germany vs US

[Perchoutofwater]

How about same taxes...no Government services except for military and other things expressly spelled out in the Constitution? It's time to start saying no to the people for their so-called "wants". Tough titties.

 

Then after we overcome this burden, we cut taxes to pay for that every year. No more, no less. :dreaming:

 

I'd love to see this happen, but it never will, because people have realized they can vote them selves money. It just proves how prophetic Mr. Franklin was.

[Azazello1313]

bump

 

Figures released on August 13th showed that the German economy grew by 2.2% (an annualised rate of close to 9%) in the three months to the end of June, well above even the most optimistic forecasts.

[SEC=UGA]

bump

 

We shoulda nuked those Krauts when we had the chance...

[TimC]

Az, I have a feeling you don't like this administrative's economic policy of "Hey, it could be worse". Why don't you jump on the Ursa and bushwacked bandwagon and accept the fact that forcing your children and grandchildren into slave labor after you're dead and gone will be a good thing so you won't have to hurt so much today?

 

You're not hurting today, are you Az? Tell me....how do you feel?

[wiegie]

The most obvious explanation for the surge in exports and investment in the second quarter was the depreciation of the euro during that time period. (A depreciation of a currency makes its cheaper for foreigners to buy that country's goods while at the same time makes it harder for domestic residents to purchase foreign goods.)

 

I'll bet $100 with anyone who thinks Germany's growth rate will be this high in the third quarter.

[Azazello1313]

I'll bet $100 with anyone who thinks Germany's growth rate will be this high in the third quarter.

 

9% annualized? that's a pretty high number to match. I'm not really interested in trying to stay on top of these kinds of bets, but a more reasonable wager would be whether the supposedly stupidly austere germans have higher 3Q growth than we do here in the US. but something tells me that's a wager you'd back away from.

[detlef]

How about same taxes...no Government services except for military and other things expressly spelled out in the Constitution? It's time to start saying no to the people for their so-called "wants". Tough titties.

 

Then after we overcome this burden, we cut taxes to pay for that every year. No more, no less. :dreaming:

Whatever you do, just please don't mess with the model of fiscal conservancy that is and always has been our military. Because this financial mess has absolutely nothing to do with pumping insane amounts of money into the black hole that is an unwinnable war in Iraq.

Edited August 13, 2010 by detlef

[wiegie]

9% annualized? that's a pretty high number to match. I'm not really interested in trying to stay on top of these kinds of bets, but a more reasonable wager would be whether the supposedly stupidly austere germans have higher 3Q growth than we do here in the US. but something tells me that's a wager you'd back away from.

take a look at German government spending as a percentage of GDP and then compare it to US government spending as a percentage of GDP and see what conclusion you want to draw. (The conclusion is that German "austerity" is a result of having high German taxes to pay for high levels of German government spending.) With naturally high levels of government spending, they are more insulated from overall economic downturns than are countries where governments play less of a role.

[Azazello1313]

take a look at German government spending as a percentage of GDP and then compare it to US government spending as a percentage of GDP and see what conclusion you want to draw. (The conclusion is that German "austerity" is a result of having high German taxes to pay for high levels of German government spending.) With naturally high levels of government spending, they are more insulated from overall economic downturns than are countries where governments play less of a role.

 

not the point and you know it. the germans have been getting lectured by the likes of paul krugman and the obama adminstration for not pumping enough fiscal stimulus into their economy.

 

just read krugman's op-ed, then some of the background on the g20 obama/merkel dustup, and then look at the latest numbers on the german economy compared with ours and draw your own conclusions.

[WaterMan]

Whatever you do, just please don't mess with the model of fiscal conservancy that is and always has been our military. Because this financial mess has absolutely nothing to do with pumping insane amounts of money into the black hole that is an unwinnable war in Iraq.

 

It was a brilliant idea by that monkey to cut taxes on the rich while fighting 3 wars.

[wiegie]

not the point and you know it. the germans have been getting lectured by the likes of paul krugman and the obama adminstration for not pumping enough fiscal stimulus into their economy.

