А. Меркел (обновено) - най-опасния немски политик след Хитлер...или спасителят на модерна Европа ..
Отиди на страница:
| ....една арогантна статия от The New Statesman, само за сведение, не е нужно да се коментира ... явно всички искат Германия да продължи да дава парите и да не пита много, много ... The German Chancellor is terminating growth and pushing us towards a new Depression. By Mehdi Hasan Published 20 June 2012 Which world leader poses the biggest threat to global order and prosperity? The Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Wrong. Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu? Nope. North Korea’s Kim Jong-un? Wrong again. The answer is a mild-mannered opera fan and former chemist who has been in office for seven years. Yes, step forward, Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, whose solution to Europe’s financial crisis – or lack thereof – has brought the continent, and perhaps the world, to the edge of a second Great Depression. “World Bank warns that euro collapse could spark global crisis”, read the headline on the front of the Observer on 17 June. With apologies to Mike Godwin and his eponymous law, Merkel is the most dangerous German leader since Hitler. Her eight predecessors – from Konrad Adenauer to Gerhard Schröder – presided over a manufacturing miracle at home and the rehabilitation of Germany’s reputation abroad. Under Merkel, however, the country finds itself isolated once again, loathed and feared in equal measure. Cartoons in the newspapers of Germany’s neighbours have depicted the chancellor with a Hitler moustache or wearing a spiked, Bismarck-era military helmet. Commenting on the phenomenon, the columnist Jakob Augstein observed: “Her abrasive pro-austerity policies threaten everything that previous German governments had accomplished since World War II.” Merkel, Augstein rightly noted, is “a radical politician, not a conservative one”. Neighbourhood bully Merkel did not cause the financial crisis; that (dis)honour still belongs to the world’s “top” bankers. But her deficit fetishism and obsession with spending cuts are exacerbating the continent-wide debt-and-growth crises that threaten to upset more than six decades of pan-European unity and stability. Then there is her bullying tendency. The majority of Greeks voted on 17 June either to delay or to cancel the EU-imposed austerity plan; up popped Merkel the next day to warn: “No departures can be made from the reform measures . . . We have to count on Greece sticking to its commitments” – and to slap down her foreign minister, who had suggested that the EU might give Greece more time to do cuts. Merkel prefers to fiddle as Athens burns – and Madrid and Rome, too. Youth unemployment in Spain and Greece is hovering around 50 per cent; in Italy, a third of 15-to-24-year-olds are out of work. Riots beckon as Europe’s far right attracts new supporters. It is ironic that the leader of a nation paranoid about and offended by any mention of its Nazi period seems so relaxed about the rise of anti-austerity, neo-Nazi parties across the EU, from Marine Le Pen’s National Front in France to Greece’s black-shirted Golden Dawn to the fascists of Jobbik, now the third-largest party in Hungary’s parliament. Merkel’s supporters argue that this is unfair. She is, they say, standing up for hard-working Germans who are weary of bailing out their feckless southern European neighbours. This is nonsense. First, figures released by the OECD show that the “lazy” Greek worker labours for 2,017 hours per year, which is more than the average in any other EU nation – and more than 40 per cent longer than the average German works. So a little less Schadenfreude, please. Second, it isn’t just southern Europeans who are revolting against fiscal sadism. In May, Merkel’s Christian Democrats suffered a humiliating defeat in an election in Germany’s most populous state, North Rhine-Westphalia. It was the party’s worst result in the state since the Second World War. Ordinary Germans are starting to acknowledge that austerity isn’t working. But Merkel won’t budge. She is a purveyor of the conventional wisdom which says that the economy is like a household that can’t borrow or spend more than it earns. But economies are not households – or credit cards! – and common sense tells us that the solution to a downturn caused by a prolonged drought in demand is not to reduce demand further (by slashing spending). History teaches us that the Great Depression wasn’t helped by Herbert Hoover’s cuts in the US and, in pre-war Germany, it was mass unemployment, not hyperinflation, that propelled Hitler to power in 1933. Fiscal self-flagellation In a study published in 2010, analysts at the International Monetary Fund found just two cases, out of 170 examples across 15 advanced economies between 1980 and 2009, in which cuts in government spending turned out to be expansionary for the economy overall. They concluded: “Fiscal consolidation typically has a contractionary effect on output.” Merkel’s insistence on fiscal self-flagellation, her unwillingness to countenance any fiscal stimulus by Germany or an easy-money policy by the European Central Bank, have pushed depressed countries such as Greece further into depression. The recent announcement at the G20 summit in Mexico that Merkel may now be willing to allow eurozone institutions to buy up the debt of crisis-hit member countries is too little, too late. This isn’t just about geopolitics or macroeconomics. Europe’s austerians have blood on their hands. Suicide rates are up by 40 per cent in Greece; the birthplace of western democracy is being remorselessly reduced to the status of a developing country. Meanwhile, Merkel, as the US economist Robert Kuttner wrote earlier this month, “continues to pursue Germany’s narrow self-interest . . . [because] Germany benefits from the rest of Europe’s suffering in two ways – expanded exports and dirt-cheap money”. In denial and bent on austerity über alles, Merkel is destroying the European project, pauperising Germany’s neighbours and risking a new global depression. She must be stopped. Mehdi Hasan is the author of the ebook “The Debt Delusion” (Vintage Digital, £3.74). For the New Statesman's position on the Eurozone crisis, read our leader here. | |
Редактирано: 3 пъти. Последна промяна от: проф. дървингов |
