R.I.P. UK

[Arraya]

Not trying to start a keynesian verse austerity flame war, the tempo and mechanisms of destruction are irrelevant, just showing a rift beginning between germany and the US

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/germany-us-rift-gets-deeper-merkel-openly-mocks-obamas-keynesian-guidelines
The transatlantic smackdown is getting vicious, as Angela Merkel makes a point to demonstrate her refusal to follow Obama’s policies before a business audience in Berlin. As Bloomberg reports, “Chancellor Angela Merkel championed German export strength as “the right thing” for her country, spurning President Barack Obama’s call to boost private spending as both leaders prepare for Group of 20 talks.
More from Bloomberg:

snip

The G-20 must “safeguard and strengthen” the economic recovery and promote “global demand growth that avoids the imbalances of the past,” Obama said in a June 16 letter to fellow G-20 leaders. He expressed concern about “heavy reliance on exports by some countries,” which he didn’t name. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner called on June 5 for “stronger domestic demand growth” in European countries like Germany that have trade surpluses.
The upcoming G-20 meeting will likely be very contentious:

Merkel said on June 11 that she expects to have a “hard time” from fellow leaders at the G-20 meeting, where Germany and France are leading Europe’s push for a global commitment to impose bank levies and a tax on financial transactions.

The G-20 faces a test of unity on the banking levy, a German government official said earlier today, warning that leaders can either pull together or split into two camps over the tax. The official spoke to reporters on condition of anonymity.
And the punchline:

Obama’s appeal “isn’t anything that goes against what we are doing,” Merkel told reporters yesterday. “If we don’t get onto a path of sustainable economic growth but have rather a growth bubble, then if the next crisis comes we won’t be able to pay for it.”

[poorgradstudent]

You know what, at least I’ll give the new UK government credit for having the balls to increase taxes while making cuts. In the US we have one party that believes the budget can be balanced with spending cuts alone and one that doesn’t really care about even trying.

[poorgradstudent]

You know what, at least I’ll give the new UK government credit for having the balls to increase taxes while making cuts. In the US we have one party that believes the budget can be balanced with spending cuts alone and one that doesn’t really care about even trying.

[poorgradstudent]

You know what, at least I’ll give the new UK government credit for having the balls to increase taxes while making cuts. In the US we have one party that believes the budget can be balanced with spending cuts alone and one that doesn’t really care about even trying.

[poorgradstudent]

You know what, at least I’ll give the new UK government credit for having the balls to increase taxes while making cuts. In the US we have one party that believes the budget can be balanced with spending cuts alone and one that doesn’t really care about even trying.

[poorgradstudent]

You know what, at least I’ll give the new UK government credit for having the balls to increase taxes while making cuts. In the US we have one party that believes the budget can be balanced with spending cuts alone and one that doesn’t really care about even trying.

[Rich Toscano]

“the UK falls into a severe double-dip recession, this will finally prove once and for all that Keynesian economics works,”

I don’t see how this would suffice as “proof” that Keynesian economics works.

Everyone (or most everyone) agrees that Keynesian policies can boost things in the short term. The question is whether this is a sustainable approach that works in the long run. The proof or lack thereof of that will be in whether governments can reduce their huge Keynesian-induced debt loads without causing a crisis.

Rich

PS – Since we’re on the topic these days, this is an example of a “good” political thread. There is obviously debate but the debate is civil and it’s about the content of an issue, not flaming and picking sides.

[Rich Toscano]

“the UK falls into a severe double-dip recession, this will finally prove once and for all that Keynesian economics works,”

I don’t see how this would suffice as “proof” that Keynesian economics works.

Everyone (or most everyone) agrees that Keynesian policies can boost things in the short term. The question is whether this is a sustainable approach that works in the long run. The proof or lack thereof of that will be in whether governments can reduce their huge Keynesian-induced debt loads without causing a crisis.

Rich

PS – Since we’re on the topic these days, this is an example of a “good” political thread. There is obviously debate but the debate is civil and it’s about the content of an issue, not flaming and picking sides.

[Rich Toscano]

“the UK falls into a severe double-dip recession, this will finally prove once and for all that Keynesian economics works,”

I don’t see how this would suffice as “proof” that Keynesian economics works.

