http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100006577/bravo-chancellor-osborne-you-have-saved-britain-in-the-nick-of-time/
Eurostat’s latest horrifying report reveals that public spending in Britain rose to 51.7pc of GDP in the final year of Brownism. This is the highest in British history, and higher than that of Germany and other countries that we tend to view as big-state euro-corporatists.
Even Belgium is now lower at 50.8pc. Les Belges, mon Dieu/ mijn God.
Germany is at 47.6pc, and has written a balanced-budget amendment into its Basic Law. The figure is 45.9pc for Spain, and 44.5pc for Poland. All of these countries are above the 40pc level deemed by some to be the long-term ceiling for creativity and enterprise in a modern industrial economy (with the Nordic exception, of course).
The great roll-back of the British state during the Thatcher era has been entirely reversed – and funded by borrowing rather than tax revenues. The policy drew prosperity from the future: now the future has arrived. This is the Faustian nature of debt.
[less]
Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman says that Germany has begun imposing austerity measures far too soon and that it could endanger fragile economic growth. His comments are just the latest in a trans-Atlantic dispute about fiscal policy.
----------------------------------------------------------
LIKE THE GERMANS WOULD SEE A NEED TO CUT DEBT WHEN GDP GROWS....
---------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't have a problem with trying to balance the budget in five or 10 years," Krugman told the paper. "The question is whether one should start when the economy is at 7 or 8 percent below its normal capacity and interest rates are at zero.... Now is not the time to be worried about deficits." Later in the interview, Krugman said, "the German austerity package is really a bad idea."
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by jason10006
about 16 years ago
Posts: 5257
Member since: Jan 2009
"deemed" by whom? This level of govt/GDP has been the norm in the Benelux and Scandie countries as well as Germany for DECADES - over which time they have been the economic darlings of Europe. Over here, Canada's level has consitently been higher than ours...and who is doing better right now? hint - it ain't even close to being us. Who is LOWEST and has been for two decades? Among wealthy nations...Japan, the most anemic of all. Please.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
about 16 years ago
Posts: 13573
Member since: Apr 2009
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5811186.ece Most economists and ministers now believe that a prudent fiscal policy means not allowing public sector debt to exceed 40 per cent of GDP. But the Government is under no obligation to manage the public finances with this target in mind. Indeed, Britain is not even bound by the 60 per cent limit in the Maastricht treaty, as Margaret Thatcher managed to win an opt-out from the relevant article.
In an empirical study covering 29 sub-Saharan African LDCs over the period of 1970-80, Fosu (1996) confirms this finding as he identifies a non-linear effect of external debt on growth. Pattillo et al. (2002) confirm this finding and show that the average effect of debt on growth becomes negative when the ratio of debt to GDP exceeds a threshold between 35% and 40%. This non-linear effect is also confirmed by Clements et al. (2003) and Cordella and Arranz (2005). In addition, Imbs and Ranciere (2005) find that countries with good policies and good institutions have lower debt overhang.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by stevejhx
about 16 years ago
Posts: 12656
Member since: Feb 2008
Didn't we discuss your posting things for no particular purpose already?
Does this have something to do with real estate, or do you just need an audience?
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by alanhart
about 16 years ago
Posts: 12397
Member since: Feb 2007
At this point it not only has nothing to do with real estate, but has nothing to do with anything.
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by jason10006
about 16 years ago
Posts: 5257
Member since: Jan 2009
DEBT to GDP versus GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES as a % of GDP are two entirely different things, which you obviously do not understand - especially if of all people you quote SACHS and KRUGMAN, who would BOTH argue that the Scandies and Benelux's are models to follow! What a moron you are!
Ignored comment.
Unhide
Response by Riversider
about 16 years ago
Posts: 13573
Member since: Apr 2009
Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, has launched a forthright defence of his country’s economic policy on the eve of the G20 summit in Toronto, designed to head off charges in the US that its austerity measures will choke off global economic recovery.
In an article in Thursday’s Financial Times, he insisted that far from “slamming on the brakes”, Berlin was trying to combine an exit strategy from the present large fiscal stimulus with laying the foundations for future growth.
“The German government knows it has a responsibility to promote growth in Europe and the world,” he said. “We will rise to it not by piling up public debt but by fulfilling our traditional role as an anchor of stability.”
DOES KRUGMAN USE OVER-DRAFT PROTECTION?
------------------------------------
http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,701894,00.html
Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman says that Germany has begun imposing austerity measures far too soon and that it could endanger fragile economic growth. His comments are just the latest in a trans-Atlantic dispute about fiscal policy.
----------------------------------------------------------
LIKE THE GERMANS WOULD SEE A NEED TO CUT DEBT WHEN GDP GROWS....
---------------------------------------------------------------
"I don't have a problem with trying to balance the budget in five or 10 years," Krugman told the paper. "The question is whether one should start when the economy is at 7 or 8 percent below its normal capacity and interest rates are at zero.... Now is not the time to be worried about deficits." Later in the interview, Krugman said, "the German austerity package is really a bad idea."
"deemed" by whom? This level of govt/GDP has been the norm in the Benelux and Scandie countries as well as Germany for DECADES - over which time they have been the economic darlings of Europe. Over here, Canada's level has consitently been higher than ours...and who is doing better right now? hint - it ain't even close to being us. Who is LOWEST and has been for two decades? Among wealthy nations...Japan, the most anemic of all. Please.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article5811186.ece
Most economists and ministers now believe that a prudent fiscal policy means not allowing public sector debt to exceed 40 per cent of GDP. But the Government is under no obligation to manage the public finances with this target in mind. Indeed, Britain is not even bound by the 60 per cent limit in the Maastricht treaty, as Margaret Thatcher managed to win an opt-out from the relevant article.
http://www.acrobatplanet.com/non-fictions-ebook/ebook-public-external-debt-informality-and-production-efficiency-developing-count
More recently, new studies by Krugman (1988), Sachs (1989) and Cohen (1992) gave rise to the theory of excessive debt (debt overhang). This theory establishes that beyond a certain threshold, external debt could discourage consumption and investment, and thus limit economic growth.
In an empirical study covering 29 sub-Saharan African LDCs over the period of 1970-80, Fosu (1996) confirms this finding as he identifies a non-linear effect of external debt on growth. Pattillo et al. (2002) confirm this finding and show that the average effect of debt on growth becomes negative when the ratio of debt to GDP exceeds a threshold between 35% and 40%. This non-linear effect is also confirmed by Clements et al. (2003) and Cordella and Arranz (2005). In addition, Imbs and Ranciere (2005) find that countries with good policies and good institutions have lower debt overhang.
Didn't we discuss your posting things for no particular purpose already?
Does this have something to do with real estate, or do you just need an audience?
At this point it not only has nothing to do with real estate, but has nothing to do with anything.
DEBT to GDP versus GOVERNMENT EXPENDITURES as a % of GDP are two entirely different things, which you obviously do not understand - especially if of all people you quote SACHS and KRUGMAN, who would BOTH argue that the Scandies and Benelux's are models to follow! What a moron you are!
Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, has launched a forthright defence of his country’s economic policy on the eve of the G20 summit in Toronto, designed to head off charges in the US that its austerity measures will choke off global economic recovery.
In an article in Thursday’s Financial Times, he insisted that far from “slamming on the brakes”, Berlin was trying to combine an exit strategy from the present large fiscal stimulus with laying the foundations for future growth.
“The German government knows it has a responsibility to promote growth in Europe and the world,” he said. “We will rise to it not by piling up public debt but by fulfilling our traditional role as an anchor of stability.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/504fa87a-7eec-11df-8398-00144feabdc0.html