| ...материал за размисъл, преди утрешния ден, когато не очаквам да се случи нещо съществено... German commentators warn that fundamental questions must be answered at Thursday's EU summit. ... Chancellor Angela Merkel used uncommonly stark language on Tuesday when she rejected the idea for common euro bonds by saying Europe would not share total debt liability "as long as I live." But German media commentators have drawn some comfort from a blueprint for a radical revamp of the euro zone's architecture presented this week by the "gang of four" European presidents: European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, Euro Group President Jean-Claude Juncker and European Central Bank President Mario Draghi. The ideas would entail a dramatic loss of national sovereignty through the establishment of a central authority with power to demand changes in individual members' national budgets, as well as a "medium term" move towards euro bonds, as well as a banking union with a single authority that would insure banking deposits and have the power to shut or recapitalize banks directly, with help from Europe's permanent bailout fund, the European Stability Mechanism. Merkel's partners are pushing her to accept some form of collective debt issuance to ease the pressure on ailing states such as Spain and Italy, whose bond yields have risen to unsustainable levels in recent weeks. German commentators say EU leaders will have to grasp the nettle and agree to at least the basic framework of a complete overhaul of the euro system if they want to save the single currency. Many agree with Merkel that euro bonds are the wrong answer, and that American calls for Germany to throw money at the problem won't solve the crisis. All countries will have to accept a loss of sovereignty to make the currency work in the long term -- and in the medium term, says one commentator, the European Central Bank should take a bigger role in tackling the crisis. Center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: "Politicians like to dodge answers to the big questions because they are so risky. But politicians must now answer the euro question before it resolves itself with the collapse of Europe's currency: How much are you prepared to pay to keep the currency? The honest answer is this: If Europe's strong west and north want the euro, they will have to pay more for it. It will be expensive, not just for German taxpayers. At the very least, the wealthy regions of Europe will have to take on higher risks on behalf of the ailing states. Before that, the taxpayers will have to answer the question whether they want to keep the euro. Is this currency the best one for them? The honest answer is yes." "For economically strong countries like Germany, the euro opened up the markets of their neighbors for a lasting boom. To sever all the financial ties among the 17 member states after a euro collapse would cause immeasurable damage which would threaten Germany's jobs miracle. That's why it is the best thing to save the euro with transitional transfer payments." "But ... every policy of providing aid must follow the logic that it tackles the cause of the crisis -- otherwise it will just cement the problem. Aid must only come in return for reforms, and that means economic modernization and that governments must no longer manage their deficits on their own. The model used so far, under which the individual states behave sensibly and make savings without being forced to, has failed. The euro can only be saved with a system of coercion. Brussels must have the power to decide on government spending in Italy, Portugal or wherever." "That is the dilemma ahead of the EU summit on Thursday. The ailing euro states clearly need more help, but it is equally clear that this help mustn't cement the old mistakes." "Due to this dilemma, the reality is more complicated than American demands imply: It's not just down to the stingy Germans who could solve everything by paying more." "The chancellor shouldn't agree to aid that she cannot withdraw again if reform pledges are broken. Common debt, financed by euro bonds, cannot be nationalized again. If the German saver becomes liable for Spanish bank accounts, he won't see his money again." "The aid instrument of choice is a different one: the European Central Bank could ease the financial pressure on Spain and Co. as far as necessary until the countries are stable again." "Of course the ECB wasn't set up to provide this kind of help, but in truth it's been buying junk (government) bonds since 2010. Using the ECB for a quick rescue mission until Europe has developed into a stabilitiy union -- that is the way to finally get over this crisis." Conservative Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes: "If the whole thing becomes reality, national governments will no longer have full power over how much they borrow. In the light of the public debt crisis -- which for the past two years has gripped politicians, citizens and financial markets and according to leading policymakers has plunged the EU (and the global economy) into an existential crisis -- this form of debt control is probably unavoidable. But it effectively means giving up national budget autonomy; the core power of parliaments would be transferred to a Brussels authority." "One has to know that. But one could and should already have known when monetary union was launched that the euro can only achieve its expected stabilitiy if the member states maintain budget discipline and if they reform their economies so that they can withstand competition in the 21st century. That is why the debate about mutualizing debt via euro bonds is misleading because it only continues the borrowing practices of the past." Business daily Financial Times Deutschland writes: "The four EU politicians propose a complete reconstruction of the monetary union into a real budget and economic union. At its core is a banking union with a powerful banking supervisory body (in which the ECB will be involved), a common deposit insurance for private accounts as well as an institution, financed by banks, to save ailing banks. And that is the right thing to do: A currency union can only survive if the member states jointly vouch for it -- one will have to discuss what form that should take. It is good that the highest authorities have initiated a debate on the concept -- for the politicians, but for the citizens as well. Everyone must now be made aware that a bigger mutualization of budgets and finances must inevitably entail a loss of sovereignty for national governments." "This is a warning to the chancellor as well as to the other government leaders who don't like to relinquish their sovereignty. No one needs grand speeches calling for 'deeper political union' that aren't followed up by concrete policies. The leaders should agree to the grand outlines at the EU summit -- and leave the details to be sorted out by the finance ministers. All that won't affect the current battle against the crisis. The firefighting goes on." Conservative Die Welt writes: "For the first time there's a plan on the table that tries to find a delicate balance between greater common liability and valid guarantees that it won't be abused. Things are going to get serious at this summit, the changes debated will go to the core. That isn't a bad precondition for the EU to finally show the determination it has claimed to have for the past two years, but has shown too rarely." "The government leaders, and at some point all Europeans, will have to come clean on whether they trust one another to an extent that justifies sharing liability for the debts of others and curtailing national sovereignty. One has to take a deep breath to imagine saying yes to these steps." |
