Motanul Incaltat

Just another weblog

Cum se explica urmatorul lucru…?

Iata un editorial foarte interesant semnat de Paul Krugman pe blogul sau din The New York Times:

Ideological Ratings

Se arata ca:

„So S&P has downgraded France. What does this tell us?

The answer is, not much about France. It can’t be overemphasized that the rating agencies have no, repeat no, special information about national solvency — especially for big countries like France. Does S&P have inside knowledge of the state of French finances? No. Does it have a better macroeconomic model than, say, the IMF — or for that matter just about any one of the men and women sitting in this IMF conference room with me? You have to be kidding.

So what’s this about? I think it’s useful to compare IMF projections for France with those for another country that has been getting nice words from the raters lately, the UK. The charts below are from the WEO database — real numbers through 2012, IMF projections up to 2018.

First, real GDP per capita:

So France has done better than the UK so far, and the IMF expects that advantage to persist.

Next, debt relative to GDP:

France is slightly less indebted, and the IMF expects this difference to widen a bit.

So why is France getting downgraded? Because, S&P says, it hasn’t carried out the reforms that will enhance its medium-term growth prospects. What does that mean?

OK, another dirty little secret. What do we know — really know — about which economic reforms will generate growth, and how much growth they’ll generate? The answer is, not much! People at places like the European Commission talk with great confidence about structural reform and the wonderful things it does, but there’s very little clear evidence to support that confidence. Does anyone really know that Hollande’s policies will mean growth that is x.x percent — or more likely, 0.x percent — slower than it would be if Olli Rehn were put in control? No.

So, again, where is this coming from?

I’m sorry, but I think that when S&P complains about lack of reform, it’s actually complaining that Hollande is raising, not cutting taxes on the wealthy, and in general isn’t free-market enough to satisfy the Davos set. Remember that a couple of months ago Olli Rehn dismissed France’s fiscal restraint — which has actually been exemplary — because the French, unacceptably, are raising taxes rather than slashing the safety net.

So just as the austerity drive isn’t really about fiscal responsibility, the push for “structural reform” isn’t really about growth; in both cases, it’s mainly about dismantling the welfare state.

S&P may not be participating in this game in a fully conscious way; when you move in those circles, things that in fact nobody knows become part of what everyone knows. But don’t take this downgrade as a demonstration that something is really rotten in the state of France. It’s much more about ideology than about defensible economic analysis.”

Despre ce este vorba? S&P a retrogradat Franta din cauza refuzului acestei tari de a lua celebrele de acuma masuri de „reforme structurale”, pentru ca nu si-a „intensificat” perspectivele de crestere pe termen mediu. Krugman afirma ca, la ora actuala, nu stim prea multe despre „reformele” care ar putea genera cestere economica. Care ar fi acelea, stiintific vorbind? Pentru ca in articol se arata un paradox: Franta este retrogradata de catre S&P dar, cu toate acestea, macroeconomic vorbind – luandu-ne cel putin dupa ce ne spun cifrele – aceasta tara sta mult mai bine decat UK. Cele doua grafice arata, bazandu-se de datele puse la dispozitie de catre FMI, ca, luand anul 2007 ca an de referinta (100%), PIB-ul Frantei pe locuitor s-a situat peste cel al Regatului Unit (primul grafic) si datoria (ca procent din PIB) este in scadere in Franta fata de UK, Franta fiind mai putin indatorata, desi situatia, cel putin intre 2007-2011(12), a stat invers. Concluzia pe care care o trage Dl. Krugman este ca aceste rating-uri sunt ideologice, sustinand teoria austeritatii si nu welfare state-ul…

Interesant este urmatorul lucru: sa vedem cum a evoluat din 2007 somajul in cele doua tari – aici, din World Economic Outlook Database, October 2013. In primul rand cred ca este necesar sa precizam ca e vorba de doua tari comparabile ca numar de locuitori!! Vom constata ca somajul (ca procent din forta totala de munca) este mai scazut in UK decat in Franta!! Sub guvernarea socialista somajul merge in Franta spre 11% in vreme ce in UK somajul are tendinta de scadere, de la 8,020% in 2012 la 7,743 in 2013 si, previziunea FMI pe 2014, 7,528%.

Si atunci cum se explica fenomenul asta?

