Posted on 04/09/2007 5:16:38 PM PDT by WesternCulture
Which economy will dominate the Globe 10-20 years from now?
While the US economy of today is the world's most powerful given consideration to its ability of providing large numbers of households with the blessing of prosperity and, furthermore, the upsurging economy of China probably will be able to fully compete with the Western World in 50-100 years or so, 'Old' Europe still stands a decent chance of strengthening its position visavi these 'parvenu' economies during the next decades.
Americans who pride themselves of belonging to and contributing to the most impressive economy on Earth are right in doing so. While this ought to be acknowledged by each and everyone, one could easily argue for the likelyhood of a coming European catching up process;
- Several European countries turning to Conservatism - The strength of the Euro - Disposing of the World's largest production capacity - The EU being successful in tearing down trade barriers
The article below illustrates a core aspect of the present hinders to a well functioning European market of 750 million consumers (including Russia and Turkey), namely that of many Europeans still not having done away with the 'nation state' perspective on economic matters.
The union of One Market, One Currency, One Grand Ambition is a concept that has worked before in the glorius history of Western Civilization. Across the Atlantic that is.
"All change on packet sizes?
The free movement of goods is an EU principle and key to its economic success. Half a billion citizens can choose from a vast range of shopping products from 27 states. Standardisation, including packaging, has been vital in making this happen. But with the single market securely in place, has the time come to reverse the process? More choice is great, but might the more vulnerable be "lost in the supermarket"? This is the question now confronting the Parliament.
The European Commission wants to liberalise food packaging sizes. Many food packaging laws are over 30 years old and accumulated amendments make them confusing and hard to apply.
In the 1960s different national rules on the volume of packets and bottles were a major barrier to the free movement of goods between the Member States. Harmonisation helped sweep those barriers aside. But, in 2000 the European Court of Justice ruled that EU countries could not refuse products from other member states because they used different pack sizes, making the law unnecessary.
What does the customer want?
A Eurobarometer survey in October 2001 asked consumers about their experience with packaged and bottled products sold in shops and supermarkets. Most welcomed standard sizes, but also wanted more choice.
In response, the Commission proposed in 2004 a near total deregulation of package sizes. EU standards would be scrapped in favour of market mechanisms. Only wine, spirits, instant coffee and white sugar would retain their standard sizes.
Parliament supports the Commission's proposal in general, but wants better protection for consumers and small and medium enterprises. It is concerned that disabled and elderly customers could be confused about whether they are getting value for money. Many of the people in these demographic groups tend to use local shops, which often don't indicate unit prices, something supermarkets are obliged to do. In addition, Parliament is concerned that there may be costs for smaller firms, who may find that existing machinery catering to specific packet sizes becomes obsolete.
It suggests that the list of regulated products should be extended to include ground coffee, butter, salt, rice, pasta and milk.
Ministers would prefer to see a gradual phasing out of packaging norms over five years for the products proposed by the EP and over six years for white sugar. Following the EP's strong line on protection for consumers and small companies, the Council also proposes:
a regular check on how the new law affects producers and consumers more visible product labels to help customers estimate value for money What's next?
The ball is now back in Parliament's court. It looks likely that the EP will approve the legislation in May, provided that there is agreement that it can be revised if it is found that the law has had a negative impact on customers or producers.
Already posted here:
___________________________________________________________
German penises ‘too small for EU condoms’
Posted by Grzegorz 246
On General/Chat 11/01/2004 9:17:58 AM EST · 155 replies · 4,876+ views
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/1264724/posts
Thanks for the good laugh. A statist place could catch up if, and only if, it manages to similarly hobble its competitors.
IOW they want to make odd sizes mandatory so they can set the norms.
- I get your point, but I’d rather say the EU, the US and Asia presently promote valuable economic incentives in each other economies in a very benign manner (contrary to the situation in the early 1990’s when Asia was too weak to compensate decline in cross-Atlantic trade levels) than standing any chance/running any risk of hobbling each other.
The EU economy is probably growing faster, presently, than its US counterpart (despite its lousy performance
the last decade) and Conservatism is on the rise in wide areas of Europe (from what I can tell, this process is evident in Scandinavia, Germany, France and Britain).
A guarantee of 6 weeks vacation for *every* adult in Europe and the fact that “unemployment insurance” can go on for years and pays 90% of what you made while working doesn’t bode well for Europe catching up with *anyone*!
Maybe we should, a la Confucius, start with rigorous vocabulary. Economic development has very little to do with conservatism per se, and a lot to do with hayekian lasses-faire old fashioned “liberalism”, even with its libertarian elements. Extremely conservative places like Imperial China and Korea were so conservative that after reaching their systemic maximum [pretty low, BTW] they simply stagnated. Ditto for Europe. Every sociological model [including the statist one] has systemic limitations on its parameters. From the models known so far, the lasses-faire model has the highest economic development potential.
-——The EU economy is probably growing faster, presently, than its US counterpart (despite its lousy performance
the last decade)
You are simply wrong. Why don’t you do a google before making flat and incorrect assertions?