With apologies to Mike Godwin and his eponymous law, Законът на Годуин гласи: "As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1." |
| ...и мнението на Сорос по темата - свежда се до това, че "Германия ще бъде мразена", "Германия на път да стане имперска сила", "Германия прави само най-необходимото да предотврати кризата в еврозоната и прочие апокалиптични истории...интересното е, че С. сравнява сегашна Германия със САЩ след края на ВСВ и реномето, което САЩ са придобили с плана Маршал...намеква се за някаква вина и отговорност на ФРГ за въвеждането на еврото, личи си една голяма загриженост за дереджето на страните-длъжници, няма какво да се лъжем...в същото време С. е дълбоко загрижен и за това какво ще стане с Федералната република, ако еврозоната се разпадне, какви беди ще я сполетят, изобщо - приятно четене Der US-Investor kritisiert das Krisenmanagement der Euro-Zone scharf. Deutschland befinde sich auf dem Weg zur "Imperialmacht". Um das zu verhindern, brauche es ein überzeugendes Programm zur Schuldenreduzierung. Vor dem EU-Gipfel hat US-Investor George Soros das Euro-Krisenmanagement Deutschlands erneut scharf kritisiert. Die Haltung der Regierung in Berlin, in der Euro-Krise immer nur das Nötigste zu tun, verschlimmere die Situation in den Schuldnerländern, sagte Soros im Gespräch mit "Spiegel Online". "Das Ergebnis wird ein Europa sein, in dem Deutschland als Imperialmacht betrachtet wird - allerdings als eine Macht, die vom Rest Europas nicht bewundert und imitiert wird", sagte Soros. "Stattdessen wird Deutschland gehasst werden, andere Länder werden Widerstand leisten, weil sie die Deutschen als Unterdrücker wahrnehmen." Soros verglich die Situation der USA nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg mit der Deutschlands im heutigen Europa. Die USA hätten sich damals mit dem Marshallplan als "wohlwollende Imperialmacht" etabliert. Das habe dem Land selbst sehr genützt. Deutschland dagegen sei heute nicht bereit, sich auf etwas Ähnliches wie den Marshallplan einzulassen. "Es ist ein tragischer und historischer Fehler, dass Deutschland diese Möglichkeiten nicht erkennt." "Deutschland wird immer gerade das Nötigste tun, um den Euro zu erhalten. Aber das Nötigste wird die Situation der Schuldnerländer nur verschlimmern." George Soros "Kein anderes Land hat so von der Währungsunion profitiert wie Deutschland - weder ökonomisch noch politisch", ist Soros überzeugt. Deshalb sei Deutschland auch dafür verantwortlich, was durch die Euro-Einführung geschehen ist. Außerdem würde ein Auseinanderbrechen der Euro-Zone das Land enorm treffen. Der Investor zitierte eine Studie des deutschen Finanzministeriums, wonach ein Euro-Ausstieg Deutschlands die Arbeitslosigkeit in die Höhe schnellen lassen würde und das Wirtschaftswachstum extrem schädigen würde. "Deshalb wird Deutschland immer gerade das Nötigste tun, um den Euro zu erhalten. Aber das Nötigste wird die Situation der Schuldnerländer nur verschlimmern." "Schäuble ist eine tragische Figur" Soros glaubt nicht, dass die möglichen finanziellen Verpflichtungen Deutschland überfordern könnten. "Je umfassender und überzeugender ein Programm zur Schuldenreduzierung ist, desto geringer ist die Gefahr, dass es scheitert", sagte er. Den deutschen Finanzminister Wolfgang Schäuble hält der Investor indes für den "letzten verbliebenen Europäer". "Er ist eine tragische Figur, weil er versteht, was getan wurden müsste, aber auch weiß, dass er die Hindernisse nicht aus dem Weg räumen kann", meinte Soros. "Griechenland bräuchte enorme Großherzigkeit" Der US-Investor lobt die deutschen Strukturreformen, sagt aber zugleich, dass Euro-Schuldenländer solche nur durchziehen könnten, wenn sie bei den Schulden entlastet werden. Um diesem Ziel näher zu kommen, schlägt Soros eine Europäische Finanzagentur vor, die einen Schuldentilgungsfonds auflegen könnte. Dieser könnte dann einen großen Teil der spanischen und italienischen Staatsanleihen aufkaufen - "im Gegenzug müssten sich die Länder zu Strukturreformen verpflichten". Der Fonds könnte die Käufe durch die Ausgabe von Euro-Bills finanzieren - eine kurzfristige Variante von Euro-Bonds. Griechenland könne dies aber nicht mehr helfen, meint Soros. Die Situation sei dort zu vergiftet. Um das Land zu retten, bräuchte es "enorme Großherzigkeit". Wäre Angela Merkel im Fall Griechenlands hart geblieben, "könnte sie jetzt die deutsche Öffentlichkeit leichter von Hilfen für andere Länder überzeugen", meint der US-Investor. | |
Редактирано: 1 път. Последна промяна от: проф. дървингов |
| ...убу, поне едно добро дело да сторя тази седмица, че тук все ме ругаят, пък ако се получи и разговор, още по-добре, ама не е задължително... |
за съжаление съм невежа по темата и мога само поддаквам на тези от компетентните участници, чиито коментари ми харесват.  Ако става въпрос за политико-философски разговор по осите нац.суверенитет vs СЕЩ или локална идентичност vs континентална такава може и да се впия в някакъв момент. | |
Редактирано: 1 път. Последна промяна от: wreckage |
| Прегледах статийката на Хасан - същото, както в много други критики на Германия и Меркел. Не се споменава един прост факт - Меркел не е отишла с Panzerdivision-и да налага на някого спестовност. Гърция, Испания, може би после и други се редят на опашка пред Меркел за пари (уж) назаем с ниска лихва. Уж, защото я ги върнат, я не. И реват, че Меркел им налагала условия, преди да даде пари. Ми като не им харесват условията, да не искат заеми, бе! На мен като не ми харесват условията на някоя банка, или намирам банка с по-добри условия, или не взимам кредит и харча само колкото съм си изкарал. Да вземат заеми от друго място или да харчат само колкото са си изкарали и няма да се налага да спазват гадните условия на Меркел. Ей ги БРИКС например, да вземат оттам! Ама другаде не давали, защото им нямали вече вяра или пък искали висока лихва - ами да харчат тогава колкото са си изкарали. Ако ще ходят на просия, знае се как се ходи - смирено, с наведена глава и с паничка в ръка! |
| ...В тоя ред на мисли един виц. Меркел пристига в Гърция за частна ваканция, по популисткому - без видима охрана. Гръцки граничаро-митничар пита: - Name? - Angela Dorothea Kasner Merkel. - Occupation? Тя, след едносекундна хладна пауза: - Not yet!  |
...поредната апокалиптична статия (Die Zeit), "възседнала" този път призива от Рио от миналата седмица - "консумирайте по-малко", авторът оспорва тезата "за екология ше говорим след кризата, тогава ще има пари"...
