Tuesday, November 30, 2010

EU's Sovereign Debt Crisis And The Centralization Of Power Within The EU.



Ireland has recently accepted/forced to accept a 85 billion euro bailout and Portugal, Spain, Italy are falling like dominoes. The debt contagion is spreading throughout the peripheral nations and will eventually make its way to the core. This is a very good video titled "Von Rompuy:Pin-up boy for Eurosceptics" showing a member of the UK Independence Party Nigel Farage's message to the EU president and those that still wish to keep the European Union dream alive: "The dream is up". Farage's rant against the EU points out that current events in the EU could be leading to the end of the EU and if it doesn't then it will lead to people rallying around nationalism and violence because "when you rob people of their democracy and their identity. Then they are left with nationalism and violence".
(Picture) European Union: European Day poster, 2000. Photograph. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Web. 30 Nov. 2010

And continuing on the ideal that the current events in the EU are leading to the fragmentation of the EU here is a good article from CNBC,

A few weeks ago, I wrote about the possibility of a political breakup of the European Union. Just before Thanksgiving, I wrote— not ironically — about whether a crypto-breakup of Europe might already be underway in the sovereign debt markets.
Today, a new idea that is at least as unsettling: Fragmentation in Europe, not just along national lines, but along class and economic lines as well.

Michael Pettis, a Professor of Finance at Peking University and a frequent writer on international economics wrote in a recent blog post, in reference to Europe's most economically troubled nations:

'Political radicalism in these countries will rise inexorably as a consequence of rising class conflict. As Keynes pointed out as far back as 1922, the process of adjusting the currency and debt will primarily be one of assigning the costs to different economic groups, and this is never an easy or conflict-free exercise.'

This is indeed a frightening scenario. If, as Milton Friedman suggested in 1965 'We are all Keynesians now,' perhaps it is time to think through some of the darker ramifications for Europe.[...] In the United States, we tend to underestimate the significant ideological grip socialism held in Europe for much of the 20th century.[...] While those examples might indeed be outliers, the policies of many European Union nations are influenced by the fundamental structure of their governments: parliamentary democracies.[...] The upside of the parliamentary system is the promise of an intellectual openness to a broader spectrum of political opinion. The downside is the possibility that small parties—and with them fringe movements—can accumulate a share of power disproportionate to their representation in the general population. (In an example from the opposite side of the political spectrum, the broad Swedish left is apoplectic over the rise of a political party alleged to have racist roots.)

In short, due to cultural, historical, and structural factors at play in Europe, it seems impossible to rule out the possibility of social fragmentation along class and economic lines. In certain European intellectual circles, that oft-quoted line from The Communist Manifesto[sic] —that 'The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles'—is more than just a ancient relic. It's a political truism.


As Farage notes in his speech, hopefully the Euro project will be destroyed by the markets before this happens. Looking at the fact that these PIIGS nations are receiving bailouts, it doesn't seem that the EU leaders are unwilling to let the free market work. There is too much political capital invested in the concept of the EU.
(Picture) European Union. Flag. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Web. 30 Nov. 2010
(http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic-art/196399/92316/Flag-of-the-European-Union).


A good article from the Ludgwig Von Mises institute states that these debt crises is leading to a centralization of power in the EU,
Finally, the bailout leads to a centralization of power in the European Union. European politicians already indirectly determine the Irish budget. For instance, they tell the Irish government to increase taxes, such as the sales tax. They also put tremendous pressure on the Irish government to abandon its policy of a low corporate-tax rate, a policy that many European politicians regard as 'fiscal dumping."' Here, at last, the Irish government resisted.

In the short run, one may find some positive aspects of the determination of fiscal policies by Brussels or indirectly by Germany. When Germany or Brussels tells Spain, Greece, or Ireland to reduce their deficits, the result for people living in these countries may be a reduced size of the government in the short run. But such centralization of power in the EU will likely prove to be disastrous for liberty in the long run. The European interventionists now claim that because there is one central bank we need one economic policy.

One factor that frequently hampers governments' attempts to increase their power via increases in taxation or regulation is the competition of other governments. If taxes get too high in a country, economic agents will flee to countries with lower tax rates (such as Ireland, with its low corporate tax rate). If economic policy is centralized in the European Union, this limitation on government power is eliminated. European politicians already aim at a harmonization of fiscal policies and talk about benchmarks for tax rates. Once fiscal policies are harmonized, there will be a tendency toward an increase of power in Brussels and then toward an increase of tax rates throughout the eurozone.

The euro might be saved, but at the cost of building a strong, central European state, as national policymaking is transferred to Brussels in exchange for bailouts. The turmoil produced by the euro will then have served as an instrument for the development of a centralized state in Europe.
This article also describes the problem with the concept of the EU project: it created the incentives for small EU nations to run up massive deficits.

