EU Clinches Massive Stimulus Deal To Bind Continent Together (bloomberg.com) 182
European Union leaders agreed on an unprecedented stimulus package worth 750 billion euros ($860 billion) to pull their economies out of the worst recession in memory and tighten the financial bonds holding their 27 nations together. From a report: The agreement, in the early hours of Tuesday after more than four days of acrimonious negotiations in Brussels, required the unanimous approval of the member states and represents a victory for German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron, who drafted an early outline for the proposal in May. The emergency fund will give out 390 billion euros of grants and 360 billion euros of low-interest loans. Almost a third of the funds are earmarked for fighting climate change and, together with the bloc's next 1 trillion-euro, seven-year budget, will constitute the biggest green stimulus package in history. All expenditure must be consistent with the Paris Agreement's goal of cutting greenhouse gases.
That's Gotta Hurt (Score:2)
The article fails to mention whether the U.K. gets any part of the stimulus or not. Without looking further I would bet they get nothing.
Of course they will get some benefit from it anyway, as long as their economy is operable enough and they have something to sell to the EU. I have no idea what that might be.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
UK aren't in the EU so aren't part of this.
Re: (Score:3)
Because, at least for some Americans, what is good for the goose is not good for the gander. They have no problem with a United States of America, a political and fiscal union binding together several states, but find the idea of Europe wanting to do the same quite offensive. Maybe it's fear of the EU eventually becoming a rival power, I really don't know.
But like it or not, this is the next step to a United States of Europe.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe in the minds of some but it'll never happen - too many want to keep their sovereignty within a cohesive economic block with free movement of people
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They already gave up a lot of their souvereignity when the European Central Bank was created, together with the post of European ‘minister of finance.’ With this deal, a European tax comes on top of that. What I would like to see next is the formation of a European army and a European Minister of Traffic and Environment, whose main task will be smoothening the build of high-speed train tracks connecting all countries and making sure all countries adhere to the Paris agreement.
Re: (Score:2)
I sincerely hope so. Europe really needs to get a single government and single economy. Has needed it for a couple-three centuries....
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Europe was united before Diocletian split it up in 284 CE. It was a time of peace and prosperity [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:3)
I sincerely hope so. Europe really needs to get a single government and single economy. Has needed it for a couple-three centuries....
Well, that's what they say in Germany.
The core issue with Germany has always been a deep-seated belief that no one else can be trusted to run Europe "properly". That belief is still there, albeit in a nicer form than previously but it still boils down to a sincere belief that they are the best country with the best financial sense and, since financial sense is the single most important thing in the world, there's no logical reason to let anyone else be in charge. The whole Eurozone is about making sure Germ
Re: (Score:2)
Of course Switzerland is the country with the best financial sense in Europe. Which is why they aren’t in the EU.
Re:This is actually a fact. (Score:4, Insightful)
some Americans ... find the idea of Europe wanting to do the same quite offensive.
Most Americans would have difficulty finding Europe on a map and couldn't care less about the political structure of the EU.
In 2016, 45% of Americans didn't even care about the politics of their own country enough to bother to vote. They care about Europe far less.
Re: (Score:2)
United States of Europe
Nobody will agree to that when some states have veto power and some dont.
Re: (Score:2)
They all have veto power already.
Re: (Score:2)
Many in the United States don't want the states to be really united either. It's typically just been a conservative ideal to have a weaker federal government and stronger state governments - they don't like huge countries.
Honestly I think a lot of the US's problems right now could be solved by it dividing up into 4 or 5 smaller countries. Hence why it's sort of cheered for the UK to exit the EU. Kinda like a guy in an unhappy marriage cheering his friend getting a divorce, and warning the unmarried frien
Re: (Score:2)
It's typically just been a conservative ideal to have a weaker federal government and stronger state governments - they don't like huge countries.
Or it's just not appealing to have some distant unaccountable bureaucrat that operates on the federal level with no vestment with your community making decisions that can have tremendous impact.
case in point: Kalamath Falls farmers vrs. the Federal Bureau of Reclamation [columbian.com], where Fed decides on a whim whether or not these rural communities wither on the vine.
