France to form new government

[dphantom]

I would agree with you on the first part. Italy, Spain, and France have been engaging in severe austerity which has badly damaged their economies. The strange thing about your statement is that they WERE following Germany's recommendations, that's been the whole problem.



You realize that growth continued in the US for most of what is considered the Great Depression, right? Regardless of what definition you want to use of a depression, what is undeniable is that the Eurozone is now experiencing worse economic performance than it did during the years of the Great Depression.

That's how bad austerity has been for their economies. Thanks, Germany!

They should have let the Germans run their economies then. So much more efficient the Germans.

I am quite aware of the fact that growth at times did occur during the period of time generally agreed to be defined as the Great Depression. Of those 8-9 years, roughly 5 were spent in 2 very severe recessions.

As I said, some economies, notably Greece, can be considered to be in a depression. But simply because the GDP has not returned to pre-recession levels does not make this a depression.

It can become a depression but is not one yet. But a very painful period of very slow growth and a number of economies who seem unwilling to make very hard choices to bring their fiscal house in order.

 

[Jhhnn]

Performance has been poor because of the policies of Italy, Spain and France have not been conducive to growth. If they followed Germany's model, they would be doing better.

And it still is not a depression in any classical sense. Growth continues even though it is very slow. A reporter's opinion is one thing, I will stick with accepted definitions - and there are several - that describe a true depression.

How lame. Germany has a trade surplus within the Eurozone, so of course they benefit from hard money. It's not like all the countries in the Eurozone can do that, however.

 

[Phynaz]

So much for all the people that use France as an example for how the US should be run.

Socialism for the win?

 

[fskimospy]

So any decrease in budget deficits is austerity? I thought austerity was supposed to be inhumane slashing of entitlement budgets in order to punish the poor.

Austerity is defined as policies that governments implement for the purpose of reducing budget deficits. Aren't you glad that you've learned the real definition of the word instead of whatever silly ultra-right definitions you had in your head?

If that's all true then what was all the press about the socialist leadership of France rejecting austerity for the last several years?

It's unclear to me why you would think that evidence showing what French officials actually did could be rebutted by statements of French officials saying what they would like to do.

So when was the socialist government of France pushing austerity when they said they weren't pushing austerity because austerity that Sarkozy said he wasn't doing until he was didn't work?

The budgets submitted by first Sarkozy and then Hollande were expressly designed to close the budget gap through increases in taxes and spending cuts.

These are public documents, and as I already linked you can see the results of them quite clearly in the economic data. I assume that when faced with these facts you will now accept that France has undertaken significant austerity, correct?

 

[dphantom]

This is what "austerity" looks like in France.

The most significant issue that hampered their growth was tax increases. Taking money out of the private sector is the kiss of death for economic growth.

they should have taxed and spent more instead of the austerity policies.

oh wait........

 

[fskimospy]

They should have let the Germans run their economies then. So much more efficient the Germans.

I am quite aware of the fact that growth at times did occur during the period of time generally agreed to be defined as the Great Depression. Of those 8-9 years, roughly 5 were spent in 2 very severe recessions.

As I said, some economies, notably Greece, can be considered to be in a depression. But simply because the GDP has not returned to pre-recession levels does not make this a depression.

It can become a depression but is not one yet. But a very painful period of very slow growth and a number of economies who seem unwilling to make very hard choices to bring their fiscal house in order.

By that I believe you mean further austerity. How do you square this with the fact that the economic data shows that austerity itself is responsible for this poor economic performance?

Look at the relationship between austerity and GDP growth and tell me why you think this is a good idea again?

 

[fskimospy]

they should have taxed and spent more instead of the austerity policies.

oh wait........

This is what "austerity" looks like in France:

ie: it's the dictionary definition of austerity.

 

[Knowing]

Austerity is defined as policies that governments implement for the purpose of reducing budget deficits. Aren't you glad that you've learned the real definition of the word instead of whatever silly ultra-right definitions you had in your head?

Why is it that when I disagree with people on P&N I become "ultra right?" Also, if you're going to pull something straight from the first sentence of the wikipedia article, at least quote the whole sentence and reference the source.

It's unclear to me why you would think that evidence showing what French officials actually did could be rebutted by statements of French officials saying what they would like to do.

What evidence?

The budgets submitted by first Sarkozy and then Hollande were expressly designed to close the budget gap through increases in taxes and spending cuts.

So what you're saying is that the way to implement austerity is to say you're not doing austerity then blame austerity when what you're doing doesn't work the way you sold not austerity in the first place? Makes perfect sense.

