That's a good thing. They've been violating the Euro treaties by running a surplus against other countries in a common currency area, but no one dared to say a word.
China is #1, the USA (all of it) is #2 and Germany (just Germany, not the EU) is #3. Have a look at their relative populations and appreciate that fully.
In the export destinations like Greece. For Germans it means supressed wages because they have to compete against Greek wages which means Germany has to sacrifice its productivity gains to provide low priced goods, effectively giving those productivity gains away for free the moment the export destination country predictably must go bankrupt.
Barring an economy from running a surplus seems like a terrible trade deal to me, so I wonder why the Germans would ever agree to such a rule.
If Germans are allowed to have a permament surplus, than someone MUST always have a deficit.
No country has a trade surplus/deficit of exactly 0, or even near 0. There's always at least half a billion going either way. If you know of any treaties that put limits on these numbers, I'd like to know what they are because I'm very curious about the intentions behind the people who would draft something like that.
Going by https://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/december/tradoc_... (link says 2013, but document says Q1 2022), Germany had an intra-EU trade surplus of about 0.2 billion euros. Germany is the closest to a perfect balance within the eurozone in the entire EU except for Bulgaria. Their surplus is almost entirely extra-EU, which isn't a problem for EU members.
The Greeks do hence they are massively in debt. No, they can't export their way out of debt because that would mean Germany has to export less and import more. Germany is supposed to be the workplace country and Greece must remain soulless suburbia with no job opportunities.
Greece can export to any country it wishes, if it has goods or resources that other countries want. If Greece can produce the Germans really want, they'll export to Germany all the way to an internal German trade deficit.
The entire EU would be quite happy if Greece turned into a workers' paradise tomorrow, but no other country is going to pay to fix the mess corrupt Greek governments have left behind unless the Greek situation threatens the stability of their own economies.
https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2018/number/3/ar...
"The rules established under the EU’s macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP)define a ceiling for current account surpluses of six per cent of GDP and stipulate that the three-year average for a country’s current account surplus should not exceed this ceiling.2 However, Germany has been running surpluses in excess of this figure for many years. Its most recent three-year average is eight per cent of GDP, while the 2016 figure was even higher, at 8.5%."
https://archive.nytimes.com/krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/0...
Of course, you could make the argument that it violated the spirit of the treaties.
Because Germany has renounced part of its independence and sovereignty by joining the EU, so now it has to do the patriotic thing and think of that larger collective. As a point of comparison, should New York do what is best for New York, or what is best for the country? At least sometimes, we expect New York to sacrifice its own interests and do the patriotic thing for the whole country. As was pointed out many times during the crisis years of 2008-2013, many of the problems in the EU exist because of its partial and unfinished integration. It is very difficult to have a unified currency without also having a unified fiscal policy. As others have pointed out, the EU cannot survive in its current state, either it breaks up or it deepens its integration and becomes a United States of Europe.
Is this enumerated in a treaty? Which law says this?
>As a point of comparison, should New York do what is best for New York, or what is best for the country? At least sometimes, we expect New York to sacrifice its own interests and do the patriotic thing for the whole country.
I live in the United States and I have never, ever, heard of this question being asked. Which thing is New York sacrificing for the rest of the United States?
https://www.intereconomics.eu/contents/year/2018/number/3/ar...
"The rules established under the EU’s macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP)define a ceiling for current account surpluses of six per cent of GDP and stipulate that the three-year average for a country’s current account surplus should not exceed this ceiling.2 However, Germany has been running surpluses in excess of this figure for many years. Its most recent three-year average is eight per cent of GDP, while the 2016 figure was even higher, at 8.5%."
That being said I have no idea what the OP was on about, it's not illegal, it's just stupid.
The idea being, why would Italy, France and Greece agree to open their market and give up their currencies (ie ability to devalue) in the face of the German juggernaut? A joint market would destroy French and Italian industry and in-debt Greece - as happened.
<rant> The Euro zone was a mistake. Its premise was solid - the europeans no longer had the ability to have colonies to steal resources from, so they sought to create a large enough market to be relevant and muscle themselves into decent prices.
It failed because the US quickly made sure the euro never seriously challenged the USD. Also, a continent that makes < 1.5 children/woman is not a going concern so no one has ever taken them seriously. Finally, the rise of China and India sealed the EU's fate. </rant>
It was rather the other way round: Germany was made to agree to the euro project as a concession for reunification.[1]
All in all, this seems to have been beneficial for a majority of normal people in the countries getting a stronger currency and for a minority of people in Germany, who export: Consequently, Germany’s wealth distibution tends to be the most unequal in the euro zone,[2] and its median wealth is slightly below that of Slovenia and significantly below that of France, Italy and Spain.[3]
[1] https://voxeurop.eu/en/you-get-unification-we-get-the-euro/
[2] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-wealth-idUSBREA1P...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_pe...
So the Germans accept the Euro in exchange for re-unification (France's biggest mistake IMO) Thats one negotiating point.
Second negotiating point: who's in charge of the Euro? Who's industrial interests are represented by the ECB? Germany needs cheap imports (strong currency) or its industry screeches to a halt.
