Baltic states ... What happened?

[PeteEU]

The U.S. doesn't force countries or their citizens to borrow more than they can afford to pay back. At least Latvia's paying back its debts ahead of schedule. How are the socialist paradises like Greece doing? Trying to borrow more money?

Latvia Repays $287 Million of IMF Loan to Lower Interest Costs - Bloomberg

And why bring up Greece? It is a very unique situation there.. rather pathetic. Plus the Latvian economy (and other baltic states) is still totally dependent on the EU and the goodwill of the rich Scandinavian countries... poverty is at record highs, as is unemployment last I looked.

 

[Ahlevah]

The Baltic states are near the wealthy Scandinavian countries, while Bulgaria sits next to Greece.

Yeah, and Mexico sits on the border of the largest economy on the planet while China is thousands of miles away on the other side of the Pacific. Who cares? They have these things called ships. And the Baltic states haven't moved since they left the Soviet Union, you know. They still sat next door to Scandinavia when Estonians and Latvians ate boiled pork fat and used 30-grit sandpaper to wipe their asses.

 

[JP Hochbaum]

Yeah, and Mexico sits on the border of the largest economy on the planet while China is thousands of miles away on the other side of the Pacific. Who cares? They have these things called ships. And the Baltic states haven't moved since they left the Soviet Union, you know. They still sat next door to Scandinavia when Estonians and Latvians ate boiled pork fat and used 30-grit sandpaper to wipe their asses.

And since Nafta Mexico has become much better off. Thanks for proving my point.

"The 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) capped Mexico’s ten-year transformation from one of the most closed to one of the most open economies in the world. The hope was that economic integration would stimulate large inflows of foreign direct investment (FDI) in manufacturing, especially by North American corporations looking for a low-wage export platform. By expanding exports, FDI would alleviate Mexico’s debt overhang, create high-productivity manufacturing jobs, and fuel economic growth. FDI was also expected to cure environmental and social problems. New manufacturing jobs would absorb the urban poor and farmers displaced by NAFTA, allowing Mexico, in the words of President Carlos Salinas to “export goods, not people.” Moreover, transnational corporations (TNCs) would transfer “clean technology” and state-of-the-art environmental management systems, reducing the pollution and health risks associated with rapid industrial growth, especially in developing countries with poor regulatory systems. Ten years after the passage of NAFTA, it is clear that the operation was successful—FDI inflows and exports boomed."

Now all they have to do is fix wage inequality, something that unions could help with

 

[iliveonramen]

The U.S. doesn't force countries or their citizens to borrow more than they can afford to pay back. At least Latvia's paying back its debts ahead of schedule. How are the socialist paradises like Greece doing? Trying to borrow more money?

Latvia Repays $287 Million of IMF Loan to Lower Interest Costs - Bloomberg

You forget the other socialist paradises, like Finland, Norway, France, Germany, Canada etc. Of course those don't fit your narrative so they don't exist or somehow turned into non-socialist countries. Germany actually spend a larger % of it's GDP on government services than Greece did before the collapse. Just a little food for thought.

 

[Ahlevah]

You forget the other socialist paradises, like Finland, Norway, France, Germany, Canada etc. Of course those don't fit your narrative so they don't exist or somehow turned into non-socialist countries. Germany actually spend a larger % of it's GDP on government services than Greece did before the collapse. Just a little food for thought.

Grant Thornton just released its Global Dynamism index for 2012 (the best nations for capitalists to do business in). Finland and Sweden came in, respectively, 2nd and 3rd, after Singapore. Germany came in 9th, the U.S. 10th, Norway 14th, and France 16th. Greece came in 48th in the list of fifty countries, between Egypt and Nigeria. Hugo Chavez' Venezuela came in dead last. Among the criteria used in the survey are business operating environment. The report noted:

An economy’s business operating environment – trade laws, regulation, legal and political institutions – provides the foundations for business growth. A poor operating environment, that fails to offer key safeguards and security, represents a higher risk for business investment. Conversely, those economies with open trade policies and clearly defined competition and legal systems offer a much better platform for dynamic businesses....

