German Unemployment Breaks Weimar Highs

John Uskglass

Venerable Relic of the Wastes
So, what's this about Liberalization not being needed?


German jobless hits Nazi-era highs

Wednesday, February 2, 2005 Posted: 5:17 AM EST (1017 GMT)


BERLIN, Germany (Reuters) -- Germany's jobless total rose above five million in January for the first time since the 1930s, a labor office source has said, highlighting the main threat to Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's 2006 re-election bid.

The surge was mainly due to new benefit rules that force all social welfare claimants to register as unemployed.

But the politically sensitive figure of five million underlines how little progress has been made in solving Germany's biggest economic problem since Schroeder came to power in 1998, pledging to halve unemployment from some four million.

Despite some signs of improving sentiment, big German companies including industrial giant Siemens AG and Deutsche Bank have continued to shed jobs.

On Tuesday, the country's fourth-biggest construction firm, Walter Bau, which employs 9,000 people, filed for insolvency.

As well as sluggish consumer demand caused partly by worries over jobs, Economy Minister Wolfgang Clement said Germany still had an enormous amount to do to reform its over-regulated economy and create more employment possibilities.

"We're sitting here a bit like Gulliver and a lot of our strength is tied down. We have to cut these ties back gradually but it's a fearfully difficult thing to do," he told Germany's n-TV television.

A source from the Federal Labor Office told Reuters that the unadjusted German jobless total increased by 573,000 last month to 5.037 million.

The source said the rise put the unadjusted jobless rate at 12.1 percent.

On an adjusted basis, unemployment increased by 227,000 in January, the source said. Official figures are due to be issued on Wednesday.
Biggest change since WWII

The sharp rise was mainly due to the introduction in January of the Schroeder government's "Hartz IV" welfare reforms, which added 200,000 to the unadjusted total, according to the source.

Hailed as the biggest change to the country's welfare system since World War Two, the measures have resulted in a cut in benefits for around one million long-term jobless and tougher means testing for recipients of unemployment payouts.

The reform has also removed the distinction that previously existed between unemployment benefit claimants and social welfare recipients, who were not registered as job seekers.

The government has long known that the change was likely to lift the total over the five million mark and ministers have carefully prepared the ground in recent weeks to ensure that the shock of the number was as limited as possible when it came.

Schroeder's Social Democrats have recovered strongly in opinion polls over recent months but failure of the reforms to produce results would threaten their chances of retaining power in a general election due in 2006.

"I think the Federal Labor Office will make it clear tomorrow that these figures have arisen as a result of the Hartz IV reforms," said Deutsche Bank economist Stefan Schneider. But the message was stark just the same.

According to official historical figures obtained by Reuters the unadjusted figure of 5.037 million would put the country's unemployment at the highest level since 1933, when Adolf Hitler and his Nazi party came to power.

No figures were available for the immediate postwar years of 1946-48.

"We are getting towards the dimensions seen at the beginning of Hitler's regime," said Dieter Wermuth, an economist at United Financial of Japan.

"Germany is increasingly getting a lower class, which it has not had for many decades, a growing class of people who do not expect to work ever. And that is politically very dangerous."
 
You call that unemployment? Croatia hasn't had unemployment rate lower than 20% since mid-nineties. And Bosnia has about 40%, I think.
 
John Uskglass said:
So, what's this about Liberalization not being needed?

Ha, that's funny, because Dutch unemployement is reaching new heights under a liberal government. In fact unemployement has been rising since the liberalization under three following governments, Lubbers, Kok and Balkenende.

Did it occur to you that we're in a bit of a recession right now, and that this has nothing to do with lack of liberalization.

Also you don't seem to be able to read much:

article said:
The surge was mainly due to new benefit rules that force all social welfare claimants to register as unemployed.

In other words, a lot of unemployed that have never been counted as unemployed, back to Weimar times probably, are now counted as unemployed. No shit they then get higher than ever before, Sherlock. Jesus, someone buy this man a golden hat.
 
On one side those numbers really are that high because they were calculated for the first time with the new protocol.

On the other side yeah, high taxes and high cost of living is making many industries to move to Eastern Europe and Asia, that`s one of the less forgiving sides of globalization.

