Showing posts with label increased. Show all posts
Showing posts with label increased. Show all posts

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Why Germany will lose export earnings if Greece leaves the Euro

German and British politicians and IMF officials are fond of talking to the Greeks as if they were doing them a favour by offering any debt write down or bail out at all, even on the extreme austerity terms they're offering - and that Greeks can take it or leave it.

The dominant view seems to be that Germany and other northern EU members were doing Greece a favour by letting it into the EU and the Euro-zone, or that Greece is so backward or corrupt that it should never have been allowed in to either. This is very far from the truth. In fact Germany gains massive amounts of trade income as a result of weaker economies' membership of the Euro.

Greek membership of the EU and the Euro-zone has actually boosted German exports to Greece and to the rest of the world massively - and if Greece leaves the Euro German exports both to Greece and to countries outside the EU will fall and so German export earnings will fall.

With Euro currency zone membership the first reason is that before the Euro was introduced as a common currency the German Deutschmark was worth many Greek drachma. This meant that German exports were too expensive for most Greeks to buy, so they would be more likely to buy cheaper products made by Greek or other producers or companies. With the introduction of the Euro the price of German exports was effectively lowered, so Greeks bought more German products, increasing German exports and export earnings.

The second reason is that the value of the Euro is based on the average economic strength of the entire Euro-zone, making it worth less than the Deutschmark, which had a value based on the very strong German economy. As a result, with the introduction of the Euro, German exports to countries outside the EU also became cheaper to buy for consumers in other countries - once again leading to an increase in German exports and export earnings.

If Greece leaves the Euro the crisis will likely spread to, at the least, Portugal and Spain - and possibly to Ireland and Italy, meaning all those countries might leave the Euro. They would then return to their own, weaker, currencies, effectively increasing the price of German exports to buyers in those countries and reducing German exports.

On top of that each weaker economy leaving the Euro will increase the value of the Euro, meaning exports from Germany and any other remaining Euro-zone countries worldwide will rise in price to buyers in other countries, reducing exports for Germany and any other remaining Euro-zone countries.

With EU membership the reason is free trade between a relatively strong developed economy and a barely developed one. German and British and French industries and companies built up over centuries of protection and subsidy before World War Two and decades of investment (including the lion's share of Marshall Plan aid) after it, are free to export to Greece and Portugal and Spain with no barriers up to protect Greek or Portugese or Spanish industries and companies or allow them to develop.

The Graph at the top of the page is from Antonio Fatas' post on Insead blog

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

A non-binding consultative referendum on independence or increased devolution for Scotland would still have democratic legitimacy

David Cameron and the UK government can certainly refuse to make the results of any referendum including increased devolution legally binding under UK law, but they can’t prevent the Scottish government holding a consultative, non-binding, referendum. It would be impossible to deny the democratic legitimacy of the result.

 The only questionable part of the SNP’s plan is allowing 16 and 17 year olds to participate. This would give the Unionist parties an open goal to say the results of the referendum weren’t valid, since 16 and 17 year olds can’t vote in UK General elections.

Labour and the Lib Dems have joined with the Conservatives in insisting any referendum must be a straight choice between the status quo or independence, yet both parties supported devolution in the 1997 referendum. How can they argue that Scottish voters be entitled to choose to devolve some domestic powers, but not others, especially when polls show 67% want more powers devolved to the Scottish government including full powers to decide how taxes raised in Scotland are spent? (1) – (2)

Devolving more powers could reduce the amount of taxpayers’ money that Westminster parties could hand to billionaire and corporate patrons. If Scottish governments gained the powers to issue bonds, borrow money, or spend a higher share of taxes raised in Scotland, PFI gravy trains here might end.

If Scots are refused the increased devolution option, more will vote for independence. This would lose the UK revenues from oil and gas off Aberdeen and Shetland. UK governments fiddle the figures to pretend an independent Scotland would be bankrupt, by assuming oil revenues would be split proportionally to population. In fact under international law they would be split by proximity, giving Scotland far more than it’s 10% of the UK population.

An independent Scotland would be a small neutral country on the North-Western edge of Europe, so would not need a nuclear deterrent any more than Norway or Sweden, and would avoid the costs in money and lives of involvement in US-led wars. These costs would then be paid solely by the rest of the UK. So Scotland would be better off and the UK (unless it gets a much better government with better policies) much worse off.

We might even avoid future financial crises. Both Norway and Sweden avoided any crisis or recession and both of their economies are still growing, as they never de-regulated their financial sector to the degree that the Conservatives (from Thatcher’s 1986 ‘Big Bang’ on) or Labour governments in the UK have.

Is Cameron trying to provoke Scots into independence in the hope the Coalition will have a permanent majority if 50 Scottish Labour MPs are gone?

If so this is unlikely to work.

Labour’s last three majorities exceeded the number of Labour MPs elected in Scotland (3) – (8). Three quarters of Lib Dem voters surveyed at the time of the last election and again recently no longer support the party (9). Cameron should realise that independence will hurt his party far more than increased devolution would.


 (1) = The Politics Wire / British Future 10 Jan 2012 ‘Support for devolution across Britain is growing as ‘national’ identity outweighs feelings of ‘Britishness’ ’, http://www.ipsos-mori.com/newsevents/blogs/thepoliticswire/985/Support-for-devolution-across-Britain-is-growing-as-national-identity-outweighs-feelings-of-Britishness.aspx , ‘During this period, support for independence in Scotland has grown. This is illustrated in recent Ipsos MORI polls and is reinforced by our latest survey for British Future, which shows around a third of Scots now backing a breakaway from the UK….At the moment, however, a majority of Scots prefer to remain part of the UK, albeit favouring substantial new powers for the Scottish Parliament. Ipsos MORI polling in Scotland shows that over two-thirds would vote in favour of giving Holyrood further legislative and tax-raising powers.’

