is also higher in the USA, but not by as much. However, I didn't then post a correction myself because of the advanced hour and because I fully expected to find this morning a raft of statistics to contradict me - and here it is. Thanks for your trouble. However, it's not really relevant to my argument anyway.

I accept that Americans work harder and longer hours, with less holidays, and that more elderly people and women are working in the US. Whether this is a good thing for your society is open to debate - but it's your country, after all. I have also never disputed that unemployment and excessive social programs are harmful to the German economy. Almost everyone here agrees this is the case.

You're absolutely correct that the Left party a.k.a. PDS a.k.a. SED raked in a lot of votes: about 25% in the old GDR and about a whacking 4.5% in the old FRG. The old GDR is a problem, of course. Over 85% of people in Germany overall voted for the established parties. So your point is...?

BTW , SPD means Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands. The CSU (slightly right of the CDU) means Christlich Soziale Union. You're getting the two mixed up, a harmless mistake.
CDU is the Christlich Demokratische Union. The two Nazi parties call themselves National Democrats and Republicans. What's in a name, eh?

As I said in my post, it's quite true that the Nazis lifted elements from socialist theory to get German workers on their side. Social security goes back to the Kaiser's and Bismarck's time (1880s I think)- those two were notorious Socialists. Helping the less well-off in this way was a German tradition, which not coincidentally helped defuse popular discontent with the elites in power although it didn't alway work, of course - as in 1919, 1932, 1953).

You're correct the Nazis had a command-driven economy. However, Germany under the SPD never did. Obviously not Socialists, then.

You keep on harping on that Germans are socialists = Nazis. I have no truck with either. Both the SPD and the CDU subscribe in varying degrees to the "social market economy" - i.e. the market operates without undue state interference, and the less fortunate get welfare so they're not reduced to crime or begging if they are handicapped or jobless or old. This isn't particularly controversial in Germany. In fact, you (still) have something like this in the USA, don't you?

Germans get irate of course about excessive benefits to wasters and about benefit fraud, and the govt. fights a constant battle to ensure that the undeserving don't sponge off the rest of us. Both the main parties are committed to cutting back social programs, it's only the details of these cutbacks that are at issue.

I'll say it once more and for the last time. Nobody here is defending socialism; but Germans do defend the social market economy, and they make a very sharp distinction between the two.

And also for the last time. Nazis are not socialists, whatever sources you quote to back up this ludricous assertion.

Right, back to work.


212 posted on 09/21/2005 12:10:34 AM PDT by ukman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson