Dreams of European Growth: The European Commission is seeking adjustments in the 2015 budgets of France and Italy and while the governments of both countries have embarked on economic reforms, they are dealing with challenges that pre-date the launch of the euro.
Germany, France and Italy experienced increases in debt and unemployment in the 1990s, which ended with the launch of the euro in 1999.
France last had an annual budget surplus in 1974 but it was only in the early 1990s during the genesis of the euro project, that it allowed its economy to come off the rails with its sovereign debt as a ratio of GDP surging by almost two-thirds in 1990-1995.
The Italians had lost control of their economy earlier and the Basel I agreement, which went into effect in 1990, provided additional leverage for countries that wished to expand debt as the new rules for banks lowered to zero banks’ capital requirement on sovereign debt – no matter how risky.
Eurozone countries like Italy, Spain and Greece have had trade deficits with Germany since at least 1980 - 20 years before the euro launch. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has said that the euro is a continuation rather than a structural break and the Fund's statistics show that since 1999, Germany's trade surplus with the rest of the world has grown faster than its surplus with the other Eurozone countries - and faster still with European nations that have not adopted the euro.
In 1980 Greek trade with was almost in balance. Since then the value of German imports from Greece hardly changed until 2005 while exports from Germany quadrupled.
In 1979, West Germany's exports of manufactured goods were double France's level. In 1988, 44% of the British trade deficit was with West Germany.
In 1981/82, 40% of the deteriorating French trade balance was related to West Germany.
Over the past hundred years, the German economy only during the Hitler regime (1933-45) did not have a reliance on exports. Between 1910 and 1913, exports accounted for 17.8% of Germany's GDP. Their share declined to 14.9% in the second half of the 1920s and fell to only 6% in the second half of the 1930s, but by 1950 accounted for 9.3% of West Germany's GDP. Once the postwar economic boom got under way, exports rose to 17.2% of GDP in 1960, to 23.8% in 1970, to 26.7% in 1980, and 25% in 1990.
In 2013 the following were the export/GDP ratios: Germany 51%; Spain 34%; UK 31%; Italy 30%; Greece 29%; France 27%; US 14% and Ireland 108% in 2012.
The product mix, company structure, and both the number and skills of its exporters, make Germany an exports powerhouse.
France has run a continuous trade deficit since 2002. In 2013 and 2013 Italy achieved trade surpluses after a decade of deficits, partly because the poor economy has depressed imports.
So began a short article in the September 1961 American Economic Review titled "The Golden Rule of Accumulation."
Edmund Phelps, the author, won the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences in 2006 for his work on growth and in 1961 he had proposed a simple rule for a nation's wealth to grow and provide the highest standard of living for its citizens - present and future. The rule specified how much people had to work, save, and invest today so that future generations could be at least as well off as they were.
In the same 1961 issue of the American Economic Review Robert Mundell, another American economist, outlined a theory of “optimum currency areas” - it details the conditions that the countries in a monetary union have to have—or quickly institute—to share a single currency profitably.
Mundell suggested that that the single currency should not lead to persistently high unemployment rates in some parts of the monetary union, nor to unacceptably high rates of inflation in others. He argued for both capital and labour mobility.
In 1999, the year of the launch of the euro, Mundell was awarded the Nobel Prize for “his analysis of monetary and fiscal policy under different exchange rate regimes and his analysis of optimum currency areas.”
The single currency began with the three biggest economies representing two-thirds of the region's GDP, facing economic problems.
In a major report in 2012, 'Golden Growth: Restoring the lustre of the European economic model,' World Bank economists said that many economists still consider the golden rule the most basic proposition of optimum growth theory. "It is the inspiration for the title of this report, and forms the roots of its policy prescriptions. Following the golden rule means that today’s Europeans work and consume just so much that future generations do not resent them for consuming too much, nor pity them for consuming too little. Keeping to the rule is perhaps the most telling sign of a country’s — or a continent’s — economic maturity."
They said Europe’s growth is already different from other economies’ in two aspects, reflecting its cultural and demographic maturity. Perhaps more than others around the world, Europeans want economic growth to be smarter, kinder, and cleaner, and they are willing to accept less for “better” growth. With the inevitability of ageing, Europe does face the new challenge of falling populations.
The report looks at long-term growth in Europe, paying special attention to the last two decades, and identifies what needs to be done to assure continued prosperity in the decades ahead. It assesses the six principal components of the European growth model: trade, finance, enterprise, innovation, labour, and government. Its main findings: most countries in Europe are doing well in trade and finance, many in enterprise and innovation, but few are doing well in labour and government. So Europe needs many changes to make governments and labour markets work better, fewer changes to foster innovation and productivity growth in enterprises, and fewer changes still to reform finance and trade. Stalled productivity, declining populations, and unsustainable fiscal imbalances have made many changes urgent.
To revitalise the European growth model, the report makes three sets of recommendations: restart the convergence machine that has allowed poorer countries become high income economies; rebuild “brand Europe” that has helped the region, with one-tenth of the world’s population, account for a third of the global economic output; and reassess what it takes to remain the world's lifestyle superpower, with the highest quality of life on the planet.
The report says that between 1950 and 1973, Western European incomes converged towards those in the United States. Then, until the early 1990s, the incomes of more than 100m people in the poorer southern periphery—Greece, southern Italy, Portugal, and Spain—converged to those of advanced Europe.
Starting with the first association agreements with Hungary and Poland in 1994, another 100m in Central and Eastern Europe were absorbed into the European Union.Another 100m in the candidate countries in Southeastern Europe are now benefiting from the same aspirations and similar institutions that have helped almost half a billion people achieve the highest standards of living. If European integration continues, the 75m people in the Ukraine and other countries of the Eastern Partnership will profit in similar ways.
Indermit Gill, the lead author commented: "Europe spends more on social protection—pensions, unemployment insurance, and social welfare—than the rest of the world combined. European governments spend about 10% of GDP more than counterparts in other parts of the world, and almost all of the difference is social protection. For many countries in Europe, this has become unaffordable. Combined with demographic pressures and weakened work incentives, this fiscal burden is now a drag on growth.”
According to the report, Europe will need to make big changes in how it organises labour and government, because of pressing demographic trends and persistent budget deficits. With a rapidly ageing population and falling fertility and without changes in employment, immigration, and pension policies, Europe will lose about one million workers each year for the next five decades and Europe’s labour force is projected to shrink from 325m to 275m.
At the same time, Europeans have been reducing how much they work. Today, Americans work an extra month compared with the Dutch, French, Germans, and Swedes, and work noticeably longer than less well-off Greeks, Spaniards, Hungarians, and Poles. Men in Poland, Turkey, Hungary, and France retire more than 8 years earlier than in the mid-1960s. By 2007, French men expected to draw pensions for 15 more years than they did in 1965, Polish and Turkish men more than a dozen. This puts enormous pressure on public finances, already strained by the costs of servicing large public debt.
Europe will have to work on many fronts to deal with impending labour shortages: increasing the competition for jobs, improving labour mobility, fixing how work and welfare are facilitated, and rethinking immigration policies. These changes will need a new social consensus.
“When done well, reforms to labour markets and social protection systems mean that Europeans can work shorter hours per week and fewer weeks per year,” said Indermit Gill. “But it is impossible to balance public accounts if people also work fewer years over their lives.”
According to the Joint Research Centre (JRC) of the European Commission, over 50% of all US firms in the Top 1,000 global R&D spenders in 2009, were founded after 1975, in Europe the figure was 18% and in Japan just 2%.
© Copyright 2011 by Finfacts.com