Finland, Ireland, Sweden, the Netherlands and Denmark are all very open economies with strong, transparent competition and regulatory systems. Of the five, Ireland has suffered most from the eurozone crisis, but it has managed to hang on to its low corporation taxes making it an attractive location for business investment.

http://www.gti.org/files/gdi2012 - final report.pdf

 

[Ahlevah]

And since Nafta Mexico has become much better off. Thanks for proving my point.

I thought your point was prosperity came by virtue of geographic proximity. If that were the case, then the Baltic states should have been booming during the Soviet period, which they clearly weren't. Scandinavian countries carried on substantial trade with the U.S.S.R., including the Baltics.

But if your point is free trade, free markets, and private ownership of capital lead to prosperity and create the wealth that allows funding of a welfare state, then we share common ground.

 

[RGacky3]

Latvia's economy is recovering. Unemployment is down significantly from the peak, employment is up, trade is up, industrial production is up....

Really? the official unemployment rate is 15% (meaning real is more around 25% to 30%), and that is dispite about 10% of the labor force emegrating ... And yeah ... so some sectors are up, but when you compare that to the hit it got, it can barely be considered a recovery. Its back in defecit now.

Also labor costs in Latvia are just as high as other comparable countries.

 

[RGacky3]

Meanwhile, how's Greece doing? How many bailouts has it had? Two, with another one on the way? If bailouts actually worked, its economy should be booming. The only things that will save an economy with a large, inefficient, bloated public sector are austerity and time.

Greece is following the exact same policy as Latvia ... also its not the government of Greece bailing out Greece its the eurozone ... and Latvia got bailouts too.

The U.S. doesn't force countries or their citizens to borrow more than they can afford to pay back. At least Latvia's paying back its debts ahead of schedule. How are the socialist paradises like Greece doing? Trying to borrow more money?

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...est-costs.html

Actually the US does through lowering wages and higher cost of living expenses .... Actually the US does that all the time with 3rd world countries.

Also how the hell is Greece socialist AT ALL???? oh one more thing Lithuania just voted out the right wing government in favor of a more left wing one.

 

[Ahlevah]

Really?

Yeah, really. Yes, unemployment is high, but considering it peaked at more than 30%, the country's made considerable progress. Latvia's economy has grown for eleven straight quarters in the wake of a recession that's left more than fifteen million people unemployed in the E.U. As Latvia's economy grows, it will begin adding jobs again, which it did in the latest reporting period. Meanwhile, in Greece and Spain, where people are rioting and cursing the IMF, Germany, Goldman Sachs, the United States--basically, everyone but themselves--the unemployment rate is 25% and rising. So I guess the "real" rate must be 35-50%, eh? Spain's economy has declined for four straight quarters and Greece's for nine.

Indicators for LATVIA

Indicators for GREECE

Indicators for SPAIN

 

[Ahlevah]

Greece is following the exact same policy as Latvia ... also its not the government of Greece bailing out Greece its the eurozone ... and Latvia got bailouts too.

Latvia's paying back the loans it already received ahead of schedule. Spain will undoubtedly need a bailout, and Greece will probably need a third bailout. The difference between Latvia and Greece is Latvia borrowed money after the country's second-largest bank failed while Greece had been using the euro as a credit card and living beyond its means for decades, squandering the money it borrowed on padded public payrolls and a social "safety net." Now the bills are coming due.

 

[RGacky3]

Yeah, really. Yes, unemployment is high, but considering it peaked at more than 30%, the country's made considerable progress. Latvia's economy has grown for eleven straight quarters in the wake of a recession that's left more than fifteen million people unemployed in the E.U. As Latvia's economy grows, it will begin adding jobs again, which it did in the latest reporting period. Meanwhile, in Greece and Spain, where people are rioting and cursing the IMF, Germany, Goldman Sachs, the United States--basically, everyone but themselves--the unemployment rate is 25% and rising. So I guess the "real" rate must be 35-50%, eh? Spain's economy has declined for four straight quarters and Greece's for nine.

Indicators for LATVIA

Indicators for GREECE

Indicators for SPAIN

Both Spain and Greece have followed traditional IMF policies of austerity ... So that's not really a good example ... the rioters are not making public policy.

