German Unemployment Breaks Weimar Highs

[John Uskglass]

Recession for us means 5% Unemployment and 3.1% GDP growth. Recession for Germany means 12% Unemployment and 0.1% GDP growth. Why is that?

Maybe, just maybe, it's because of fundemental weakness of a strong welfare state to deal with changing world economies, and the fact that ultimatley it's not sustainible from the standpoint of a society.

 

[Brother None]

Maybe, just maybe, it's because of fundemental weakness of a strong welfare state to deal with changing world economies, and the fact that ultimatley it's not sustainible from the standpoint of a society.

You draw this conclusion from the state of one nation at one point.

Ok, I give you the burden of evidence. Name at least half a dozen nations that have dealth badly with changing world economies because of the wellfare state (including China, huh? Hah). If you include Great Britain, cite numbers

 

[Bradylama]

Hot potata hot potata.

 

[John Uskglass]

Half a dozen? WTF? How about just massive nations in the current day? I can't even think of half a dozen nations with a Welfare state as big as Germany's.

Uh, dude, Japan, duh.

The Japanese population is rapidly aging, the effect of a post-war baby boom followed by a decrease in births as the country modernised in the latter part of the 20th century (notable aspects including the shift from agricultural to urban lifestyles and the increasing tendency for women to remain in the workplace). Japan now also has the highest life expectancy in the world. By 2007, when Japan's population growth is expected to stop completely, over 20% of the population will be over the age of 65. The changes in the demographic structure have created a number of social issues, particularly potential decline in workforces and increase in the cost of social securities like public pension plan. Japanese government planners are currently in a heated debate over how to cope with this problem. [1] (http://www.mofa.go.jp/j_info/japan/socsec/ogawa.html). Immigration and birth incentives are sometimes suggested as a possible solution to provide younger workers to support the graying society. Immigration is not publicly popular as recent increased crime rates are often attributed to foreigners living in Japan.

What does this mean? Imploding workforce and massive welfare state mean that lots of money will be bleed for lots of people by a small work force. Same situation as in Germany.

And how on earth did Japan begin Economic growth for the first time in a decade after rescession? Liberal Prime Minister/Rockstar Junichiro Koizumi and his economic policies, and his total lack of fear for kicking government beaurocracy in the ass.

Meaning that the welfare state will cease to exsist in any meaningful form within Japan in the decade.

Can you say Dirigisme Kharn?

However, dirigisme came to be highly contested in the 1980s, with complaints of bureaucracy and lack of reactivity to new challenges. As a result the government largely retreated from economic intervention; Dirigisme has now essentially receded. Despite significant reform and privatization over the past 15 years, the government continues to control a large share of economic activity: Government spending, at 53% of GDP in 2000, is the highest in the G-7. Labour conditions and wages are highly regulated. The government continues to own shares in corporations in a range of sectors, including banking, energy production and distribution, automobiles, transportation, and telecommunications.

The Welfare State there has been eroding for what, ten years under Chirac? Only reason that fuckface is still in office is because
A) The French people are smart enough to realize that the Economic Right is Right and that liberalization if needed (get rid of working hour restriction, lower minimum wage, BREAK THE BACKS OF THE UNION CARNEGIE STYLE)
B) He does nothing, which makes him even MORE attractive to the French.

But, as I said, the efects of Dirigisme (and all other Socilist policies, like the ghastly work hour restrictions) have left the French economy behind the American in most regards, and growing slower every year.


So, three of the largest economies in the world.



Also, what recession? The recession is largely over over here, and it's been over for a year in Japan, and never even touched China. Again, FUNDEMENTAL weakness of the European welfare state is the reason Europe has not been able to keep up with the big dogs (despite, technically, being the largest economic union).

 

[Brother None]

Ok, this is the fucking umpteenth time I'm typing up this message and I'm fed up, so pardon me if I'm a bit concise. It's the browser's fault.

Japan has an unemployement rate of 5% and a GDP real growth rate of 2.7%. I asked you to name economies HIT by welfare, not potentially to be hit because of outside influences. Japan is doing fine under welfare.

The Graying, however, will hit it hard. I've often noticed however that you Americans don't really seem to understand what the Graying is.

The Graying is a one-time huge hit on the economy. The baby-boom generation stops working, completely disbalancing the system. The capitalist system. This doesn't even have that much to do with welfare, though that means the people that continue to work have to pay more, it's simple capitalism; less workers is less money.

This is bad preparation from everyone's side, though. In the end people will have to work longer for simple capitalist reasons and the problem will fix itself, economically speaking. It's not a permanent crises where a small proportion of the population has to pay for the rest, as you describe it.

Your argument on Dirigism is false. I know this might be hard to get, but Dirigism is not a part of the welfare system. I know your American mind must lock onto Dirigism = socialist = welfare, but that's not how it works. Dirigism is a part of government-controlled markets, which has nothing to do with how much unsupported people get from these markets, which is what welfare is.

That granted, Dirigism was in place in France during the 30 Golden Years. Thay said, it's a flawed system, as are all human control on market economy systems tend to be. Again, has nothing to do with welfare.

Also, budget numbers are a tricky thing. After all it's liberalizations, I would hardly call France a major welfare state

Look at healthcare? Do you know who spends most on healthcare in the world? The USA. After that countries like France, Germany, Canada and Luxembourg

Even more cute, during the 30 years following WW II when France had an average GDP real growth ratio of 4.5% the French government were considerably more socialist than the one in place now.

In fact, the "crisis" in French economy seems to have come about during the last 15 years of liberalization. "That's just because it was handed down by previous governments" Bullshit.

That said, it's no small secret that welfare states are not the best method of making an economically strong nation. It is also no small secret that all attempts to turn welfare states into American-model nations has led to crisises (Great Britain, the Netherlands, France). At the same time, there's yet to be any proof that welfare states are completely unviable models in the future economy.

hough Bush'll make it hard with that new pension-plan. Man, talk about insane.

PS: The EU is not technically the largest economic union, it is the larget economic union period. It may not be the strongest, but calling it technically the largest is stupid. That said, we're also producing that which the US is consuming, which naturally means we lag behind as the US has to pick up the slack first, which it is not doing as there has been no significant increase in wealth in the US yet (despite GDP increases, strange innit?)

PPS: this reply is kind of crappy, but that's because we're partially talking past one another. I consider general welfare more important than economic growth. And like it or not, the big Scandinavian welfare states, but even the Netherlands and Belgium, do (or did) outrank the US in quality of life.

 

[Ashmo]

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.

Like the people in the USA?
Oh, right, poverty and employment aren't mutually exclusive.

::snip article::

Yeah, but in Germany such things lead to laws being revised when such incidents occure and get enough attention.
It's not breaking any law, but she might win a case at the constitutional court which would lead to the law having to be revised or removed.

It's not like our constitution would be overloaded by our laws.

::snip rambling::

Right. And the USA is doing fine right now.
Not to pop your bubbles or anything, but although the USA might have a lower unemployment rate the social situation is much more severe on your side of the pond than it is in Germany.
We're on our best way to rival you (which is not entirely unrelated to the past attempts at "Americanisation" of most European countries by some of our wackos in charge), but that doesn't exactly make your problems insignificant.

Not to mention the whole authoritarian and world-domination thing -- this is not exactly the right place to start another anti-American thread.
Talking of anti-country, what is your exact motivation for spending so much energy on trying to make the EU or Germany -- or whatever it is you are trying to bring to our attention -- look like it's about to become a 3rd world region?