My very strong expectation is that they wanted Germany to enact fiscal stimulus so that it wasn't a one-way stimulation street from the US to Germany--not so much that they were worried about the German economy. Basically, they wanted Germany to be a good neighbor rather than just enjoying spillover benefits from the US stimulative policy.

 

Reference key terms for those who care: Mundell-Fleming Model; Hamada Diagram

Edited August 13, 2010 by wiegie

[detlef]

It was a brilliant idea by that monkey to cut taxes on the rich while fighting 3 wars.

For the sake of actually talking about what happened, dude cut taxes on everyone, not just the rich.

[Azazello1313]

My very strong expectation is that they wanted Germany to enact fiscal stimulus so that it wasn't a one-way stimulation street from the US to Germany--not so much that they were worried about the German economy. Basically, they wanted Germany to be a good neighbor rather than just enjoying spillover benefits from the US stimulative policy.

 

Reference key terms for those who care: Mundell-Fleming Model; Hamada Diagram

 

ahh, I see. we saved the german economy with our stimulus, and they wrecked ours by being concerned about deficits. funny how that works, and how all data, no matter how blatantly contradictory, are manipulated to point toward the white whale of MORE STIMULUS!!!

[Brentastic]

everyone needs to bite the friggin bullet!!! higher taxes, lower wages and pensions!! or this country is toast. im sad for my children's future.

No, the real solution is banking/monetary reform. Until we rid ourselves of the Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking, nothing will improve. The NWO is real and the more we keep bickering over policies and other crap that doesn't really matter (just keeps the masses focused on everything EXCEPT the true problem), the further we get manipulated into the global elite's plan.

 

Having a monetary system based on debt and allowing private banks to control the issuance of currency and the manipulation of our money supply is the root cause of any global economic problems.

[TimC]

C'mon Brent, the dollar has only dropped like 95% in real value and we now have fake manipulated interest rates at 0% since the Federal Reserve was created. It's not like they're not doing a heckuva job.

[Azazello1313]

 

pretty good article about this, more nuanced and "fair and balanced" than you would think coming from the weekly standard.

[bpwallace49]

pretty good article about this, more nuanced and "fair and balanced" than you would think coming from the weekly standard.

 

Very good article. It also re-iterates the points that 1) Germany has a much better theory of social nets than we do. and 2) US companies view human capital as disposable, while Germany would rather subsidize a work slow-down versus a gutting of employees.

 

It is obvious by the results that teh German theories have been better. That would involve drastic changes in the US safety net, and a change in behavior by US businesses. And that isnt a bad thing . . . .

 

 

ASIDE: Az, I truly love how you incessantly bump your own posts, even after weeks and weeks of inactivity. Just like your groundhog thread, your constant use of "thread masterbation" you make yourself feel better is always amusing.

[Azazello1313]

Very good article. It also re-iterates the points that 1) Germany has a much better theory of social nets than we do. and 2) US companies view human capital as disposable, while Germany would rather subsidize a work slow-down versus a gutting of employees.

 

and it also gives demographic and economic reasons why this makes sense in germany but likely wouldn't work well here.

 

Az, I truly love how you incessantly bump your own posts, even after weeks and weeks of inactivity. Just like your groundhog thread, your constant use of "thread masterbation" you make yourself feel better is always amusing.

 

if there's a new article or event I come across that relates to an old thread, I generally think it better to update the old thread than to start a new one. it makes things tidier.

[Ursa Majoris]

Very good article. It also re-iterates the points that 1) Germany has a much better theory of social nets than we do.

Not necessarily better, just more comprehensive. It is an open question as to whether the Germans will ultimately be able to maintain their security blankets. What they do have is a much more realistic and less polarized view of politics and reality, IMO.

[Azazello1313]

Not necessarily better, just more comprehensive. It is an open question as to whether the Germans will ultimately be able to maintain their security blankets. What they do have is a much more realistic and less polarized view of politics and reality, IMO.