Everyone (or most everyone) agrees that Keynesian policies can boost things in the short term. The question is whether this is a sustainable approach that works in the long run. The proof or lack thereof of that will be in whether governments can reduce their huge Keynesian-induced debt loads without causing a crisis.

Rich

PS – Since we’re on the topic these days, this is an example of a “good” political thread. There is obviously debate but the debate is civil and it’s about the content of an issue, not flaming and picking sides.

[Rich Toscano]

“the UK falls into a severe double-dip recession, this will finally prove once and for all that Keynesian economics works,”

I don’t see how this would suffice as “proof” that Keynesian economics works.

Everyone (or most everyone) agrees that Keynesian policies can boost things in the short term. The question is whether this is a sustainable approach that works in the long run. The proof or lack thereof of that will be in whether governments can reduce their huge Keynesian-induced debt loads without causing a crisis.

Rich

PS – Since we’re on the topic these days, this is an example of a “good” political thread. There is obviously debate but the debate is civil and it’s about the content of an issue, not flaming and picking sides.

[Rich Toscano]

“the UK falls into a severe double-dip recession, this will finally prove once and for all that Keynesian economics works,”

I don’t see how this would suffice as “proof” that Keynesian economics works.

Everyone (or most everyone) agrees that Keynesian policies can boost things in the short term. The question is whether this is a sustainable approach that works in the long run. The proof or lack thereof of that will be in whether governments can reduce their huge Keynesian-induced debt loads without causing a crisis.

Rich

PS – Since we’re on the topic these days, this is an example of a “good” political thread. There is obviously debate but the debate is civil and it’s about the content of an issue, not flaming and picking sides.

[patb]

I’m surprised they aren’t pulling out of Afghanistan.
If you are slashing hard domestically, it seems a lot cheaper to pay for good police work and
immigration research and not be pouring money into adventures in the Kyhyber.

If i were the Lib Dems i’d make that a push
along with instant runoff voting

(Instant Runoff voting can work in lots of ways,
my preference is eliminate the last place contenders
and take all the voters for last place and apply
their votes to their second choice person. If someone gets 51% in round 1 they win but if
A get 45, B gets 40 and C gets 14 and D gets 1 percent

but the D voters preferred A on choice 2 and the C voters preferred B on Choice 2, then B wins due to
instant runoff.

[patb]

I’m surprised they aren’t pulling out of Afghanistan.
If you are slashing hard domestically, it seems a lot cheaper to pay for good police work and
immigration research and not be pouring money into adventures in the Kyhyber.

If i were the Lib Dems i’d make that a push
along with instant runoff voting

(Instant Runoff voting can work in lots of ways,
my preference is eliminate the last place contenders
and take all the voters for last place and apply
their votes to their second choice person. If someone gets 51% in round 1 they win but if
A get 45, B gets 40 and C gets 14 and D gets 1 percent

but the D voters preferred A on choice 2 and the C voters preferred B on Choice 2, then B wins due to
instant runoff.

[patb]

I’m surprised they aren’t pulling out of Afghanistan.
If you are slashing hard domestically, it seems a lot cheaper to pay for good police work and
immigration research and not be pouring money into adventures in the Kyhyber.

If i were the Lib Dems i’d make that a push
along with instant runoff voting

(Instant Runoff voting can work in lots of ways,
my preference is eliminate the last place contenders
and take all the voters for last place and apply
their votes to their second choice person. If someone gets 51% in round 1 they win but if
A get 45, B gets 40 and C gets 14 and D gets 1 percent

but the D voters preferred A on choice 2 and the C voters preferred B on Choice 2, then B wins due to
instant runoff.

[patb]

I’m surprised they aren’t pulling out of Afghanistan.
If you are slashing hard domestically, it seems a lot cheaper to pay for good police work and
immigration research and not be pouring money into adventures in the Kyhyber.

If i were the Lib Dems i’d make that a push
along with instant runoff voting

(Instant Runoff voting can work in lots of ways,
my preference is eliminate the last place contenders
and take all the voters for last place and apply
their votes to their second choice person. If someone gets 51% in round 1 they win but if
A get 45, B gets 40 and C gets 14 and D gets 1 percent

but the D voters preferred A on choice 2 and the C voters preferred B on Choice 2, then B wins due to
instant runoff.

[Author]

Posts