Latvia's paying back the loans it already received ahead of schedule. Spain will undoubtedly need a bailout, and Greece will probably need a third bailout. The difference between Latvia and Greece is Latvia borrowed money after the country's second-largest bank failed while Greece had been using the euro as a credit card and living beyond its means for decades, squandering the money it borrowed on padded public payrolls and a social "safety net." Now the bills are coming due.

That's nonsense, A: Latvia also has a large public sector, B: Greece has been cutting all those saftey nets and public payrolls C: You're ignoring Estonia ... Which was the origional libertarian diamond of the Baltics.

 

[Paul Austin]

You're ignoring Estonia ... Which was the origional libertarian diamond of the Baltics.

When was Estonia ever Libertarian?

Serious question.

 

[RGacky3]

When Libertarians talked about it as a good model.

 

[Paul Austin]

When Libertarians talked about it as a good model.

So actually never then?

So this debate is really one of those "well some libertarians said some policies were good" type debates where the goalposts are moved to "therefore they were Libertarian".

By that same measure I could probably make a false case against any ideology in any country.

In fact using that measure I could argue Estonia is a guide to the fate of socialist nations as well.

 

[RGacky3]

So actually never then?

So this debate is really one of those "well some libertarians said some policies were good" type debates where the goalposts are moved to "therefore they were Libertarian".

By that same measure I could probably make a false case against any ideology in any country.

In fact using that measure I could argue Estonia is a guide to the fate of socialist nations as well.

Its the no true scotsman fallacy you're making, libertarians were talking about estonia and their good economic policies all the time, and socialists were not.

 

[Paul Austin]

Its the no true scotsman fallacy you're making, libertarians were talking about estonia and their good economic policies all the time, and socialists were not.

No, it was a genuine question I asked, based on the fact I'd previously been to Estonia & was genuinely interested if Id missed something, like them being libertarian at some point in history.

As for what I said afterwards, then yes, as members of the EU (applying for Eurozone membership) by law they will have policies applauded by socialists too, so its as valid for one side as the other.

If adopting policies applauded by libertarians makes them libertarian it can be argued that adopting policies applauded by socialism makes them socialists too (& not a scotsman in sight).

Actually given the obvious libertarian opposition to the EU & Eurozone Im surprised to hear any libertarians were championing them as a libertarian.

I guess I'll have to go look at who said what in the past.

 

[iliveonramen]

Grant Thornton just released its Global Dynamism index for 2012 (the best nations for capitalists to do business in). Finland and Sweden came in, respectively, 2nd and 3rd, after Singapore. Germany came in 9th, the U.S. 10th, Norway 14th, and France 16th. Greece came in 48th in the list of fifty countries, between Egypt and Nigeria. Hugo Chavez' Venezuela came in dead last. Among the criteria used in the survey are business operating environment. The report noted:

And all those countries have strong safety nets, strong union presence, and universal healthcare. You seem to be equating bad governance with socialism which obviously isn't the case here. Obviously government spending doesn't equal a bad business environment.

 

[RGacky3]

No, it was a genuine question I asked, based on the fact I'd previously been to Estonia & was genuinely interested if Id missed something, like them being libertarian at some point in history.

As for what I said afterwards, then yes, as members of the EU (applying for Eurozone membership) by law they will have policies applauded by socialists too, so its as valid for one side as the other.

If adopting policies applauded by libertarians makes them libertarian it can be argued that adopting policies applauded by socialism makes them socialists too (& not a scotsman in sight).

Actually given the obvious libertarian opposition to the EU & Eurozone Im surprised to hear any libertarians were championing them as a libertarian.

I guess I'll have to go look at who said what in the past.

I'm talking about the austerity policies post recession.

 

[Paul Austin]

I'm talking about the austerity policies post recession.

I get the general gist, some libertarians supported some policies in a non-libertarian country (in the same way as many non-libertarians supported non-libertarian policies) what I struggle with is the extrapolation that therefore Estonia is libertarian & libertarianism is therefore wrong on all counts.

Without the hype its not a bad topic for debate, how much did what policies effect the economy, what part did external forces play (trade partners, EU etc) & how much did the mix & match politics hamper & help each other & what can be extrapolated from all this.