Sub guvernarea socialista din Franta nu numai ca nu s-au creat locuri de munca, dar s-au mai si dat afara oameni, crescand somajul. Prin asta sa se explice oare cresterea economica a Frantei, superioara celei din Regatul Unit? Pe de alta parte unde e mai bine: in Franta, unde ratele somajului sunt foarte ridicate, sau in UK, unde nu este asa? Nu mai vorbesc de scaderea in popularitate a lui Hollande si a socialistilor… Lasand la o parte aspectul politic, cum se explica fenomenul? Sau trebuie sa privim problema strict din punct de vedere al productivitatii muncii? Cu alte cuvinte, vreau sa spun, in Franta este o productivitate a muncii mai ridicata decat in UK, lucru ce nu are legatura neaparat cu nivelul somajului. Este, oare, asa?

Va propun sa cititi un interesant articol pe aceeasi tema din The Guardian:

François Hollande’s shaky credibility takes another hit with credit-rating cut

Se arata, printre altele, ca:

„France’s second credit-rating downgrade by Standard & Poor’s in less than two years is as damaging politically for the socialist François Hollande as it was for his rightwing predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy, who lost the election shortly after France lost its AAA rating in January 2012.

S&P directly attacked Hollande’s economic policy, questioning the socialist government’s capacity to repair Paris’s stuttering economic motor. It said the problem with France was that the government’s tentative reforms were not enough to lift growth in the eurozone’s second largest economy.

Hollande, recently found to be the most unpopular French president on record in a poll by BVA, was already struggling to sell his economic measures to the nation. „The recovery is here,” Hollande declared in August after a small rebound in growth following months of stagnation. But real, sustained growth is expected to be slow in returning.

While the government highlights reforms such as injecting more flexibility into the rigid labour market, policies for companies to boost competitiveness and pensions reform, surveys show the electorate is baffled by policy muddles and tax U-turns. Voters are also alarmed by record levels of unemployment and nightly TV news bulletins about factory closures.

The worst of this has come in Brittany in recent weeks. The socialist stronghold, which voted resoundingly for Hollande last year, has now come to symbolise a popular revolt against his economic approach and tax policy.

Brittany is the heartland of France’s pork and poultry sectors, which have seen major factory closures. Hard-pressed farmers, fishermen and food industry workers have joined forces to don red bonnets – symbol of a local 17th century tax revolt – and focused their rage on a new eco-tax on lorries thought up under Sarkozy but due to be implemented by Hollande. The tax was duly suspended by a jittery government – its second tax climbdown in a week after it scrapped plans to raise taxes on some savings products amid a public outcry. This month, it also scrapped a new corporate tax that had infuriated business leaders.

Hollande’s government is struggling to bring down the public deficit without killing the fragile economic recovery. He has promised to cut state spending without swinging the axe against France’s vast public sector and welfare state. He has also promised to improve competitiveness and, most significantly, has vowed to tackle rising unemployment, bringing down levels before the end of this year. All of these have caused economists to cough and splutter about impossible promises.

Unemployment is now at 11%, 3.29m people, a historic high. Hollande has staked his credibility on his promise to halt the rising curve of joblessness by end of this year. But without strong growth, he can only rely on measures such as state-assisted job contracts for the young, which are taking a long time to have an effect.

S&P warned that with joblessness likely to stay high, Hollande will have a difficult job getting more reforms past a distrustful electorate. Hollande’s critics say structural reform has not gone nearly deep enough, fearing that one and a half years into a five-year mandate and faced with a tax revolt and tricky municipal elections next spring‚ further reforms will be put on hold. The government is experiencing a growing backlash from voters and businesses after it imposed €30bn in tax hikes this year, seeking to honour a promise to its EU partners to bring its budget deficit below the bloc’s target ceiling of 3% next year‚ a target it is still struggling to meet, later than promised. But it is not just the rich who are complaining about taxes, lower-income households also feel they are being targeted. Consumer-spending is low.

Jean-Marc Ayrault, France’s prime minister, told the regional press last month: „You can’t redress in one and a half years, a country that has been degraded for ten years,” a direct jibe at the rightwing governments before him.

The government said S&P had failed to take into account key reforms, such as pensions, and attacked what the finance minister called the ratings agency’s „inaccurate criticisms” of the French economy. Hollande has insisted he won’t be changing tack on the economy because of S&P’s report. But the downgrade leaves him under even more pressure to do more to sell and explain his economic policy to the public on both the left and right.”