Notice those protesting the overreach of Federal power wave the banner of the national flag. It isn't about 'too big a country', it's about having actual
Re: (Score:2)
Without looking further I would bet they get nothing.
And why would they? They aren't formally part of the EU and they weren't even present at the negotiations as they aren't a EU member and thus no longer party to its meetings.
Re: (Score:3)
The first thing this country did was to pass stimulus packages, IDK how effective they can be, I'm not judging. But the packages for working people whilst not perfect were a godsend to many millions of people, myself included. I'm getting paid 80% of what my income was for not spreading the virus about / for self-isolating. I feel bad for the tens of millions of Americans and some UK people that don't get treated so well.
I feel that having a population that isn't all completely skint should help the economy
Re: (Score:2)
People with Vit'D deficiency who get COVID19 are 20x more likely to end up in intensive care-The British Medical Journal
We'd better start adding vitamin D to our milk, and flouridating our water, and ....
Correlation is not causation.
Re: (Score:2)
Some EU economies are stronger and more productive than the UK economy. Yet they contribute to this package and they have to desire whatsoever to leave it.
The reason is simple - they all are part of a larger economy called the Single Market, and would not fare nearly as well without that market.
How strong and productive the UK economy is going to be outside this market remains to be seen. I wouldn't take anything for granted.
Re: That's Gotta Hurt (Score:4, Interesting)
Any significant friction in trade with the EU is going to create a cascade of difficulties for the UK. The idea that it's going to sign a bunch of free trade deals elsewhere and somehow make up for what is lost by access to the Single Market is the fundamental pipe dream. The UK at one time was able to manage that, but it had a vast overseas empire and control of the seas to facilitate its global trade. It no longer has an empire and its navy is a shadow of what it once was. And even when it held its huge trade empire, it wasn't like the locals were that appreciative. The American colonies didn't like having trade monopolies imposed on them, and neither did India. The rest of the Commonwealth, due to geographical situation, have looked to nations closer to themselves; whether that's Canada to the US or Australia to Asia.
Britain, or at least the Conservative Party, is stuck in a past that died with the Second World War.
Re: (Score:2)
you are not wrong
Re: (Score:2)
Probably true, of course the left in most of Europe and the US has the heads firmly planted in the mid 60s believing neo-marxism works and if they just push their fiat money money and confiscatory redistributionary taxation schemes a little harder all the world problems will suddenly vanish as if 80 years of experience with the welfare state should not have produced results by now; utopia is just around the corner!
I would love it if just for a moment people would give some consideration to the idea that jus
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't wave the flag and bow down to Brussels. That's all a true citizen of the EU needs to know.
Re: (Score:2)
Some EU economies are stronger and more productive than the UK economy. Yet they contribute to this package and they have to desire whatsoever to leave it.
The reason is simple - they all are part of a larger economy called the Single Market, and would not fare nearly as well without that market.
The single market has a cost. Quite a high one if you're at all democratically minded.
Re: That's Gotta Hurt (Score:2)
Lol
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's just silly. The UK's GDP was 2.85 trillion in 2018. Germany alone had a 3.94 trillion dollar GDP in 2018. The UK screwed itself with Brexit, cutting off its nose, lips and eyebrows to spite its face. The EU doesn't need the UK, but the UK definitely needs the EU.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK economy has always been stronger than the EU's.
LOL. Your post started so well comparing the UK's to individual member nations. Then you decided to compare them to the lumped together EU and lost the plot. Sorry but your economy is minor compared to that of the EU's, actual figures put it around 1/10th of the size. Expect that to drop further at the end of this year as the gap has been steadily widening since 2016.
Re: (Score:2)
The UK economy is about the same as the French economy and both are dwarfed by Germany in both the size and the productivity.
Re: The trouble is those economies are interconnec (Score:2)
Why don't you just cut out the red states? Stop collecting taxes from them and stop giving them money.