*Според автора, единственото, което в момента произвеждаме са дългове, нови дългове; *Пак според него не е важно просто да има растеж, важно е в кои отрасли е той; Основната теза е - и в миналото последством нови дългове предизвиквахме икономически бум, след това на конференции за защита на околната среда се обсъждаха последствията от това и така отново и отново; *Естествено, не липсват и обичайните залитане по посока "екология" и "зелени" партии, политици, теории, вероятно авторът е техен активист или симпатизант... Впрочем, някои да знае къде са сега нашите "зелени" - Сугарев, Каракачанов, алтернативните еколози на Бисеров, не може да не ни кроят капа, да се опитват да "яхнат" нещо или някого. EU-Gipfel Wachstum pur ist Geldverbrennung Neue Kreisverkehre und Autobahnen können Europa auch nicht retten. Die Politik muss gezielt investieren, in Bildung, Gesundheit und Umweltschutz, kommentiert P. Pinzler. Es ist absurd. Wieder einmal treffen sich Europas Regierungen in dieser Woche zur Euro-Rettung. Auf dem EU-Gipfel werden sie von Donnerstag an über milliardenschwere Bankenrettungen reden und darüber, dass sie durch teure Programme und Reformen irgendwie das Wirtschaftswachstum wieder ankurbeln könnten. Denn wenn die Wirtschaft wachse, so die Hoffnung, würde endlich wieder alles gut, wenigstens in Europa. Ach ja? Wir haben doch alle noch die Nachrichten aus Rio im Ohr: So wie bisher dürfen wir nicht weiter wirtschaften und konsumieren! In der vergangenen Woche habe wir es alle gehört: Schneller als je zuvor zerstören wir die Umwelt. Wir leben trotz aller Bemühungen mitnichten nachhaltig. Machen wir so weiter, dann bleibt unseren Kindern wenig. Also müssen sich Produktion und Konsum radikal ändern – oder ganz aufhören zu wachsen. Was das mit Europa zu tun hat? Wir Europäer produzieren im Moment nachhaltig vor allem eines: Schulden. Weil die inzwischen so bedrohlich sind, dass sie den Euro und möglicherweise auch die Europäische Union sprengen könnten, müssen wir sie loswerden und brauchen also nichts dringender als: Wachstum! Das hat uns schließlich die vergangenen Jahrzehnte immer wieder geholfen. Ökologie? Nach der Krise! Deswegen benutzen Sozialdemokraten das W-Wort schon immer gern, Liberale und Grüne fordern es neuerdings wieder lauter (letztere setzen allerdings immer gern das Wörtchen "grün" davor); und auch viele Konservative haben sich angeschlossen und die Hoffnung übernommen: Wenn die Ökonomie nur erst wieder boomt, wird auch die Politik leichter. Dann sinken die Lasten, dann stabilisiert sich vielleicht auch der Euro, dann kommen der Rest der Wirtschaft und irgendwie auch die Umwelt in Ordnung. ... Leider ist das genau falsch. Denn wenn wir Europäer auf unseren Gipfeln jetzt so tun, als ob uns der Imperativ von Rio, "Verbraucht weniger!" nichts angehe, dann vergeben wir nicht nur eine große Chance. ... Entscheidend für den Wohlstand eines Landes ist nicht, ob es wächst, sondern was wächst. Wichtig ist, welche Branchen boomen – und wie ein Land mit den Menschen und Ressourcen umgeht. Viel zu oft haben wir in der Vergangenheit den einen Fehler gemacht: Erst finanzierten wir mit Schulden einen Boom. Und dann leisteten wir uns Umweltkonferenzen, auf denen über die Folgen gejammert werden durfte. Das aber ändert wenig an unserem Verhalten. Nach der ersten Rio-Konferenz vor zwei Jahrzehnten war das so, und diesmal könnte es ähnlich sein. | |
Редактирано: 1 път. Последна промяна от: проф. дървингов |
| ...нощта е бременна, казват братята турци, да се оставим да ни изненадат, викат немците ... аз споделям голяма част от мнението на канцлерката; Germany sets tone for 'controversial' summit - Merkel under pressure to move on Spain and Italy By Honor Mahony BRUSSELS - On the eve of what she expects to be a "controversial" summit, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has challenged other member states on whether they are ready to relinquish yet more budgetary oversight to Brussels - Berlin's sine qua non for future debt sharing. Angela Merkel is 'under no illusion' about the summit ahead She said in a speech on Wednesday (27 June) that a eurozone integration blueprint circulated on Monday got the balance wrong between budgetary control and shared liability. The paper, put together by European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, gives "priority" to mutualising debt and puts "more controls and legal obligations" in second place and then only "very imprecisely." "Accountability and control clearly stand in disproportion in this report," said the Chancellor. Eurobonds - mentioned in the summit paper as a medium-term objective - would not only go against the German constitution but are also "economically wrong and counterproductive." What is needed is more EU powers to step in when national budgets get out of line, she noted. "I will sound out whether other member states are prepared to take this path - including necessary treaty change," she said. The German leader's tough words set the scene for what is likely to be a bruising summit beginning Thursday. The extra supervisory powers that Merkel is calling for chip away at what is the heart of a state's powers - the right to decide how and when to spend money. Berlin has been increasingly grumbling about other capitals calling on Germany to open its pockets but being unprepared to accept greater external controls. A key issue is relations with France. Merkel will meet President Francois Hollande in Paris on Wednesday evening. Hollande has been pressing Germany to show more solidarity before Paris will accept a loss of sovereignty - traditionally a hard-sell among Hollande's own socialists. Meanwhile, Spain and particularly too-big-to-fail Italy are the other two main players in the eurozone game. While Merkel is focussing on long term structural change to the eurozone, Madrid and Rome are looking for quick solutions as their borrowing costs have jumped upwards. One of the ideas pushed by Italian leader Mario Monti - who says he is prepared to sweat out a days-long summit to get a satisfactory outcome - is that the eurozone rescue fund buy the bonds of troubled but well-intentioned eurozone countries to lower borrowing costs. Another mooted plan is to have the eurozone fund directly recapitalise troubled banks - rather than going via the government and pushing a state further into debt - something particularly relevant to Spain. "I have no illusions. I am expecting controversial discussions in Brussels," said the Chancellor of the summit, adding that "many eyes" will be on Germany |