De observat ca si in acest articol se vorbeste de somajul foarte ridicat in Franta, 11%, care inseamna 3,29 milioane de oameni, un maxim istoric. Aspectul politic e usor de inteles: se incearca sa se loveasca in guvernul socialist de la Paris prin aceasta retrogradare a rating-ului… Aspectul economic ridica multe probleme. Pentru ca nu e foarte clar, spre exemplu, de ce alte tari, care inteleg ca fac reforme, nu au si cresteri economice, sau daca le au sunt foarte mici. Cum, repet, nu e deloc clar de ce intr-o tara care, comparativ cu o alta, are o crestere economica mai mare si o tendinta de scadere a datoriei, somajul este mai mare…


Iata ce spune Dl. Krugman referitor la problema somajului in Franta:

More Notes On France-Bashing

Se arata ca:

„First things first: France has problems. Unemployment is high, especially among young people, many small businesses are struggling, the population is aging (although not nearly as much as in many other countries, Germany very much included.)

By just about any measure I can find, however, France looks not too bad by European standards. GDP has recovered roughly to pre-crisis levels; the budget deficit is fairly small and the medium-term debt outlook not at all scary; the long-term budget outlook is actually pretty good compared with its neighbors, thanks to a higher birth rate.

Yet the country is the subject of vituperative, over-the-top commentary. Here’s The Economist, a year ago, declaring France “The time bomb at the heart of Europe”. Here’s CNN declaring that France is in “free fall”.

That CNN piece actually offers a few specifics. It argues that France faces a “yawning competitiveness gap” due to rising labor costs. Hmm. Here’s what I get from European Commission numbers, comparing France with the euro area as a whole:

European Commission

There’s a bit of deterioration there, I guess — but it’s more yawn-inspiring than yawning.

CNN also declares,

France’s decline is best illustrated by the rapid deterioration in its foreign trade. In 1999, France sold around 7% of the world’s exports. Today, the figure is just over 3%, and falling fast.

Hmm.Just about every advanced country, the United States very much included, has a declining share of world exports (Germany is an exception); this New York Fed research paper notes that this decline is more or less in line with the declining share of advanced economies in world GDP as emerging nations rise, and it portrays France as more or less typical.

Again, the point is not that France is problem-free; the question is why this only moderately troubled nation attracts rating downgrades and so much apocalyptic rhetoric.

And the answer just has to be politics. France’s sin isn’t excessive debt, especially poor growth, lousy productivity (it has more or less matched Germany since 2000), poor job growth (ditto), or anything like that. Its sin is that of balancing its budget by raising taxes instead of slashing benefits. There’s no evidence that this is a disastrous policy — and in fact bond markets don’t seem concerned — but who needs evidence?”

Recunoaste faptul ca Franta are probleme, in primul rand somajul ridicat, in special in randul tinerilor, multe din micile afaceri se zbat, populatia imbatranita (nu atat de mult ca alte tari, Germania fiind „foarte inclusa” in aceasta categorie). Totusi, considera ca dupa „standarderele europene” Franta nu arata deloc rau… (interesant, dupa „standardele europene” 😀 ). PIB-ul si-a revenit la nivelul pre-criza, deficitul bugetar este mic, datoria pe termen mediu nu e ceva care sa te sperie. In ceea ce priveste datoria pe termen lung sta destul de bine comparativ cu vecinii, datorita ratelor mari ale nasterilor. Considera deplasat ce a afirmat in urma cu un an The Economist – „Bomba cu ceas din inima Europei” sau CNN, ca Franta ar fi „in cadere libera”. Nu e de acord cu ceea ce declara CNN cu privire la marirea costurilor cu forta de munca in Franta, si anume ca „se casca un decalaj de competitivitate”, argumentand prin costurile unitare cu forta de munca (v. graficul) aratand ca decalajul fata de Zona Euro nu este asa de mare. Referitor la ceea ce declara CNN, „rapida deteriorare a comertului exterior”, Krugman spune ca fenomenul de declin al cotei din totalul exporturilor pe plan mondial se manifesta in fiecare economie avansata, foarte mult in United States, Germania fiind exceptia. Spune ca doar tarile cu probleme moderate atrag retrogradari ale ratingurilor si retorici apocaliptice. Afirma ca raspunsul nu poate fi decat unul politic. Spune ca „pacatul” Frantei nu este debitul excesiv, in special cresterea slaba, sau o productivitate slaba (din punctul de vedere al productivitatii comparandu-se mai mult sau mai putin cu Germania, incepand din anul 2000), o crestere slaba in privinta locurilor de munca. Spune ca „pacatul” ei este ca doreste sa-si echilibreze balanta bugetara prin marirea taxelor in loc sa taie beneficiile. Spune ca nu este o evidenta ca aceasta ar fi o politica dezastruoasa – pietele bondurilor nu par a fi ingrijorate – „dar cine are nevoie de evidente?”.