So much wrong with that sentence.
The birth rate went that low (and lower!) but has been going up recently[0]. But even if total population was halving every generation, that’s only a concern if it’s sustained for many generations, and population forecasting (especially this simplistic) has never been particularly accurate over such periods.
Then there’s the second half. Europe has been vastly important worldwide from roughly the age of exploration to the end of WW2, and even then only stopped being temporarily because of active efforts by both of the two superpowers — who, despite arms reduction treaties, still have enough nukes each to destroy all settlements worldwide with populations over 150,000 [1] — and yet despite that the EU (less than the whole of Europe) has close to the same GDP (18 T) [2] as China (20 T) [3] and the USA (25 T) [3].
[0] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/eur/europe/fertility-r...
[1] https://www.reference.com/geography/many-cities-world-c25cce... and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_the_European_Union
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nomi...
I think the data you linked is prediction from year 2020 onwards, and there is no observed increase from 2013.
Who cares what the halving period is? You still have an inverted population pyramid. Have fun paying pensions. Even if you started popping 3 kids per woman today you still have 30 years before they become productive (debauchery during an Erasmus is not a productive use of time). How's Europe going to pay bills until then?
Btw, 3 kids / woman in Europe is a laugh - 70 years of technocratic rule have resulted in city infrastructure that are unlivable for "large" families. Sure, it's possible to have three kids in a two room 80 sq m apt, and I know people who have done so. But why would you if you have the qualifications to move abroad?
"Then there’s the second half. Europe has been vastly important worldwide from roughly the age of exploration to the end of WW2, and even then only stopped being temporarily because of active efforts by both of the two superpowers — who, despite arms reduction treaties, still have enough nukes each to destroy all settlements worldwide with populations over 150,000 [1] — and yet despite that the EU (less than the whole of Europe) has close to the same GDP (18 T) [2] as China (20 T) [3] and the USA (25 T) [3]."
I really dont understand how your point about nuclear weapons is germane to this discussion. Ill have to ask the French and Brits? Naw, Ill just ask the Germans who financed their welfare programs by gutting their defense budget safe under said nuclear umbrella.
As to Europe's post war relevance - Europe has no resources and the Asians have caught up, and surpassed, technologically. Where's Europe's competitive advantage?
Europe's GDP is not impressive. Actually, its trend is very bad. Look at Europe's share of world GDP as a function of time from the sage if Discovery. On top of that Europe's GDP is highly dependent on the tertiary sector, dumb things like "tourism" which has low margins and dulls the minds of the people involved.
Europe is not a going concern. Heck Im expecting a new debt crisis in the EU this year
As does the USA and China, with fertility rates of 1.7 (according to Google).
> Have fun paying pensions.
Pension ages are increasing. Germany is also encouraging immigration, but that's only going to affect Germany as a million across Germany is economically relevant but the same million across the entire continent isn't.
But, we also have improving tech for old age care as everyone saw this coming since the Japanese did it first, and anti-aging in lab rats is now at the "huh interesting" stage. Nothing's guaranteed of course, this is just to illustrate that everything can radically change for reasons you don't consider. Like a global pandemic or a land war in Asia.
> 70 years of technocratic rule have resulted in city infrastructure that are unlivable for "large" families. Sure, it's possible to have three kids in a two room 80 sq m apt, and I know people who have done so.
And as the population goes down, everyone still around gets more space.
> But why would you if you have the qualifications to move abroad?
Where? Europe is very varied from one country to another, but overall it's better than most places worldwide — while not as much as the USA, the USA doesn't seem to want immigrants, and conversely much better than China and India which you previously described with the sentence "Finally, the rise of China and India sealed the EU's fate".
> Ill have to ask the French and Brits?
Both of which have only enough to deter outside forces from destroying them, they didn't have enough military power to e.g. keep their empires.
> Ill just ask the Germans who financed their welfare programs by gutting their defense budget safe under said nuclear umbrella.
The modern state of Germany literally only exists because of the fall of the decline and fall of Soviet Union, allowing reunification. They felt safe for fairly obvious reasons, but that postdates the only period of European weakness since the age of exploration.
> Where's Europe's competitive advantage?
This is the only relevant question. I don't have an answer (software engineer not economist), but everything else you've said either doesn't matter or can't be treated as a long-term trend.
> Europe's GDP is not impressive.
The EU alone being the third largest on the planet isn't impressive? As you sometimes write of the continent and sometimes of the EU, I will also add that if Brexit had not happened the EU alone would be above China right now, and you can add another trillion for the EFTA. The biggest economic issue the continent has right now is that Russia and Ukraine are both in the continent, and each is likely to see order-of trillion dollar costs.
> Actually, its trend is very bad. Look at Europe's share of world GDP as a function of time from the sage if Discovery.
"Everyone else is catching up" is not a bad thing. If all else was equal, every nation would have a share of GDP equal to their share of population, which would put Europe at double the GDP of the USA and China at four times the GDP of the USA.
> On top of that Europe's GDP is highly dependent on the tertiary sector, dumb things like "tourism" which has low margins and dulls the minds of the people involved.