Economic growth during the 1990s never became what many had wished for. Some
countries performed reasonably well, most notably Ireland, but on the whole the EU
was lagging far behind other countries during the whole decade. Productivity growth
decreased and by mid-decade the EU was running behind the US in this respect.
http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf
As is increasingly admitted, the economic performance in nearly every Continental country is generally poor compared to the U.S. and a few other countries that share the U.S.’s characteristics. Productivity in the Continental Big Three—Germany, France and Italy—stopped gaining ground on the U.S. in the early 1990s, then lost ground as a result of recent slowdowns and the U.S. speed-up. Unemployment rates are generally far higher than those in the U.S., U.K., Canada and Ireland. And labor force participation rates have been lower for decades. Relatedly, the employee engagement and job satisfaction reported in surveys are mostly lower, too.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110009657
When I clicked on this thread I thought I was going to read some personal statements by French women, about their men's short comings. :)
However, I guess few members of this forum believe an orientation towards Conservatism in Europe will harm the economic development of the continent more than various representatives of Socialism/Unionism/Political Correctness already have.
The EU economy is finally on the rise after a long decade of stagnation, whatever the situation was like during the 1990’s.
One of the main reasons is probably the strength of the Euro fueling the purchasing power of EU citizens on behalf of US consumers.
I am still not seeing any substantiation for your opinion. What is your source?
- The most reliable source I’ve managed to find regarding this issue is that of Eurostat.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurostat )
Quote below is from a PDF file.
( http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/LN-022007/EN/LN-022007-EN.PDF )
“Compared to the same quarter of the previous year, seasonally adjusted GDP grew by 3.3% in the euro area and by 3.4% in the EU25 in the fourth quarter of 2006, after +2.7% and +3.0% respectively in the previous quarter.
During the fourth quarter of 2006, US GDP increased by 0.9% compared to the previous quarter, after +0.5% in the third quarter. Compared to the fourth quarter of 2005, GDP grew by 3.4% in the US, after +3.0% in the previous quarter.
Over the whole year 2006, GDP grew by 2.7% in the euro area and by 2.9% in the EU25, compared to +1.4% and +1.7% respectively for the year 2005. In the US, GDP growth for the year 2006 was +3.4%, after +3.2% in 2005.”
While the US economy developed in a healthy manner during 2006 in general, the material above indicates the US economy slowed down a lot during the last 6 months of 2006, quite contrary to what happened in the field of European economics simultaneously..
- The most reliable source I’ve managed to find regarding this issue is that of Eurostat.
( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurostat )
Quote below is from a PDF file.
( http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/LN-022007/EN/LN-022007-EN.PDF )
“Compared to the same quarter of the previous year, seasonally adjusted GDP grew by 3.3% in the euro area and by 3.4% in the EU25 in the fourth quarter of 2006, after +2.7% and +3.0% respectively in the previous quarter.
During the fourth quarter of 2006, US GDP increased by 0.9% compared to the previous quarter, after +0.5% in the third quarter. Compared to the fourth quarter of 2005, GDP grew by 3.4% in the US, after +3.0% in the previous quarter.
Over the whole year 2006, GDP grew by 2.7% in the euro area and by 2.9% in the EU25, compared to +1.4% and +1.7% respectively for the year 2005. In the US, GDP growth for the year 2006 was +3.4%, after +3.2% in 2005.”
While the US economy developed in a healthy manner during 2006 in general, the material above indicates the US economy slowed down a lot during the last 6 months of 2006, quite contrary to what happened in the field of European economics simultaneously..
Re stalinist USSR: growth from zero [or very low] level happens - has to - at astronomical rates. But the system, while [initially] growing fast, rapidly achieved its saturation mode and stagnated. Statist Europe [see France as a good example] is at, or close to, its saturation level. Thus no spectacular growth is to be expected until and unless the hobbling sociological model is dismantled.
A guarantee of 6 weeks vacation for *every* adult in Europe and the fact that “unemployment insurance” can go on for years and pays 90% of what you made while working doesn’t bode well for Europe catching up with *anyone*!
To have a strong economy and still be able to provide this is stunning. The anti-Europe on FREEPERS is very unfortunate. I never understood why. Europe has much to offer but is never appreciated here.
- I guess most US Republicans prefer liberty (which is seen as a typical American ideal worldwide) to security (which is associated with the generous European welfare systems).
I’m from Sweden and apart from viewing myself as a Swede, I take pride in being a part of Europe and of the Western Civilization as a whole.
The US, Sweden, France, Germany, The UK etc are all magnificent nations but in many ways very different from each other. What works well in one Western nation might not function in a benevolent manner in another one.
Personally, I don’t think generous welfare systems necessarily is a threat to neither economic growth or to healthy work ethics. If this was the case, Scandinavia wouldn’t be the most prosperous part of the world (measured in nominal GDP/capita) today. On the other hand, I don’t think our societal model would work well in the US, like some Liberal and leftist Americans seem to believe. We should try to learn from each other, but also be aware of the strength of our own nations. I guess you agree America too has much to offer!
I sincerely hope nations like Germany, France and Italy will be able to mobilize the national unity and spirit needed to get their economies growing anew. Personally, I’m rather optimistic. For instance, trade unions in Germany have begun to realize the need for settlements on the labor market that are more realistic than the ones politicians and unionists have forced through during the last 15 years.
Best of regards from Europe!
- Your description of the USSR development is correct.
As a European and a as friend of France, I sincerely hope the French economy will free itself from the burdens that presently is holding it back.
So, what are these burdens?
IMO, France, just like Germany and Italy needs to forget about the 30 hour work week. It needs to encourage high tech industries and entrepreneurship on behalf of bureaucracy and unrealistic unionist demands. It needs politicians who focus on GDP growth instead of PC agendas. France needs to rediscover traditional European work ethics and get in proper touch with the values that once made Europe a powerhouse of human progress.
A major difference between Scandinavia and the European continent is that while all of Europe wants Scandinavian standards of living and Scandinavian social security, many continental Europeans are not willing to pay the price for it, traditional hard work that is.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.