Un alt articol interesant despre Franta este acesta:

Non-Crisis France

Iata ce arata:

„A few people have asked a pretty good question, albeit in fairly belligerent tones: How can I say that France isn’t doing too badly, when I also say that the euro has been such a problem?

The answer lies in the nature of the euro problem; France is not Spain.

What happened when the euro was created was a flood of capital out of the core, mainly Germany, to the periphery, especially Spain. The counterpart of this move was the emergence of huge current account surpluses in the core, huge deficits in the periphery. The problem now is that correcting these imbalances is very hard given a common currency. Here’s the usual picture — but this time with France added:

France, which didn’t get a big, unjustified confidence boost from the euro, wasn’t part of this process — it was neither a big lender nor a large borrower. So it doesn’t have the peripheral adjustment problem.

You can also look at inflation:

The first decade of the euro left Spain very overvalued, Germany very undervalued. France was in between, so there was no big news either way.

To use the jargon, the euro area suffered from very large asymmetric shocks — but France, which roughly tracked the euro average, wasn’t subject to these shocks.

So again, why the downgrade?

In 2011-2012 markets turned on France, for a while. But this was a liquidity issue, not a real concern about solvency, and it went away when the ECB signaled that it was willing to do its job as lender of last resort:

Spread between French and German 10-year bond yields. Spread between French and German 10-year bond yields.

Oh, and here was the massive action after S&P’s announcement:

Bloomberg News

Seven whole basis points!

So I stand by my assessment: S&P wasn’t really assessing French default risk, it was slapping the French on the wrist for not being sufficiently committed to dismantling the welfare state.”

Explicatia pe care o da Krugman pentru retrogradarea Frantei de catre S&P este ca Franta nu a facut suficient pentru „demantelarea welfare state”… El arata ca Franta nu se gaseste in situatia grea in care se gasesc tarile de la periferia UE (spre ex. Spania). Franta nici nu a dat foarte mult cu imprumut si nici nu a facut imprumuturi mari, de aceea nu are problemele de ajustare pe care le are periferia. Franta este undeva pe la mijloc intre Spania si Germania atat in privinta contului curent cat si in privinta inflatiei. Spune ca Zona Euro a suferit niste „socuri asimetrice”, dar Franta nu a fost subiectul unor asemenea socuri.

De acord, dar asta nu inseamna ca in Franta s-a imbunatatit mediul de afaceri. Pe de alta parte recunoaste ca micile afaceri „se zbat”. N-as crede ca din cauza imbatranirii populatiei… Pe de alta parte, chiar daca dupa „standardele europene Franta nu arata chiar asa de rau” ( 😀 ), cum s-ar putea rezolva problema somajului, atat de ridicat in aceasta tara? Daca ne uitam pe datele puse la dispozitie de catre FRED somajul a crescut puternic din 2008 incoace… De vazut si acest tabel si facut o comparatie cu ce rate ale somajului erau in 1970…

Recomand citirea integrala si in original a tuturor articolelor.

noiembrie 9, 2013 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 115 comentarii


„Nimeni nu vrea să ne facă vreun rău, ci ne spun faceţi ce trebuie la voi acasă. Efortul trebuie îndreptat spre acasă, nu cred că la nivelul instituţiilor UE am fost şicanaţi sau nedreptăţiţi. Avem noroc cu o comisie europeană care vrea să ne facă bine.”

Traian Basescu – Presedintele Romaniei

Gandul:Traian Basescu at EPP Summit September 2010

Traian Băsescu, la Bruxelles. „S-au manifestat îngrijorări despre ce se întâmplă în ţară. Cine crede că se poate folosi un limbaj dublu se înşală”

Recomand citirea integrala si in original a intregului articol.

„…Avem noroc cu o comisie europeana care vrea sa ne faca bine.