| Айде и аз да цитирам една научна статия за рецесията: Lipstick, the Recession and Evolutionary Psychology For women, periods of scarcity also decrease the availability of quality mates, as women’s mate preferences reliably prioritize resource access. This preference stems from the important role that mates’ resources have played in women’s reproductive success. Because economic recessions are associated with higher unemployment and minimal or negative returns on investments, news of a recession may therefore signal to women that financially secure men—those able to invest resources in rearing offspring—are becoming scarce. Across species, female mate preferences, as well as the effort spent on attracting a suitable mate, are amplified when high-quality males are in short supply, as the reward for discriminating between potential partners is greater. As for the best way to attract males, it’s no secret that you might want to look your best. Selection has favored men who seek in mates qualities related to fertility, such as youth and physical attractiveness. Correspondingly, women’s increased efforts to attract mates most often take the form of enhancing their physical appearance. Which brings us to lipstick and designer jeans, high-heeled boots and perfume. Would recession cues increase women’s desire to buy these products? Four separate experiments, along with real-world data, all say yes. Our findings consistently supported the lipstick effect, as college-age women, when primed with news of economic instability, reported an increased desire to buy attractiveness-enhancing goods, along with a decreased desire to purchase goods that do not enhance one’s physical appearance. Our experiments also found that this increased desire for beauty products, clothing and accessories was fully mediated by a heightened preference for mates with resources. Натисни тук |
| ...относно новата мантра "пакт за растеж" - още една немска гледна точка (Der Spiegel) по повод една френска идея... PS Манрико, от теб не очаквах такова нещо, 'ма никак... 06/27/2012 By Carsten Volkery Since becoming French president, François Hollande has countered Merkel on her efforts to save the euro. French President François Hollande promised his voters a growth pact to counteract Germany's obsession with austerity. Now, he has gotten what he asked for, nominally at least. But the pact, which will be agreed to at this week's EU summit, is full of hot air. It is astonishing how quickly a growth pact can grow. When French President François Hollande recently sent his European counterparts a paper entitled "European Growth Pact," he outlined investments worth €120 billion ($150 billion) aimed at stimulating the EU economy. But by the time Hollande met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy in Rome last Friday, the sum had already climbed to €130 billion. The reason? The sum of €130 billion is equivalent to 1 percent of the EU's economic output. It simply sounds better. The growth pact is now set to be agreed to at the European Union summit scheduled for Thursday and Friday. Its supporters, the French Socialist Hollande first among them, argue that the pact is an urgently needed corrective to the EU-wide austerity programs that have been put in place in recent years. According to a draft summit statement, member states pledge to invest in "future oriented areas" and to ease companies' access to credit. Yet summit participants know themselves that the resolution is little more than a bit of window dressing for voters and financial markets. The pact contains nothing new, according to an internal analysis undertaken by one member state. It is only being agreed to, the analysis continues, so that the new French president can save face. During his presidential campaign, Hollande demanded efforts to stimulate the economy. "It is all just old wine in new bottles," agrees Daniel Gros, director of the Centre for European Policy Studies, a Brussels-based think tank. "Politicians just want to show that they are taking the desires of the electorate seriously." But, he adds, the effect on the economy will be virtually nil. EU Structural Funds: In the EU's seven-year financial framework, regional assistance worth €55 billion is planned for 2013. There was also an undefined amount of leftover funding from the 2012 pot. This money is now to be "re-programmed" -- for the fight against youth unemployment, for example, or to assist newly founded companies. Because the money has already been assigned to specific member states, these countries must now decide what projects they want to cancel and which other ideas they wish to fund. The apparent assumption made by EU leaders is that the prior choice of projects to be funded was not optimal and the money can be better used. Still, it is unlikely that the entire sum will now be redirected. Furthermore, the funding does not represent extra money and cannot therefore be considered additional economic stimulus. European Investment Bank: The capital of the European Investment Bank (EI  is to be increased by €10 billion. The extra funding will mean that the bank will be able to offer additional credit worth €15 billion each year for the next four years -- for a total of €60 billion. Within the framework of public-private partnerships, it is hoped that the extra funding will trigger private investment worth several times that amount. Gros, however, says that the idea is "wishful thinking." Private investors, he says, would think twice before making an investment in a crisis-stricken EU country together with the EIB. Should a company go broke, EIB debt must be paid back first, meaning that remaining creditors would likely be saddled with a loss. The EIB is itself skeptical about the amount of money it might be able to mobilize. The number of sensible projects is limited and the bank is only allowed to provide credit when pay back seems practically certain.Project Bonds: Private investors who take on loans for the purpose of European infrastructure projects are to receive EU guarantees worth up to €1 billion. The guarantees will allow investors access to better interest rates on the financial markets. Funding for the project comes out of the current EU budget -- no additional money is involved. In total, the project is to mobilize an additional €18 billion in investments. Still, the challenge here too will be finding projects that make sense. For the most part, then, the growth pact is the product of accounting tricks. It has little to do with the kind of economic stimulus package being demanded by traders in New York and London. History Repeats That is largely the result of the pact being primarily politically rather than economically motivated. Hollande promised his voters to complement the fiscal pact with a growth component, and his European counterparts are allowing him this