These are public documents, and as I already linked you can see the results of them quite clearly in the economic data. I assume that when faced with these facts you will now accept that France has undertaken significant austerity, correct?

I still disagree. The evidence you have presented coupled with the quotes I've presented require that we reconcile socialists and lying with austerity.

 

[First]

This is what "austerity" looks like in France.

The most significant issue that hampered their growth was tax increases. Taking money out of the private sector is the kiss of death for economic growth.

Nominal figures with absolutely zero relative measurement?

Oh DSF, you're so cute sometimes.

 

[fskimospy]

Why is it that when I disagree with people on P&N I become "ultra right?" Also, if you're going to pull something straight from the first sentence of the wikipedia article, at least quote the whole sentence and reference the source.

You don't become ultra right by disagreeing with people, you become ultra right by saying ultra right wing things.

What evidence?

The budgets submitted by the French government and the subsequent decline in the deficit. I'll take this moment to note that you have supplied exactly zero evidence for your position.

So what you're saying is that the way to implement austerity is to say you're not doing austerity then blame austerity when what you're doing doesn't work the way you sold not austerity in the first place? Makes perfect sense.

This is an interesting question! Austerity is so damaging to an economy that the "best" way to implement it would be as incompetently as possible so it doesn't actually happen.

Again, you're relying on the quotes of politicians while I'm relying on the actual budgets they implemented and their effects on government deficits. It remains unclear to me why you would think that evidence showing what French officials actually did could be rebutted by statements of French officials saying what they would like to do.

I still disagree. The evidence you have presented coupled with the quotes I've presented require that we reconcile socialists and lying with austerity.

There's no requirement for that whatsoever. Quotes from politicians are meaningless when you have the actual policies they implemented. So again, assuming that you create opinions based on evidence I imagine you will now be acknowledging that France has engaged in significant austerity.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

This is what "austerity" looks like in France:

ie: it's the dictionary definition of austerity.

Looks like "austerity" is working!

 

[Knowing]

You don't become ultra right by disagreeing with people, you become ultra right by saying ultra right wing things.

So what did I say that was ultra right? How many times am I going to have to ask questions before you give me an answer?

The budgets submitted by the French government and the subsequent decline in the deficit. I'll take this moment to note that you have supplied exactly zero evidence for your position.

So French socialists are kinda crap at being socialist. I can accept that. Where do they have good socialists?

This is an interesting question! Austerity is so damaging to an economy that the "best" way to implement it would be as incompetently as possible so it doesn't actually happen.

What if they were implementing austerity incompetently such that it wasn't actually austerity? Historical entries on wikipedia reference cuts extensively (back when the democrats wanted to eat the rich and were pushing for taxes to close up the deficit). The NYT had a game IIRC. This anything that reduces the deficit is austerity and austerity doesn't work definition seems to lead to a single path: Spending without abatement until it works. Do you have time to opine on a solution that isn't austerity?

Again, you're relying on the quotes of politicians while I'm relying on the actual budgets they implemented and their effects on government deficits. It remains unclear to me why you would think that evidence showing what French officials actually did could be rebutted by statements of French officials saying what they would like to do.

It has a lot to do with wondering why French socialists would elect such a crap socialist.

There's no requirement for that whatsoever. Quotes from politicians are meaningless when you have the actual policies they implemented. So again, assuming that you create opinions based on evidence I imagine you will now be acknowledging that France has engaged in significant austerity.

If talk is cheap then why isn't anyone criticizing Obama for being a neocon and continuing or expanding terrible Bush policies?

 

[fskimospy]

Looks like "austerity" is working!

It's working to decrease budget deficits! GDP and debt/GDP... not so much.

Or even their debt/GDP ratio, which is supposed to be the whole point of austerity:

Austerity has been an unmitigated catastrophe.

 

[fskimospy]

So what did I say that was ultra right? How many times am I going to have to ask questions before you give me an answer?

You've said tons of things that are extremely right wing. Say fewer of them and I'll stop calling you that.

So French socialists are kinda crap at being socialist. I can accept that. Where do they have good socialists?

Irrelevant tangent.

What if they were implementing austerity incompetently such that it wasn't actually austerity? Historical entries on wikipedia reference cuts extensively (back when the democrats wanted to eat the rich and were pushing for taxes to close up the deficit). The NYT had a game IIRC.

Sadly, they weren't implementing it incompetently, as shown by the evidence. I don't know what the Democrats have to do with this other than as an irrelevant tangent.