Deci e o chestiune de noroc… Caci s-ar mai putea sa fie si viceversa: sa nu avem noroc si, deci, sa avem parte de o Comisie Europeana care sa nu ne vrea binele

septembrie 14, 2012 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Lasă un comentariu


Iata ce se arata in Romania Libera:

Socialistul european Hannes Swoboda: Trebuie să monitorizăm atent evenimentele din România şi să luăm măsuri dacă se încalcă legislaţia UE



Cum s-a apărat Traian Băsescu în faţa parlamentarilor USL. Mesajul de final: „Vă mulţumesc mult şi succes”

Aspazia Cojocaru, judecător la Curtea Constituţională, A FOST AMENINŢATĂ înaintea votului privind suspendarea lui Traian Băsescu

Judecătorii Curţii Constituţionale AU RESPINS 5 din cele 7 acuzaţii aduse de USL lui Traian Băsescu

Crin Antonescu: Dacă nu veţi fi demis la referendum domnule Băsescu, eu mă retrag definitiv din viaţa politică

SUSPENDAREA LUI BĂSESCU – Patru zile de foc pentru politica românească. Ce s-a întâmplat în ultimele zile


Preşedintele Consiliului European pe Twitter: Foarte îngrijorat de evoluţiile din România. Îi contactez pe Ponta şi Băsescu

Cum comentează presa internaţională accelerarea procedurii împotriva preşedintelui şi protestele din Bucureşti

Antonescu: Nu eu şi majoritatea parlamentară avem dosare închise, ci preşedintele

O lupta politica acerba!!!!


Mediafax si Gandul:

SUSPENDAREA LUI TRAIAN BĂSESCU. VOTUL S-A ÎNCHEIAT – Băsescu: Aţi văzut vreun dictator care să dea opoziţiei funcţia de premier? – LIVE TEXT


Update 2

Mediafax si Gandul


TRAIAN BĂSESCU A FOST SUSPENDAT. Crin Antonescu este preşedinte interimar- LIVE VIDEO

Se arata, printre altele, ca:

„Preşedintele Traian Băsescu a fost suspendat de parlament cu 258 de voturi „pentru”. În maximum 30 de zile trebuie organizat referendum pentru demiterea preşedintelui. În această perioadă, preşedinte interimar este şeful senatului Crin Antonescu.

Băsescu va fi demis dacă la referendum votează în acest sens 50 la sută plus unu dintre cei care merg la urne.

Curtea Constituţională a analizat cele şapte capete de acuzare formulate de USL, fiind de acord  cu două dintre ele.

UPDATE 20:50Dan Radu Ruşanu a anunţat că preşedintele a fost suspendat cu 258 de voturi „pentru”

UPDATE 20:45 Votul s-a încheiat, useliştii au facut deja semn ca au voturile necesare suspendării. USL susţine că pentru suspendare au votat 259 de parlamentari.

UPDATE 20:16 Votul este secret, cu bile. Parlamentarii USL, dar şi cei ai PDL, în frunte cu Elena Udrea, supraveghează votul.

UPDATE 19:56Băsescu: „Voi aştepta decizia la Cotroceni. Domnule Antonescu, vă las o foaie să vă scrieţi de pe acum ce aţi promis: demisia dacă voi câştiga referendumul

UPDATE 19:51 Băsescu:”O să vă spun un regret. Am numit doi prim-miniştri, unul se numeşte Călin Popescu Tăriceanu, altul Victor Ponta. După ce au ajuns la Palatul Victoria, amândoi şi-au făcut obiectiv suspendarea. I-am văzut cu ochii blânzi şi umezi înainte de a le da mandatul şi apoi marionete ale corupţiei din propriile partide. (…) Vă rog să aveţi grijă de ţară şi oamenii ei”

UPDATE 19:49 Băsescu: „Aţi văzut vreun dictator care să dea opoziţiei funcţia de premier, să dea opoziţiei funcţia de şef al SIE. Dacă n-aţi văzut, mai căutaţi dictatori”.

UPDATE 19:48Băsescu: „Atâta timp cât voi fi preşedintele României nu va reuşi nimeni să facă cu mine un compromis pentru că eu nu fac intervenoii nici la procurori, nici la judecători, nici la poliţişti. Uneori s-au supărat şi unii din PDL, dar asta-i viaţa”

UPDATE 19:45 Traian Băsescu a luat din nou cuvântul amintind că toate partidele au semnat Pactul pentru Educaţie. „După aceea aţi înţeles dezastrul unei cooperări în imaginea dumneavoastră”, a spus Băsescu.

UPDATE 19:35 Traian Băsescu a revenit în sala de plen.”

Recomand citirea integrala si in original a tuturor articolelor.

iulie 6, 2012 Posted by | Uncategorized | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Un comentariu