I’m not an expert on tariffs, and I am also not a big fan of them. Our economy is deeply intertwined with other economies, so tariffing will immediately raise production costs, leading to higher prices and less competitive exports. As a policy maker, I would be afraid that such a move would be the nail in the coffin for our economy.
Furthermore, being part of the EU single market means trade policy is largely set on EU level.
Let’s hope that the current efforts turn out to be effective. And thank you for the lively exchange :)
Ah, I get you. Agreed
You make a good point, and I wouldn’t disagree with it. However, your argument doesn’t really contradict what I said earlier. I still think it was a good thing that Germany took in so many refugees. Perhaps not primarily from an economic perspective, but from a humanitarian one.
The goal should not be to reduce exports, but to make growth less dependent on them. If you want to diversify demand, you would aim to strengthen domestic demand components. Meaning: higher household purchasing power, stronger private domestic investment, public infrastructure spending.
This needs a bit of context.
One reason Germany is where it is today is how wages developed in the early 2000s. In Germany, wages grew much more slowly than productivity, which kept labor costs low. This helped German companies compete internationally but also limited how much money many people had to spend domestically. At the same time, the Agenda 2010 (Set by former chancellor Gerhard Schröder, right before the Merkel era) reformed the labor market in favour of the employer’s side. This expanded flexible and low-paid jobs. As a result, Germany became very competitive in exports while also developing a relatively large low-wage sector. Basically: Germany followed a “keep your own people poor, so that the factories they are working in have lower production costs and can export their stuff cheaper”-doctrine.
This could (maybe?) be reversed by increasing the role of domestic demand. That would mean stronger wage growth, lower taxes on lower and middle incomes, and stronger collective bargaining coverage. Governments should also expand public investment in infrastructure, housing, and education. But I also think that it will be very hard to reverse that trend.
True words. But those are two different kinds of diversification. Germany is highly diversified in terms of what it produces and exports, which is what the Atlas of Economic Complexity is all about. My point refers to how economic growth is generated. Germany relies heavily on external demand, meaning exports drive a large share of growth while domestic consumption plays a comparatively smaller role. So the economy is diversified in its industrial structure, but less diversified in its demand structure.
Latest study on Immigration in Germany that I read came to the conclusion that (fiscally speaking) recent migration has a net-zero effect on the German economy. The desired economic stimulus that came with migration in the past is smaller than expected and roughly covers the states expanses. So I doubt that polands strict Migration Rules have anything to do with that.
I think the problem lays here: Germany is a rich country, but its people dont usually have much money to spend. Our wealth comes from export and is not driven by domestic purchasing power. Or in other words: Germans are underpaying themselves. This created quite strong of a chokehold where we are highly dependent on other countries buying our stuff. How is that going, now that every state drives a protectionist agenda? All, while China is flodding the market with cheap alternative goods. Germany simply failed to diversify it’s economy a long time ago.
I’m learning Dutch with Babel. I like the App a lot, and it genuinely does it’s best to keep the learning process exciting.
Only downside are the costs.
I wonder. How can European politicians look at the US and their domestic ICE-problem. They see how unwanted ICE is, how much it hurts the republicans approval rating. The republicans approval rating has diminished further and further, partly (!) because of this. And EU Leaders are like… Yeah let’s also do this. Will be a good idea!
🙄
It’s about time. Since the icelandic people are so dependent on fishing, I would even be fine with it, if they got some kind of special deal that protects their domestic fishing waters.
At this point, Hungary is actively working against our interests. We desperately need a mechanism to exclude such dysfunct democraties / rogue member states from the bloc.
Yeah, I think you are right. Thank you!
Of course, and occasionally I also poop in the shower. It’s always funny to stomp it down the drain.
Hey everyone :) I see that I am being downvoted by some. I’m not here to convince anyone of anything, but I’m willing to learn myself. What did I do wrong?
A little bit weird to include Japan, but honestly Im fine with that.
Thank you, I learned something new today.
Hm. Somewhat reminds me of another aggressor that attacked a country about 4 years ago. They also needed to downplay the costs of war for the domestic audience, bc even a part ofthe russian populus didnt want war back then. Didnt stop their government. Just as it didnt stop The US government right now. The US and russia are somewhat hard to distinguish lately.
This is the correct answer. There are no permanent US owned bases on French soil. In the past, US forces have been temporarily deployed to French facilities for exercises or joint operations, but as far as I know, this is not the case right now.
France always had a somewhat sceptic view when it came to being dependent on the US
Amazing. Thank you very much!