This article notes the Ireland bailout is not about Ireland but it is about the European project,
What you need to know about Ireland's economic crisis is that it's not about Ireland: a small country of slightly more than 4 million people and an economy of roughly $200 billion. It's about Europe. For decades, Europe has pursued two great political projects. One is the democratic welfare state, designed to improve economic justice through various social safety nets. The other is European unity, symbolized by the creation in 1999 of a single currency -- the euro -- now used by 16 countries. The fact that both contributed to Ireland's troubles suggests that Europe could be on the brink of a broader crisis.

Ireland's problems are not isolated, and if they portend a wider meltdown, this would mark a dangerous new phase in the global economic turmoil that began in 2007. Europe represents about one-fifth of the world economy, comparable to the U.S. share. If the continent relapsed into recession, worldwide economic nationalism would intensify, as the already-weak global recovery faltered and countries competed for scarce sales. For example: Europe buys about 25 percent of America's exports, which would suffer. Protectionism and predatory behavior would increase.

Europe's problems can easily spread to the rest of the world. America could possibly have a very similar situation to the EU with its individual states. The concept of the Euro is being put before the economic well being of the individual EU nations and the whole European economy.

The events in the EU illustrates how that the concept of socialism is an economic failure and how that it leads to centralization of power among various governmental entities. In the case of the EU, it is the result of the attempts by them to prevent the economic collapse that is the inevitable result of socialism. If the concept of the EU does not end but continues to be pursued, it will lead to a more centralized European governing body that is built on very shaky economic ground that will possibly collapse into a very different system of government. Friedrich Hayek warned that socialist planning leads to situation where "totalitarian powers will get the upper hand",
I have never accused the old socialist parties of deliberately aiming at a totalitarian regime, but' What I have argued in this book[The Road To Serfdom], and what the British experience convinces me even more to be true, is that the unforeseen but inevitable consequences of socialist planning create a state of affairs in which, if the policy is to be pursued, totalitarian forces will get the upper hand. I explicitly stress that 'socialism can be put into practice only by methods of which most socialist disapprove' and even add that in this 'old socialist parties were inhibited by their democratic ideals' and that 'they did not posses the ruthlessness required for the performance of their chosen task'.
As Farage notes in his address to the EU president, democratic principles are being put aside for the purpose of maintaining the EU. From what I gleam from the various commentary that I have heard on business shows like CNBC's "Squawk box", the situation in Europe is leading to an inevitable collapse of the EU system. What system of government will emerge out of the possible future economic collapse of the European socialist model?

6 comments:

  1. Good summary of where things stand. I think things will go one of two ways: it seems to me that Germany, and to a lesser extent France, are the ones putting up the money to bail out the PIIGS. As I've said before, the question is, how long and how much will the German citizen be willing to donate to the cause of holding the EU together? I think the more the other countries bow to Germany's bidding, the more and longer Germany will be able to control what's going on in the rest of Europe. Don't be deceived: this isn't about a supernational organization lording it over Europeans, this is about Germany attaining its Reich over Europe, perhaps even unintentionally. Accomplishing economically what they couldn't accomplish militarily. And the thing is, they'll deserve it if they're bankrolling the rest of Europe. So, there will be this tension: the rest of Europe needing German cash vs Germany's willingness to dish it out and what they want in return.

    As the whole EU project is really nothing more than an attempt to out US the US, I think it is destined to collapse, once enough people see that the only reason they are going through these contortions is to please their elites' appetite for glory vs the US. If being European is more painful than being Irish, the Irish will choose to remain Irish. If their standard of living crashes because their economy is tied to the whims of the Euro and the Bundesbank (my guess at the name of the German central bank, may be called something else), they will realize that they need to separate from the Euro, so their currency can float in relation to it.

    How this translates to the US: I can't wait for California to come begging to the Republican controlled House of Representatives, looking for cash. As opposed to Germany digging deeper in their pockets to bailout Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain, and finally Italy, I think the taxpayers in the rest of the US will tell California to piss off.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hahaha. I like your last paragraph.

    Good post. Just another example of socialism being bad.

    ReplyDelete
  3. On Bud-D's point that "As I've said before, the question is, how long and how much will the German citizen be willing to donate to the cause of holding the EU together?"
    I don't think that there is really any choice in the matter for Germany or France when it comes to bailing out the PIIGS. Germany, English, and France's banks are heavily invested in the PIIGS. If the PIIGs go down then the whole EU's economy goes down. From the Mises article, "Second, it was important to bail out Irish banks because English, French, and German banks had invested important sums in Ireland. Irish losses could eat up the capital of European banks and bring down the whole European banking system and its government allies." And don't forget that Germany and France both have very high levels of debt. All of the EU nation's economies are so interconnected that there is really no choice but for the larger EU nations to bail out the smaller nations to prevent the collapse of the EU whole economy to include Germany and France. In Ireland's case general elections were not permitted to take place unless they dealt with this issue. This is not really about a supranational organization or Germany plotting away at some scheme, although it is the result of the system they created: their actions are being forced upon them by external circumstances and they are acting out of necessity to prevent a very real economic collapse of the EU and the global economy.