Still i wish i got the money at the end of the month a german unemployed receives :shock:
 
And you have to think about that Germany has "concentrated" unemployemt. So in East Germany (former GDR) the unemployment rate is about 20% while in West Germany the rate is about 8-10% but they have bigger "centers" of unemployment there, too; like the "Ruhrgebiet" (don't know if there is a specific English name for the territory)
 
Molting Economies

Molting Economies


The resource based economy of Western Washington state was in - 'recline' - in the late 1970's.
This was pre Microsoft. "" Your Commodore "" was a hand held ... calculator.
Boeing (aircraft) was as 'seasonal', as the fishing and timber. The 'unofficial' unemployment of Whatcom County was 20%.

Only the Japanese seemed to be buying.

In comparison, the official unemployment in the rust belt of Ohio was around 9%, which meant one could see a "help wanted" sign from time to time.

Jimmy Carter was Prez. So if one pushes the second oil shock to the left, and shoves the Iran Hostage Drama to the right, many Americans were more likely, self absorbed with their employment status,
than consciously contemplating political theory.

Even when the "Reagan Revolution" stage managed self esteem therapy for post Watergate America, many saw little difference in their,
.... tax bracket. Especially after the tax system was ""reformed"" by act of Congress .... A lot of loop holes were lanced, some that even the marginally employed could justify, and a de-facto revenue incline began,

Outside of food stamps and benign neglect, I'm not aware of what "Big Government", whether it was Democrat or Republican, was doing for 'the working poor' outside of 'cheap' gasoline for rusting four cylinder econo-cars. I did not witness a majority of un-rusted "new" cars until I moved to with in ""Trickle Down"" range of Washington D.C. and the Cold War spending spree of the Reagon Era.


If this present German employment problem implies the voting populace of the RE-Unified Deutschland is ripe for exploitation by another charismatic 'talking head' .... ....
Is the regime of change guaranteed to be of any one of the current flavors of political persuasion?


Maybe Arnold Schwarzenegger could be their next messiah of Austrian descent.

Or maybe it's America that will be 'blessed' by ''the cult of personality""?



4too
 
mvBarracuda said:
And you have to think about that Germany has "concentrated" unemployemt. So in East Germany (former GDR) the unemployment rate is about 20% while in West Germany the rate is about 8-10% but they have bigger "centers" of unemployment there, too; like the "Ruhrgebiet" (don't know if there is a specific English name for the territory)

Ruhr area. And yes, the above is true.

4too you rock

I label this thread the "Uskglass got owned"-thread
 
There is a structural unemployement problem with the German economy since i remember, that`s what you get on a strong welfare state,but by giving their good social support for the unemployed it hasn`t been a serious question. The thing is industrial jobs are declining everywhere, i once made a study where i found that even in the 10% growth China, with factories being open almost every week, the percentage of people doing typical factory jobs decreased 10% since 1990. The thing is in most advanced industrialized countries the passe of the tertiary sector isn`t enough to absorb those low skills jobs, so things tend to get worse.

If the EU is the largest exporter block these days, it`s mainly because the US economy has become an importer economy since 1998, until then it was tradicionally a producers economy. So Europe is more and more dependant of the american economy, and that might bring trouble. And while the new EU has a potential market that is superior to the US and Russia put together, it also has large unemployment rates in too many countries, meaning that consumer confidence and the hability to spend isn`t at it`s full potential.

So while not dramatizing this situation this it is indeed a bad sign for the future, CCR may not get the subleteties of the German economy but that doesn`t mean that those numbers aren`t worrisome.
 
6 000 000 people were unemployed in 1932... we are far away from that.

Yeah, but at the rate they are going by 2012 they'll be right back where they were, jobless and listening to raving lunatics.
 
Kharn said:
I label this thread the "Uskglass got owned"-thread
The only thing I posted was an article on the fact that the German economy is'nt working. That's all.

Kharn, what do you think could be done for the German economy?
 
Yeah, but being unemployed in Germany sucks if you're a woman with any type of personal morals. This was posted on my forums:

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.

The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe.

She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel.

Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990.

The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse.

When the waitress looked into suing the job centre, she found out that it had not broken the law. Job centres that refuse to penalise people who turn down a job by cutting their benefits face legal action from the potential employer.

"There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. "The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits."

Source
 
More on EU.



Europe's next big thing is jobs
By Anthony Browne and Rory Watson
Massive rise in unemployment forces EU to change tack on economy



THE European Union has abandoned its target of becoming the world’s most dynamic economy by the end of the decade, and instead adopted as its next “big project” a less ambitious programme aimed at cutting the Continent’s massive unemployment.
The European Commission’s new economic strategy, which promotes deregulation and free markets, draws heavily on the experience of Britain, the EU’s most successful large economy.