It could be an interesting discussion but the whole libertarians fail in libertarian country propoganda kind of devalues the discussion in my eyes.

Btw. Thats not aimed exclusively at you. A lot of its feulled by the last 4 years & the thousands, probably millions of false attacks against socialism, all citing Obama.

Im neither a socialist, nor an Obama supporter but Im happy to admit that one doesnt equal the other & get annoyed when the debates are over exagerated and lose credability in the process.

 

[RGacky3]

What IS a libertarian country? Name one ...

 

[Ahlevah]

And all those countries have strong safety nets, strong union presence, and universal healthcare. You seem to be equating bad governance with socialism which obviously isn't the case here. Obviously government spending doesn't equal a bad business environment.

All of the countries you listed don't follow the same model. Some have better business operating environments than others. France, for example, is not Sweden. Unions have fought the French government over plans to sell large, inefficient, state-owned enterprises and lay off public workers. It's next to impossible to fire anyone in France. That's probably one reason Michelin is expanding its plant in non-union South Carolina and chose to put its latest plant, which will supply expensive earth-moving tires world-wide, there as well. This follows planned investments by Germany's Continental Tire and Japan's Bridgestone.

 

[iliveonramen]

All of the countries you listed don't follow the same model. Some have better business operating environments than others. France, for example, is not Sweden. Unions have fought the French government over plans to sell large, inefficient, state-owned enterprises and lay off public workers. It's next to impossible to fire anyone in France. That's probably one reason Michelin is expanding its plant in non-union South Carolina and chose to put its latest plant, which will supply expensive earth-moving tires world-wide, there as well. This follows planned investments by Germany's Continental Tire and Japan's Bridgestone.

If there's a spectrum of socialism all the countries listed are much more socialist than the US and close to or exceeding Greece. Which is my point, socialism isn't Greece's problem, it's bad governance, which can exist in any form by any government.

Chalking their problems up to "socialism" maybe convient on the right or fun because it validates their views but it's also completely incorrect.

 

[Ahlevah]

Both Spain and Greece have followed traditional IMF policies of austerity ... So that's not really a good example ... the rioters are not making public policy.

Yeah, but companies aren't exactly chomping at the bit to invest in countries where workers are rioting and demanding no more cuts in the bloated welfare state.

That's nonsense, A: Latvia also has a large public sector, B: Greece has been cutting all those saftey nets and public payrolls C: You're ignoring Estonia ... Which was the origional libertarian diamond of the Baltics.

So which is it? These are "socialist" countries with large public sectors and IMF and EU bailouts that are failing, or they're libertarian diamonds with large public sectors and IMF and EU bailouts that are failing? Did it ever occur to anyone that with the usual libertarian remedy of letting failures fail and letting capital be redistributed to more efficient enterprise these countries would be better off than they are?

 

[RGacky3]

Yeah, but companies aren't exactly chomping at the bit to invest in countries where workers are rioting and demanding no more cuts in the bloated welfare state.

That's neither here or there ...

So which is it? These are "socialist" countries with large public sectors and IMF and EU bailouts that are failing, or they're libertarian diamonds with large public sectors and IMF and EU bailouts that are failing? Did it ever occur to anyone that with the usual libertarian remedy of letting failures fail and letting capital be redistributed to more efficient enterprise these countries would be better off than they are?

Just having a large public sector doesn't make you socialist ...

It did occur to me, the usually libertarian remedy, but then I dismissed it because I know economics and history ... Its not efficiency that the problem is, its the internal contradictions of capital, i.e. excess capacity and financialization.

 

[Ahlevah]

Chalking their problems up to "socialism" maybe convient on the right or fun because it validates their views but it's also completely incorrect.

Other than olive oil, what does Greece produce that the world wants? What does it produce efficiently? Socialism is not the engine that drives innovation and prosperity. It's people and businesses taking advantage of free markets to meet demand for goods and services that other people want. Countries that permit inefficient enterprises to fall by the wayside, respect the profit motive and private property, engage in reasonable levels of business taxation, and avoid endemic corruption will likely prosper. Those that don't probably won't.