    The whole EU ideal was good in theory and would have brought about economic prosperity to the Europe if it were for the fact that Europe is composed of mostly socialist nations and the lack of ficial discipline on the part of all the EU nations.

    On California and other states being bailed out, there won't be a choice in the matter. The option of letting these states and their public pensions fail won't be on the table. Look at the TARP program and the bailout of the banks. When the moment arrives to bail out these states, the public and our politicians will be scared and forced into bailing them out to prevent a much greater economic problem. Also the Republicans are honesty looking like they will be a very big disappointment. I will wait until I make a final judgement.

    This is more than an example of how socialism fails. Take a look at the bigger picture: America and the other major economies of the world are in the very same situation as Europe is in. What is happening the EU will be played out in some way in the rest of the world, to include America. What is happening in the EU is the centralization of power at the same time its economy is continuing to be built on an unsound economic foundation. The EU is a portent of things to come.

    ReplyDelete
  4. From what I have read about the situation in the EU, Europe doesn't have a choice in forming a more centralized/powerful supranational organization, or a stronger EU, to avoid the collapse of all of its members economies. "The fact is that we are now very near the point, at last, when Europe’s policymakers will be faced with either setting up a fiscal union or sitting back and watching as our banking system implodes around us.'" http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a3e04c2e-fcd7-11df-ae2d-00144feab49a.html#axzz16uLaDVJk
    Prof Stephen Haseler is talking about Sir, Wolfgang Münchau solution to the EU situation. I don't know anything about these people. But I agree with how they framed the choice that is before the EU.

    I don't think we can try to ascribe any nefarious scheming to the formation of a stronger EU on the part of the EU or Germany, although they will benefit. Although they created the situation unintentionally, they don't really have a choice in how to react to the situation if they want to avoid a lot of economic pain. Although not allowing Ireland to hold general elections unless they voted for what the EU wants is a little interesting. I am not sure what Farage was referring to in his speech in the post.

    I do think that a stronger EU with a more unified economic system will emerge from this situation. Taking Hayek's observations on what socialism lead to in mind and the fact that the EU is based on a socialist model, this could lead to the creation of a system that will be very different from what the EU is aiming at. And in the case of Ireland being denied the right to hold general elections, if it is true, shows how a system like the EU leads to and requires that people exercise power that they might not normally use or that they might feel uncomfortable using. What is happening in Europe will happen in the rest of the world as it is based on the same socialist model and is in the same situation as the EU.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Your points are good, and certainly have a good chance of happening. I think there is also a good chance that Germans will become fed up with funding the rest of Europe, because that's what this amounts to. I don't deny that there are powerful reasons to motivate organizations to hold the Euro and the EU together, but, I think there are more powerful reasons for citizens of individual countries to create more independence.

    We'll see if something similar to the Tea Party arises in Germany or the other countries.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The US has been pushing for and is willing to support a larger EU bailout through the IMF. http://www.cnbc.com/id/40454469
    The interesting thing is that America has already helped to bail out the EU through the IMF. Pushing for a larger bailout would continue the downward economic spiral in the EU. Why does America want to bail the EU out? To prevent a slow down in the American economy.

    From reading the second article in the post and watching all of the demonstrations, I don't think enough Europeans would be willing to watch all of their government benefits dry up as a result of the dissolution of the Euro project. To stop bailing out the nations would mean an economic downturn for the EU and a lot of economic pain. A conservative in Europe would be considered a liberal here in America. And quite frankly, the tea party is starting to look disappointing along with the Republicans.

    And it does not matter how fed up the Germans become. They have no choice in bailing out the smaller EU nations because of the above mentioned reasons: economic pain. I do think that the Germans being fed up will continue to strengthen the centralization of power in the EU. If Germany and France are paying for these smaller nation's mistakes, then they will want more say in how these nations are run. We have already seen this.

    President Bush passed all of these bailouts because he was told by his economic advisers and the Fed that if he didn't bail out the banks then it would have caused a global Great Depression and that this would led to social disintegration. I don't know if that was true that not bailing them out would led to such a thing, but if trusted people told me that I would have passed the bail out. The point is that bailing out the nations is not a matter of perceived choice for these politicians. Given the character of the European people, an economic downturn over their would led to a major issue with their social stability.

    ReplyDelete