This anything that reduces the deficit is austerity and austerity doesn't work definition seems to lead to a single path: Spending without abatement until it works. Do you have time to opine on a solution that isn't austerity?

The solution was/is most certainly a broad and sustained increase in government spending until market conditions improve.

It has a lot to do with wondering why French socialists would elect such a crap socialist.

Maybe you can make a new thread about French electoral politics to discuss this?

If talk is cheap then why isn't anyone criticizing Obama for being a neocon and continuing or expanding terrible Bush policies?

People do criticize Obama for it, and this is another irrelevant tangent. Try to stay on topic.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

It's working to decrease budget deficits! GDP and debt/GDP... not so much.

Or even their debt/GDP ratio, which is supposed to be the whole point of austerity:

Austerity has been an unmitigated catastrophe.

Their debt-to-gdp ratios are much better than ours and we "stimulated" our economy. Using debt/gdp ratio as your basis in rationale...it appears that "stimulus" in the US was an "unmitigated catastrophe" as well.

 

[dphantom]

Their debt-to-gdp ratios are much better than ours and we "stimulated" our economy. Using debt/gdp ratio as your basis in rationale...it appears that "stimulus" in the US was an "unmitigated catastrophe" as well.



interesting the latter 2 images. one is of austerity and one is of stimulus. I wonder which is which...

 

[fskimospy]

Their debt-to-gdp ratios are much better than ours and we "stimulated" our economy. Using debt/gdp ratio as your basis in rationale...it appears that "stimulus" in the US was an "unmitigated catastrophe" as well.

That doesn't make any sense. The goal of stimulus is to reduce unemployment and grow the economy, it is not to reduce deficits. Austerity's explicit goal is to reduce deficits and debt/GDP ratio.

Why would you judge stimulus efforts by the goals of austerity? That makes no sense. That's why austerity is so bad though, not only does it badly affect the economy but it fails to even accomplish its stated goal.

Now let's look at what stimulus is supposed to do:

Look at the results and compare them to France and the Eurozone. The difference is night and day.

 

[dphantom]

austerity measures can squeeze out inefficiencies in an economy that may be painful in the short run but make the economy stronger when it does emerge from a recessionary interval. By not making adjustments even if painful, we may be setting ourselves up in the US for another bubble as we saw with the Internet and then the housing problems.

 

[brycejones]

damn is there not a subject that Eskimopie is not a "expert" in?

I view Eskimo as the Carl Rove of our forums.

So you're annoyed that someone is better read than you? That's really mature.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

austerity measures can squeeze out inefficiencies in an economy that may be painful in the short run but make the economy stronger when it does emerge from a recessionary interval. By not making adjustments even if painful, we may be setting ourselves up in the US for another bubble as we saw with the Internet and then the housing problems.

Stimulus sacrificed future gdp growth...time will tell how much it will hurt us.

 

[dank69]

Stimulus sacrificed future gdp growth...time will tell how much it will hurt us.

Time will only tell you what you want it to tell you. Until then, it will remain "time will only tell."

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That doesn't make any sense. The goal of stimulus is to reduce unemployment and grow the economy, it is not to reduce deficits. Austerity's explicit goal is to reduce deficits and debt/GDP ratio.

Why would you judge stimulus efforts by the goals of austerity? That makes no sense. That's why austerity is so bad though, not only does it badly affect the economy but it fails to even accomplish its stated goal.

Now let's look at what stimulus is supposed to do:

Look at the results and compare them to France and the Eurozone. The difference is night and day.

Debt/gdp ratios improved significantly under austerity which is the goal of such programs. Yet you say it was an "unmitigated catastrophe". Why would one judge austerity efforts by the goals of stimulus?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Time will only tell you what you want it to tell you. Until then, it will remain "time will only tell."

We have a ton of foreign debt...if/when interest rates rise, we'll see what we've done to our future economy much more plainly.

 

[dphantom]

We have a ton of foreign debt...if/when interest rates rise, we'll see what we've done to our future economy much more plainly.

to me that may very well be our next bubble. Once interest rates start rising, we may have a very hard set of choices to make financially as a country.

 

[fskimospy]

Debt/gdp ratios improved significantly under austerity which is the goal of such programs. Yet you say it was an "unmitigated catastrophe". Why would one judge austerity efforts by the goals of stimulus?

One wouldn't! Unless you're reading the charts differently than I am France's debt/GDP ratio has continued to get worse.