mini-triumph - in part because they themselves also hope to benefit from the rhetoric about growth. After all, austerity is unpopular across Europe. In contrast to the fiscal pact, for which 25 of 27 EU member states pledged last March to introduce legally anchored debt limits, the growth pact is not a legally binding treaty. Rather, it is just a resolution made by the 27 EU heads of state and government. It will be an appendix to the summit statement. Officially, of course, EU rhetoric would suggest that Hollande's "growth pact" is on par with Merkel's "fiscal pact." History, though, will likely show that not to be the case. In 1997, during negotiations over the Treaty of Amsterdam, Chancellor Helmut Kohl insisted on a stability pact for the soon-to-be-introduced euro. That part of the deal is well remembered. In return for his agreement, however, the freshly elected French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, a Socialist like Hollande, received a pact aimed at creating jobs and growth. The verdict of the German weekly Die Zeit at the time is telling: "That is nothing new. EU summits have promised similar packages … dozens of times over the years." ...и официалното мнение на канцлерката преди срещата - сега да видим какъв ще е резултатът от тия две дни мерене...личното си мнение казах вчера - за много неща приемам мнението на Меркел...липсва ми информация какво мисли българското правителство... Chancellor Angela Merkel reinforced her Nein to euro bonds on Wednesday and sharply criticized euro zone reform proposals presented by top EU officials this week. Her remarks set the stage for what promises to be a difficult, fractious EU summit on Thursday. In a statement to Germany's lower house of parliament, the Bundestag, Merkel made clear that she will not bow to intense international pressure on Germany to agree to joint bond issues that would calm the euro crisis by stabilizing ailing euro-zone member states like Italy and Spain. She said the blueprint for closer financial integration drafted by European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, Euro Group President Jean-Claude Juncker and European Central Bank President Mario Draghi contained major shortcomings, and that she would seek support for her own ideas in Brussels. "I profoundly disagree with the stance taken in the report that precedence is given to mutualization, and that more control and enforcable commitments take second place and are phrased in very imprecise terms," said Merkel, .... ' "There is a clear discrepancy between liability and control in this report, so I fear that the summit will once again talk too much about all kinds of ideas for possible joint liability, and much too little about improved controls and structural measures." She said instruments such as euro bonds, short-term euro bills and a common debt repayment fund would be in breach of the German constitution in any case, and that she regarded them as "economically wrong and counterproductive." She added that not even the German federal government and the regional state administrations had mutual liability for their debt, and that neither the United States nor Canada did either. "What we need instead to develop a union of stability is more enforcement rights on the European level when budget rules are breached," she said. "I will sound out in Brussels whether other member states are prepared to go down such a path, including making the necessary treaty changes." "I will also make clear that the clock is ticking, the world is waiting for our decisions, the world wants to understand (…  where this European Union and especially the euro group is heading." Merkel also said she expected "intense discussions" in Brussels.In a clear signal to international partners to tone down their demands, Merkel said Germany's economic strength has its limits and that its scope to bail out other nations must not be overestimated. "Germany is the economic motor and anchor of stability in Europe but even Germany's strength isn't endless," she said. Merkel, who on Tuesday declared that Europe would not share debt liability "as long as I live," repeatedly stressed her opposition to euro bonds, saying: "The mistakes of the past must not be repeated. Politically enforcing equal interest rates after they didn't work well in markets would be repeating an old mistake. " She said she would push for the summit to agree to a timetable and a working method to decide on reforms of the euro's architecture. "Our work must convince those who have lost confidence in the euro zone, not by self-deception and sham solutions but by fighting the causes of the crisis," she said. | |
Редактирано: 3 пъти. Последна промяна от: проф. дървингов |
| ...почнаха се, тия сериозно извадиха рулетките и почнаха да мерят...да видим Меркел колко и дали ще издържи...щото и нашия нещо се дръпна от нея, да видим, да видим...пък и ние се каним да емитираме облигации и да ги пласираме на същия този европазар, правим разчети при 5 - 5.5 % купон, интересно... 06/28/2012 Der Spiegel By Carsten Volkery in Brussels A showdown is brewing between German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti at the European Union summit in Brussels. Shortly before the start of the key euro crisis meeting on Thursday afternoon, Berlin further stoked its ongoing conflict with Rome. High-level officials within Merkel's government dismissed complaints from Monti and Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy over high interest rates for government bonds in their countries as "fearmongering." "I would warn against projecting interest rates from specific situations as though they were the average," a German government source said. "Interest rates fluctuate." There is no reason to "fall into alarm," the official added. In recent days, Monti and Rajoy have resorted to increasingly shrill rhetoric to indicate that their countries are in desperate need of assistance. They want the euro rescue fund, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), to buy up Italian and Spanish bonds to push down market interest rates from levels approaching 7 percent, which is considered to be unsustainable for borrowing in the longer term. If the EU summit in Brussels fails to make this happen, then a "catastrophe" awaits, Monti has warned, adding that the euro would then "go to hell". On Thursday, Italy had to offer yields of 6.19 percent in order to float government bonds valuing a total of €5.4 billion ($6.7 billion). But Berlin has so far been unfazed by Monti's warnings. The view of Merkel's government is that purchasing government bonds is not on the agenda. Sources inside the government are also shaking their heads over a