Tertiary sector includes tourism, but isn't limited to it. Tourists is 10% of EU GDP. Tourism includes museums.
Other things in the tertiary sector include education, IT, FIRE, management consulting, and public health.
It's generally seen as a good thing, and is more than half of both China's and India's GDP.
Because they couldn’t manage their currencies and always dreamt of low inflation, in a few words: they wanted the Mark. Calling it Mark would have upset the nationalists, so they made the Euro.
> The Euro zone was a mistake.
Outside of the eurozone, Italy would have gone bankrupt in the mid 2000s, Greece a few years later.
Typical Northern Protestant bigotry. As if Italians and Greeks don't have economics courses in college.
Italians, Greeks, etc would purposely devalue their currencies to effectively lower wages (which are sticky) wrt to international markets, making their exports competitive while manufactured imports more expensive. The French created the CFA (under the bayonet) to have a larger economic mass to play with (the most egregious post WW2 colonial abuse by Europe).
of course this policy results in (very well managed) inflation which results in the middle class saving through real estate, hence these countries' high rates of home ownership (Greece in particular).
So the single market (ie no protective tariffs) and a single currency are poison to Southern Europe's industry so why should the agree to it? They agreed under the condition that Germany's industrial appetites wouldn't be rapacious. Which was a great plan, after all when has Germany ever tried to swallow its neighbors? /sarcasm
For your information I am Italian, I won’t reply to the rest of your fantasy, but I have to say that I’m very surprised that this CFA thing is popular also outside Italian economic conspiracy websites.
> They agreed under the condition that Germany's industrial appetites wouldn't be rapacious.
So you are saying that when Italy joined the euro, they asked the Germans to slow down research and development and to artificially reduce the productivity of its industry? Or does “rapacious” mean that the Germans send assassins to kill good Italian managers? Are you implying that Italians are inherently less productive than Germans?
So was I until I grew out of it. What's your point?
"Are you implying that Italians are inherently less productive than Germans?"
... yes? The data is very clear about that including significantly less cars made per employee hour in FIAT's Napoli plant than in, say, Poland.
I didnt venture an explanation as to why Neapolitans make less cars, nor do I care. The role of Rome, or any government, is to represent the interest of its citizens.
If Napoli makes less cars because there's less capital invested or because they all get sick during the world cup is of secondary concern to me. My primary concern is that the internal market ensures my citizens are employed in a dignified labor (and not that story of a woman offered 200euros/month to work 6 days a week as a cashier)
"but I have to say that I’m very surprised that this CFA thing is popular also outside Italian economic conspiracy websites."
The CFA is not a conspiracy theory, ask Congo (or Gaddafi. Or do a HN search in the bottom of this page), and you'll find websites in all languages talking about it. Especially French, but Ive read websites in Spanish, and in English.
The only language I haven't read about the CFA is in Italian, but the Italian internet is... dull.
"Or does “rapacious” mean that the Germans send assassins to kill good Italian managers?"
I think German appetites are well known in Europe going back a millennia. Im hardly the first to note that the Germans have, through the EU, accomplished exactly what they've wanted what they've failed to do in a thousand years of warring.
"So you are saying that when Italy joined the euro, they asked...."
Read my original comment. I clearly state that I dont know if it was in the treaties or not, however it is a common complaint that there supposedly was an agreement. I then explained why that agreement would make sense, since no rational actor could possibly enter a single market without some safeguards.
That I’m not Nordic nor Protestant.
> ... yes? The data is very clear about that including significantly less cars made per employee hour in FIAT's Napoli plant than in, say, Poland.
So, is it a racial thing? The Italian is inherently less productive because he doesn’t have the German spirit?
> The CFA is not a conspiracy theory, ask Congo (or Gaddafi.
I’m not sure Gaddafi opinion would be relevant.
> I think German appetites are well known in Europe going back a millennia. Im hardly the first to note that the Germans have, through the EU, accomplished exactly what they've wanted what they've failed to do in a thousand years of warring.
So the Germans are back at the Reich thing and Frau Merkel is a cover up because we are scared of people with moustaches.
> Read my original comment. I clearly state that I dont know if it was in the treaties or not, however it is a common complaint that there supposedly was an agreement. I then explained why that agreement would make sense, since no rational actor could possibly enter a single market without some safeguards.
So you read it on a blog and you think it makes lots of sense but you can’t explain how? What are these safeguards supposed to be? If Audi makes too many Audis than Frau Merkel has to drive a Fiat Punto?
I don’t think you should continue with this.
This implies that Italians are dumb and that Germans are still in the business of making evil plans that fail at the end, because good always triumphs.
Go look at the econ stats circa 2000 of Veneto, Lombardy and Piedmont and compare them to Germany's.
init(clever);
Obama's observation was that you can't run a trade surplus with Southern Europe for decades and then get all surprised when they run out of money to pay you with. In a similar vein, you can't have EU cross-border banks without a EU cross-border insurance deposit scheme, because then one bank can potentially drown a small country, which is what happened during the Eurozone crisis.