Because we'd Balkanize & become vulnerable (Score:3, Interesting)
It's worth remember that it's cheaper to drop food than bombs. Keep the poorer states fed and clothed and you won't have civil wars to put down. Yeah, you can put those wars down (the poor states won't have the resources to mount a real offensive) but it'll be far more expe
Re: (Score:2)
Because every state gets two senators, so the moocher red states can easily dominate the more productive liberal states in the Senate, even though they have smaller populations and pitifully small GDPs.
Re: (Score:2)
Because every state gets two senators, so the moocher red states can easily dominate the more productive liberal states in the Senate, even though they have smaller populations and pitifully small GDPs.
Moocher red states? Smaller populations? Pitifully small GDPs? Did you know that California is a net recipient [usatoday.com] of federal funding?
The bulk of federal support to states is for programs like Medicaid, CHIP, SNAP, TANF, education, and other programs benefiting those in need - no matter the "color" of the state they live in. I certainly don't have a problem with it, and I don't understand why anyone would.
Re: (Score:3)
Because every state gets two senators, so the moocher red states can easily dominate the more productive liberal states in the Senate, even though they have smaller populations and pitifully small GDPs.
Moocher red states? Smaller populations? Pitifully small GDPs? Did you know that California is a net recipient [usatoday.com] of federal funding?
California is very close to neutral. Taxpayers there receive, on average, $12 more from the federal government than they pay out to it. That's so close to zero to be within the error. Which is what the link you posted said. Or here's another ref [governing.com].
In general, original poster is right: the states which give more than the receive are mostly (but not exclusively) blue, and the states which receive more than the give are mostly (but not exclusively) red.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice cherry picking. Here's the full list. https://wallethub.com/edu/stat... [wallethub.com]
The bulk of federal spending (not "support") in excess of taxes paid goes to the military industrial complex. I know, I live in a state with a lot of military and federal labs.
Re: (Score:2)
Nice cherry picking. Here's the full list. https://wallethub.com/edu/stat... [wallethub.com]
Cherry picking? I provided a credible source that lists all 50 states and ranks by actual spending numbers - not some nebulous "score" in an article on a site that peddles credit cards. If you bother to look at the USA Today article, you'll find that five of the top ten net recipients of federal spending are blue states. Number one state? Virginia.
Don't like USA Today? Here's another source. [worldpopul...review.com] Tells pretty much the same story. Six of top ten states in total federal funding are blue. Five of top ten st
CA gets $12 per resident (Score:2)
Virginia gets $10,301 and Kentucky gets $9,145.
That was probably not the article you should have linked to in order to make your point.
Very, very little of federal funding goes to CHIP, SNAP & TANF. And Medicaid & Medicare are completely separate from the money talked about in the article you linked to. So again, you're point is invalid.
The bulk of discretionary spending is and has been since the 40s on Military and Empire building. Meanwhile while we bank
Re: The trouble is those economies are interconne (Score:2)
I think they'd be ok with it. With zero federal taxes, the rich and many businesses would flood into red states.
You ok with that?
Re: The trouble is those economies are interconne (Score:4, Insightful)
That's not how things work. Riddle me this, why are all the blue states, with their higher taxes, so much better at doing capitalism? How come they succeed where backwards ass red states fail? How come California, the demon conservatives love to hate, is so rich?
If businesses were going to flood into red states, they'd already be doing it. But like the rest of the US, successful businessmen know that red states suck for business.
Re: (Score:2)
Yet if you look at the fastest growing counties in the country, almost all of them are in the South:
https://www.usnews.com/news/he... [usnews.com]
https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
It's a bit of a teeter toter - businesses build up in one area, the area no longer "needs" them (since it's already wealthy), and then less wealthy areas start attracting those businesses via tax breaks.
Re: (Score:2)
Fastest growing means population. They are counties with over 20,000 people and most are under 100,000. People are moving there from other places nearby. They are still very small and unimportant places.
We were talking about the economy, not population.
Re: The trouble is those economies are interconne (Score:2)
California, my home state where I have lived since I was a small child, is the poster child state for wealth gap.
We have both a huge number of very wealthy and an even bigger number of dirt poor. The middle class get squeezed out and pushed ever further down the economic ladder every year.