It marks a sharp change of tack for the Commission, the EU’s executive body, which previously put more priority on social protection, as demanded by countries such as France and Germany.

The Commission has also avoided adopting any more grandiose projects that build up the European project — such as single currency or enlargement — putting the emphasis instead on the down-to-earth practicalities of getting the right policies to cure the EU’s economic malaise. The Commission believes that the economy has to be put at the top of the agenda because it fears that high unemployment is fuelling public dis- illusionment with the EU, and could derail the plan to adopt the European constitution.

It launched its growth plan, which is supported by the Government and the Confederation of British Industry, on the day that German unemployment rose above five million, the highest since Hitler was in power. It took the EU-wide jobless total to 19 million.

In 2000, European leaders including Tony Blair adopted amid much fanfare the so- called Lisbon strategy, with the aim of overtaking the US to become the world’s most competitive knowledge-based economy by 2010.

Since then the European economy has slipped further behind the US, with the average growth rate down to 2 per cent, compared with 3.5 per cent for the US.

Yesterday’s report, called Growth and Jobs: Working Together for Europe’s Future, said that growth would slow further, to 1 per cent a year, undermining the welfare state.

Yesterday, José Manuel Barroso, the Commission President, said: “The way we went about it in 2000 was not very credible. There have been too many objectives and commitments. The overall goal was right but the implementation was poor. The approach we adopted today is far more appropriate.”

The report concedes that European policies were to blame. “This is not just a question of difficult economic conditions . . . ” it said. “It also results from a policy agenda which has become overloaded, failing co-ordination, and sometimes conflicting priorities.”

The report suggests reducing regulations on business and deepening the single European market by reducing barriers to trade in services. It also suggests more public spending on research and development, the promotion of high-tech centres and the creation of a “European Institute of Technology” to match the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the US. However, it also proposes a harmonised company tax across Europe, which is opposed by many member states including Britain. Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, has always championed “tax competition” between member states.

Yesterday the Commission forecast that adopting its policies will boost GDP by 3 per cent and create more than six million jobs by 2010.

Socialist leaders in the European Parliament complained that it was “mimicking the American approach”.

However, Peter Mandelson, the European Trade Commissioner, who helped to devise the strategy, said that it was very much in line with new Labour thinking.

“Barroso is proposing a programme for Europe that we would describe as new Labour in Britain,” he said.
 
John Uskglass said:
Kharn, what do you think could be done for the German economy?

The last thing you want to do is wild liberalization. We tried that with Great Britain, we tried that with the Netherlands. Both ended up miserable failure. Both were countries with old and barely functional welfare systems, but sadly liberalization only made it worse.

Why in God's name people think liberalization is a cure for anything is beyond me. By now it's pretty much proven only to make things worse, at least within Europe. I could cite numbers, but it'd take me a while to look up the proper resource book.
 
post-70-1106213612.jpg


Stop avoiding the question. If not liberalization, what? At the very least our unemployment and economic growth is far, far better and sustainible then anything Germany has.

And I'm not talking wild liberalization, rather Blair-esque third way Thatcher-with-a-heart economic policy. I don't think Thatcher did much in the long run but polarize people.
 
America has always been a liberal country, though, CCR. (personal freedoms, etc.) We were a nation founded on liberty and a liberal economy. Its a lot easier to make a Liberal Economy work when you haven't let people rely on a welfare state or have heavily regulated business. Look at how the French are taking advantage of American labor laws in the Video Game industry. You can expect the same to happen in France when they lift business restrictions for the sake of employment.
 
John Uskglass said:
Stop avoiding the question. If not liberalization, what? At the very least our unemployment and economic growth is far, far better and sustainible then anything Germany has.

And I'm not talking wild liberalization, rather Blair-esque third way Thatcher-with-a-heart economic policy. I don't think Thatcher did much in the long run but polarize people.

You seem to assume the wellfare state can't work as a body. This is not a proven fact. It is pretty much easy to see liberalization doesn't work well for wellfare states

(too drunk to make much sense, by the by)

Heck, Germany has a lot of problems, but not all of them come from the wellfare state. Even if they did, every idiots knows the time for liberalization is during economic growth, not economic recession.

Unless you consider liberalization the cure for economic problems. In which case you need to screw your head back on right, because right now you're talking out of your ass
 
Back
Top