 

it's not that their whole system works better than ours. compare, say, unemployment rates over the last few decades and they don't look so great. but compare their policies for dealing with this recession to ours and there is a stark divergence in outcomes. I think there is something to the argument that having greater safety net policies in place beforehand created more of a counter-cyclical buffer for them. that is a serious argument that can't be ignored. but while that may have softened the blow for them, it doesn't really provide any explanation for their robust recovery compared to ours. if you can't look at the whole situation and see a powerful argument in favor of fiscal discipline, and against a keynsian debt-party, then you're being willfully obtuse.

[bpwallace49]

it's not that their whole system works better than ours. compare, say, unemployment rates over the last few decades and they don't look so great. but compare their policies for dealing with this recession to ours and there is a stark divergence in outcomes. I think there is something to the argument that having greater safety net policies in place beforehand created more of a counter-cyclical buffer for them. that is a serious argument that can't be ignored. but while that may have softened the blow for them, it doesn't really provide any explanation for their robust recovery compared to ours. if you can't look at the whole situation and see a powerful argument in favor of fiscal discipline, and against a keynsian debt-party, then you're being willfully obtuse.

 

I dont know if "greater safety net policies" are need, but definitely better designed safety net policies are warranted. Greating a generation used to having everything provided is not the answer (and that is the American underclass. I really, really, really like how business still employs people, but reduces hours, and then the gubment makes up the difference. Seems a hell of a lot better for the business to save training costs, and cheaper for the gubmnet than a full unemploymnet compensation.

 

I also liked in the article where it touched on the US as a constant consumption economy that does nothing to change the reckless behavior that got us into this mess in the first place. Conspicuous consumption aint always the answer . . .

 

Unfortunately there has to be some massive changes to the system for it to happen, which means it never will with the cowardly pu$$ies in BOTh parties begging for campaign donations and votes every few years.

[Ursa Majoris]

it's not that their whole system works better than ours. compare, say, unemployment rates over the last few decades and they don't look so great. but compare their policies for dealing with this recession to ours and there is a stark divergence in outcomes. I think there is something to the argument that having greater safety net policies in place beforehand created more of a counter-cyclical buffer for them. that is a serious argument that can't be ignored. but while that may have softened the blow for them, it doesn't really provide any explanation for their robust recovery compared to ours. if you can't look at the whole situation and see a powerful argument in favor of fiscal discipline, and against a keynsian debt-party, then you're being willfully obtuse.

I wasn't actually arguing with you although you seem to automatically assume I was. The point I was making is that their social safety nets are very expensive. They don't seem to mind that though because they have a different view of those things from us. European Social Democracy in general views higher taxes that bring higher levels of cushion against down periods as a generally good thing.

 

So far as the different approaches went, I'm pretty sure there's considerably more to it than stimulus vs non-stimulus, as the article (which I believe I read weeks ago, or something very close to it) points out.

[jetsfan]

US Budget

 

US Budget

Receipts: 2,105 billion

Outlays: 3,518 billion

 

Deficit: 1,413 billion

 

[Azazello1313]

I also liked in the article where it touched on the US as a constant consumption economy that does nothing to change the reckless behavior that got us into this mess in the first place. Conspicuous consumption aint always the answer . . .

 

Unfortunately there has to be some massive changes to the system for it to happen, which means it never will with the cowardly pu$$ies in BOTh parties begging for campaign donations and votes every few years.

 

the way to change reckless behavior is to let the negative ramifications run their course. taxpayer bailouts just have the effect of privatizing the profits of risky behavior and socializing the risks. that just encourages MORE reckless behavior. the other thing bailouts do is just reinforce the old economic patterns that no longer work.

 

the way out IMO is to let bad businesses fail, to let bad mortgages foreclose, etc. get the worst behind us, rather than throwing taxpayer money away pushing the worst forward. "Policy needs to do what it can to encourage economic activity in growing occupations rather than to freeze it in declining ones."

[wiegie]

I think there is something to the argument that having greater safety net policies in place beforehand created more of a counter-cyclical buffer for them. that is a serious argument that can't be ignored.

I made exactly that same argument in a different thread in August, but you ignored it

Germany has large counter-cyclical policies built into its economic system as already in the form of substantial social safety nets that they pay for through higher taxes. Hence when things go bad, they are better positioned to handle it without having to enact a large stimulus plan.

Edited November 1, 2010 by wiegie