report by Italian daily La Repubblica that Merkel could possibly return to Brussels on Saturday to negotiate with Monti on the subject. Her travel plans have not changed, they said, insisting that Merkel would return to Berlin on Friday afternoon for the vote on ratifying the ESM in Germany's parliament, the Bundestag. Merkel's government also continues to categorically reject calls for direct bank recapitalization through the ESM, as Spain has demanded. As long as the authority to intervene remains at the national level, such a measure will not be undertaken, the source said. Otherwise, the source warned, a situation could arise in which the ESM became the majority shareholder in a Spanish bank but had no influence over it. German government officials have pointed out that the ESM was created as an instrument with which to cushion the euro-zone in emergencies. If a government believes it requires aid, then it should apply for it, Berlin government sources said. It will then be processed quickly, as happened when Spain requested a bailout of its banks. But, officials state, the ESM's rules cannot be changed. When a country asks for aid from the International Monetary Fund, the source said, it doesn't tailor its instruments each time just to meet an applicant's needs either. Merkel Ruffles Feathers in Brussels with Criticism That's not something Monti and Rajoy will be pleased to hear. They appear to be counting on being able to get special treatment because of their size and power. But the message coming from Berlin is this: We have procedures and we are not going to compromise them. Indeed, this summit isn't about granting more "room for maneuver" or pushing limits, but about adhering to rules that are already clear, government sources said. German government officials also used unusually sharp language to reject allegations that Germany is exacerbating the euro crisis with its open opposition to collective debt sharing across the common currency area. The government sources said the crisis is only continuing because the problem countries are delaying necessary reforms. "The problems in the countries that are being monitored are homemade and can only be solved at home," the source said. The way things look right now, the summit will be anything but harmonious. European officials in Brussels are also said to be angered by Merkel's harsh criticism of the proposal for the starting points for discussion at the summit prepared by European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, European Commission President José Manuel Barroso, European Central Bank President Mario Draghi and Euro Group President Jean-Claude Juncker. The chancellor criticized the fact that the discussion paper put too much focus on communitization of debt through euro bond-like structures -- a move the German government currently rejects. Sources close to the presidents of the four most important EU institutions said the leaders had been very surprised by the German chancellor's choice of words - particularly given that the contents of the document had been agreed to by all the EU member states. | |
Редактирано: 1 път. Последна промяна от: проф. дървингов |
| ...това е обобщение на предложенията (за спасяване на положението) представени на срещата, при което еврооблигациите далеч не са основния препъни камък (според близкия до управляващите Frankfurter Allgemeine), за нас особено пикантно е предложението да се заделят 130 млрд евро за стимулиране на растежа, като един от източниците ще бъдат неополозотворените следства от разни сега съществуващи фондове, които да се пренасочат към страните с проблеми; zur Diskussion stehen folgende Vorschläge: Banken bekommen Rettungsgeld direkt Die spanischen Banken brauchen viel Geld. Dazu soll sich nicht der spanische Staat Geld aus dem europäischen Rettungsfonds ESM leihen, um es an die Banken weiterzugeben. Stattdessen sollen die Banken das Geld direkt bekommen. Auf diese Weise würden die Kredite über geschätzt 100 Milliarden Euro nicht auf die Staatsschulden des Landes aufgeschlagen. Dafür müssten aber die Regeln des ESM geändert werden. Staaten gehen höhere Risiken ein Die Schulden der Banken sollen zwar nicht offiziell zu Spaniens Staatsschulden gerechnet werden, letztlich haftet aber der Staat dafür. Das stört die privaten Kreditgeber Spaniens. Sie haben Angst, dem Land Geld zu geben - denn wenn der Staat pleite ist, bekommen normalerweise erst die öffentlichen Kreditgeber ihr Geld zurück. Diese Regel könnte geändert werden. Doch die Gläubiger-Staaten sind dagegen: Sie wollen sich selbst vor Verlusten schützen. Der Rettungsfonds darf sich Geld leihen Mit einer Banklizenz könnte sich der europäische Rettungsfonds Geld von der Europäischen Zentralbank ( EZB ) leihen. Er hätte dann viel mehr Geld zur Verfügung. Dies soll die Sorge zerstreuen, dass die Mittel zur Bekämpfung möglicher Ansteckungsgefahren nicht ausreichen könnten, wenn sich die Eurokrise weiter verschärft. Besonders Frankreich setzt sich für diesen Vorschlag ein, die Europäische Zentralbank und Deutschland sprechen sich allerdings gegen eine Banklizenz für den ESM aus. Europa beaufsichtigt die Banken Wenn die Banken von Europa gerettet werden, muss Europa auch die Aufsicht über die Banken bekommen - so fordert es Bundeskanzlerin Merkel. Im Gespräch ist zum Beispiel, dass die Europäische Zentralbank ( EZB ) die systemrelevanten europäischen Banken überwachen könnte. Der Rettungsfonds kauft Staatsanleihen Italien und Spanien rufen immer lauter danach, dass europäische Institutionen ihre Anleihen aufkaufen - also ihnen Kredit geben. Denn es wird für sie immer teurer, sich das Geld an den Kapitalmärkten zu leihen. Das schlägt mittlerweile auf die Kreditzinsen für Industriebetriebe durch. Italien will deshalb, dass der Europäische Rettungsfonds Staatsanleihen an der Börse kauft, wo Investoren mit Anleihen handeln, die schon vor einiger Zeit ausgegeben wurden. Das würde allerdings den Anreiz der Krisenländer verringern, das eigene Wachstum durch Reformen und Sparmaßnahmen voranzutreiben. Auch die EZB könnte sich entschließen, Staatsanleihen zu kaufen. 130 Milliarden Euro fürs Wachstum Ein europäisches Wachstumspaket soll die wirtschaftliche Entwicklung in den Krisenländern fördern. 130 Milliarden sind verkündet - kaum etwas von dem Geld ist aber neu. Das Geld hat drei Quellen: Erstens soll nicht abgerufenes Geld aus Struktur- und Projektfonds in die Krisenstaaten fließen. Zweitens soll die Europäische Investitionsbank Geld bekommen, damit sie mehr Kredite vergeben kann. Drittens will die Europäische Kommission Anleihen ausgeben, von denen Investitionen in den Krisenländern finanziert werden können - so genannte Projektbonds. So ein Wachstumspaket könnte dafür sorgen, dass die politische Unterstützung für stärkere nationale Haushaltskontrollen durch die EU zunimmt. Eurobonds - Europa verschuldet sich gemeinsam Gemeinsame europäische Staatsanleihen könnten es gerade für die Krisenländer günstiger machen, sich am Kapitalmarkt Geld zu leihen. Denn die Schuldverschreibungen werden gemeinsam emittiert; so drücken die geringen Renditen für Staatsanleihen aus Nicht-Krisen-Ländern den Schnitt. Deutschland ist gegen vergemeinschafte Schulden, die gemeinsame Eurobonds indirekt darstellen, bevor keine komplette Fiskalunion besteht. | |