(2) = STV News 21 Dec 2011 ‘Most Scots back complete revenue raising powers for Holyrood’,http://news.stv.tv/politics/291223-most-scots-back-complete-revenue-raising-powers-for-holyrood/

(3) = BBC News Last updated Sep 2005 ‘Blair win historic third term – majority of 66’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/vote_2005/constituencies/default.stm

(4) = BBC News 23 May 2005 ‘Election 2005 – results: Scotland’,http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/region_7.stm (shows 41 Labour MPs elected in Scotland)

(5) = BBC News ‘Vote2001: Results & Constituencies’http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/default.stm ; Labour majority 167

(6) = BBC News ‘Vote 2001 : Results & Constituencies UK Breakdown – Scotland’ http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/results_constituencies/uk_breakdown/scotland_full_1.stm , – shows 56 Labour MPs elected in Scotland in 2001 General Election

(7) = BBC News ‘Vote 2001: Election battles 1945-1997’, http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/vote2001/in_depth/election_battles/1997_over.stm , ‘In 1997 Labour…Tony Blair's New Labour had gained a staggering 179-seat overall majority.’

(8) = Denver, David (1997) ‘THE 1997 GENERAL ELECTION IN SCOTLAND:AN ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS’ in Scottish Affairs, no.20, summer 1997 (table 1 on page 2 shows 56 Labour MPs were elected in Scotland in 1997), http://www.scottishaffairs.org/backiss/pdfs/sa20/SA20_Denver.pdf

(9) = Independent 06 Jan 2012 ‘Lib Dems lose three out of four of their voters ’, http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/lib-dems-lose-three-out-of-four-of-their-voters-6285640.html

Saturday, January 17, 2009

Operation Kill Children to Boost Poll Ratings Achieves Partial Success

Pity it Tripled deaths from rocket attacks; but there are glimmers of hope

We can all relax now that Operation Kill Children to Boost Poll Ratings has achieved partial success. Barak and Livni now have their chances to be the next Israeli Prime minister who bombs and starves Gazans rather than Benjamin Netanyahu. That’s a triumph for humanity (1,2).

Cynics point out that the offensive actually increased rocket attacks. The Israeli Foreign Ministry website shows one Israeli civilian was killed by rocket attacks in the six months before the offensive, while three were killed in the three weeks during it (3).The cynics miss the point though. Reducing rocket attacks was never the aim.

More Palestinians have been radicalized by a thousand deaths and Israeli spokesmen have been able to claim that it’s the ‘undemocratic’ Hamas, not their own government, which has refused to negotiate. That may be the opposite of the truth and Hamas may be elected, but who cares. Israel “won”;the Labour-Kadima governing coalition matched Likud in the polls; the untermenschen Israeli Arab parties are banned from the next election (edit - a law later over-turned in Israeli courts) and the settlement of the West Bank continues. Palestinians are again relegated to their assigned roles of being ethnically cleansed and used as an enemy to rally Israeli voters against (4 – 11).

The Israeli government can also continue to propagandise about being the "only democracy in the Middle East", even while (yet again) trying to overthrow the democratically elected government of one of the other two (the Palestinian Authority) by force and repeatedly trying the same in the other (Lebanon).

There are some glimmers of hope though - Barack Obama has announced his administration will talk to Hamas, which would make it hard for the Israeli government to justify not acccepting offers of talks, especially if Obama threatens a cut in financial aid and arms shipments behind the scenes, as even George Bush Senior did when he was President (12).

Many people have also begun their own boycotts of Israeli produce and some company directors, including, I'm proud to say, one of my own relatives, have said their firms won't trade with Israel as long as the slaughter of civilians continues. So even if governments fail to put sufficient pressure on the Israeli government their citizens might yet do it.


(1) = Haaretz 31 Dec 2009 ‘Poll: Most Israelis support continuing Gaza military op’,
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1051852.html

(2) = BBC News 08 Jan 2009 ‘Israelis back Gaza action - for now’,
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7816794.stm (see last two sections under sub-headings ‘Ratings War’ and ‘High Stakes’)

(3)= Israel Foreign Ministry ‘Victims of Palestinian Violence and Terrorism since September 2000’, http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Terrorism-+Obstacle+to+Peace/Palestinian+terror+since+2000/Victims+of+Palestinian+Violence+and+Terrorism+sinc.htm

(4) = Telegraph 09 Feb 2006 ‘Hamas offers deal if Israel pulls out’,
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/1510074/Hamas-offers-deal-if-Israel-pulls-out.html

(5) = Guardian 4 Mar 2006 , ‘Hamas says peace possible at Moscow talks’, http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1723217,00.html

(6) = Guardian 22 Jun 2006 ‘Climbdown as Hamas agrees to Israeli state’ http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1803184,00.html

(7) = Ynet news (Israel) 22 Dec 2007 ‘Report: Hamas weighing unconditional truce with Israel’, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3485394,00.html

(8) = IHT 23 Dec 2007 ‘Israel rejects Hamas request for cease-fire talks’,
http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/12/23/africa/hamas.php

(9) Guardian.co.uk 21 April 2008 ‘We can accept Israel as neighbour, says Hamas’,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/21/israel

(10) = Khaled Hroub (2006) ‘Hamas : A beginner’s guide’ , Pluto Press, London, 2006

(11) = Haaretz (Israel) 13 Jan 2009 ‘Israel bans Arab parties from running in upcoming elections’, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054867.html

(12) = 09 Jan 2009 'Obama camp 'prepared to talk to Hamas'',
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/08/barack-obama-gaza-hamas