Редактирано: 1 път. Последна промяна от: проф. дървингов |
| ...гледайки мача, лидерите договориха долното - един ялов компромис, продължаващ драмата до края на годината (явно преговорите продължават); Преобладава "обещаха", "се съгласиха, че", "заявиха" - сега да го превърнат в императивни норми, задължителни за всички Европейските лидери договориха пакт за растеж на стойност 120 милиарда евро в краткосрочен план, за да помогнат на Испания и Италия. Те постигнаха съгласие и за пътна карта, която да премоделира 17-членната еврозона. Президентът на ЕС Херман Ван Ромпой определи договореното като "действителен пробив". Ето и списък с основните постигнати договорки: Пакт за растеж: - Пакет от мерки на стойност около 120 милиарда евро (150 милиарда долара) за стимулиране на растежа в ЕС чрез усвояване на неизползваните средства от бюджета на ЕС, увеличаване на капитала на Европейската инвестиционна банка и финансиране на "проектни бонове" ("project bonds" за инфраструктурни програми.- Пактът включва също така мерки за увеличаване на заетостта, особено на младите хора, както и предложение за увеличаване на трудовата мобилност в Европа. Краткосрочни мерки: - Лидерите се съгласиха да създадат надзорен орган за банките в еврозоната, включващ Европейската централна банка, "спешно, до края на 2012 г.". - Лидерите заявиха, че когато се създаде този орган, Европейският механизъм за стабилност на стойност 500 милиарда евро, който трябва да влезе в сила идния месец, може директно да рекапитализира банките при конкретни условия. - Лидерите заявиха, че заемите, предоставени от Европейския механизъм за стабилност на Испания, за да рекапитализира банковия си сектор, вече няма да е нужно да бъдат връщани преди други заеми в случай на изпадане в неплатежоспособност, много важен фактор за участниците на пазара. - Лидерите обещаха да използват спасителните пакети "по гъвкав и ефективен начин, за да стабилизират пазарите", за страни, които спазват целите за бюджетен дефицит. Това означава да се купуват ценни книжа, за да се намалят разходите по заемите. - ЕЦБ се съгласи да действа като агент по спасителните фондове, като провежда операции на пазарите на ценни книжа. Дългосрочни мерки: - Лидерите от еврозоната се съгласиха "да работят за по-интегриран икономически и валутен съюз" чрез по-тясно бюджетно и финансово сътрудничество, за да се предотврати повторното възникване на подобни кризи. - Президентът на ЕС Херман Ван Ромпой заяви, че лидерите са договорили четири "градивни елемента" за постигане на по-интегриран съюз - финансова рамка, бюджетна рамка, рамка на икономическата политика и засилване на демократичната отчетност. - Ван Ромпой ще има задачата да представи нов доклад през октомври, в който да даде повече подробности относно календара на реформите. Те могат да доведат до създаването на банков съюз, а на по-късен етап - и до съвместно емитиране на дълг. |
First, figures released by the OECD show that the “lazy” Greek worker labours for 2,017 hours per year, which is more than the average in any other EU nation – and more than 40 per cent longer than the average German works. So a little less Schadenfreude, please. Second, it isn’t just southern Europeans who are revolting against fiscal sadism. In May, Merkel’s Christian Democrats suffered a humiliating defeat in an election in Germany’s most populous state, North Rhine-Westphalia. It was the party’s worst result in the state since the Second World War. Ordinary Germans are starting to acknowledge that austerity isn’t working. Този Хасан много нагъл, ве! Че и манипулира. Ще коментирам само по-горните му глупости. Първо, изнесоха се факти, че т.нар. по-дълго работно време на гърците се дължи на повсеместното надписване на допълнителни работни часове в държавния сектор с цел допълнително заплащане, повсеместно разпространена практика. Второ, социалдемократите също изразиха неодобрение за еврооблигациите и за засилването на ангажиментите на Германия към еврозоната, а да се твърди, че мерките финансова стабилност, предприети в Германия не работят е чиста проба лъжа. Работят и още как, след като в Германия се наблюдава увеличение на производството и рекордно намаление на безработицата. Вероятно населението иска увеличението на производството да се отрази по-чувствително върху доходите, нещо което няма как да се случи, ако германския данъкоплатец поеме дълговете на останалите държави. |
| (Wirtschaftswoche) ...мнение на шефа на едно от дъщерните дружества от групата Allianz, според когото върху Германия се стоварват непосилни тежести, независимо как ще се развие кризата - ако еврозоната се запази, немците ще трябва по един или друг начин да заделят много пари за стабилизиране и спасяване на трети страни, ако еврозоната се разпадне, пак ще трябва да заделят много пари, за преодоляване на рецесията и спасяване на местните (немски) банки; Изводът, който се прави е, че Германия вече не е онзи сигурен пристан, поради което Primco/Allianz Gruppe намалява инвестициите си в дългови книжа, отказва напълно да инвестира в новите емисии и се концентрират върху инвестиции в САШ, Великобритания и Скандинавия ... Samstag, 30. Juni 2012 Anleiheinvestor Pimco Auf Deutschland kommen unabsehbare Lasten zu - "Das europäische Haus steht in Flammen" „Wir erwarten, dass Deutschland seine Rolle als sicherer Hafen verlieren wird“, sagte Andrew Bosomworth, Chef von Pimco Deutschland, der WirtschaftsWoche. Auf den Staat kommen laut Bosomworth unabsehbare Lasten zu: „Überlebt die Euro-Zone, was wir hoffen und erwarten, zahlt Deutschland über Rettungsschirme und Euro-Bonds. Zerfällt sie, muss es Geld für die Bewältigung der folgenden Rezession und die Rettung von Banken ausgeben“. Deshalb habe Pimco auf die Teilnahme an Neuemissionen in Europa verzichtet und alte Bestände reduziert. „Stattdessen konzentrieren wir uns etwa auf Emittenten aus den USA, Großbritannien oder Skandinavien“, sagte Bosomworth. Einige Unternehmen der Euro-Peripherie, wie die Banken UniCredit in Italien oder Santander in Spanien, seien aber weiterhin attraktiv. „Sie haben solide Geschäftsmodelle, leiden jedoch unter der falschen Postleitzahl“, so Bosomworth. |