If you want to hold up some place a the golden child of wealth and prosperity that other places should emulate and envy, California is not where you should look.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
California is not even in the top three in income inequality. My home state of Connecticut has the dubious honor of being third, probably because it is right next to number one, New York. Florida is the dark horse second most unequal state.
California, believe it or not, is only number 7. https://www.epi.org/publicatio... [epi.org]
But you are a right winger and on record as a fervid supporter of capitalism. This is capitalism. This is what it does, concentrates wealth at the top. It's not a bug in the system, it is th
Re: The trouble is those economies are interconne (Score:2)
Only number 7? The idea that there are 6 places worse than the mess here is tragic and sad.
So, are we still using California as an example of a healthy economy? That was the original topic here.
And how many of those 7 states are red or blue? Without checking I'm going to guess they're mostly, if not entirely blue. Am I right?
I am not a fervent supporter of raw capitalism. I am ardently opposed to the evil that is socialism and communism. I am in favor of a capitalist-based economy with fair trade and
Re: (Score:3)
Why don't you just cut out the red states?
They volunteered to leave in 1861. But for some inexplicable reason, the blue states wanted them to stay.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, the red and blue nomenclature wasn't around yet, but by today's terms, the blue states wanted to secede, and red wanted them to stay. Abraham Lincoln was a Republican and the secessionist movement was mostly pushed by the Democrats.
Re: (Score:2)
because he knows its really just an economic distortion, because of where some political boundaries were drawn. The actually reality is the people on the coasts rather enjoy their bellies being filled with corn and wheat because those things are a whole lot more filling than financial instruments and intellectual property.
If the red states did not get tax subsides the cost of outputs from the nations bread basket would simply increase. The net effect is would be little real change in terms of wealth distrib
Re: The trouble is those economies are interconnec (Score:2)
You mean you are... *social*...? Like ... *eww* ... humans??
Better not tell Trumpotron!
Re: (Score:2)
Shackled together by debt (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Debt without an increase in productivity results in currency devaluation (price inflation). Productivity is conserved - everything consumed must first be produced. If you try to consume more than you're producing (hand out money so people can buy "more" stuff, even though they're all locked up at home not producing anything), the economy has to figure out how to keep consumption and production equal. The way it does it is
Re: (Score:3)
Arguably, it's a better plan than the US congress writes, where apparently they just make up $ numbers with lots of zeros, and no consideration whatsoever about where that money is ACTUALLY coming from.
For example, the first US stimulus package, ostensibly recognized as the one that handed out $1200 checks to everyone.
$3 trn.
There are 330 million people in the US.
Only about 50% of them pay any federal income tax at all, so 150 million.
This works out to about $20,000 per taxpayer, to hand out $1200 checks.
Of
bind together?? (Score:2)
But I thought Europe was on a single plate anyway.
Re: bind together?? (Score:2)
Yeah, but the rope still left you some nasty freedom to shift away from the funnel and not swallow the streams of Kool-Shit.
Digital Tax (Score:2)
In order to defray the cost of the program, the bloc will increase the amount of revenue it can collect. A new tax on non-recycled plastic waste will be introduced next year, and the European Commission is preparing proposals on a digital tax and a carbon border adjustment mechanism that would take effect in 2023.
That should make the U.S. digital giants sit up and take notice.
Borry (Score:2)
Ok, you can't stimulus spend when stuff is shut down. It's like walking into a carnival midway 30 minutes after they turn off the lights for the night.
We should call it what it is: throwing money at people so they won't hate us, the politicians.
Boy, it's a good thing there's no votes allowed for people who won't be born for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
The next summit: ADEO, OBI, Home Depot (Score:2)
When the US gets through printing stimulus money, people will be getting paid in million-dollar bills. After the equivalent happens in the Euro bloc, there is going to be a shortage of wheelbarrows to carry these around in. A few of the really old Germans will remember the last time this took place. It may take detailed coordination among home improvement distributors in major nations to make sure that ther will be enough wheelbarrows for all. We don't want recovering Covid survivors to have to drag their m
Looking forward to another 20 years of stagnantion (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
Market (Score:2)
One stimulus to rule them all (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Well yes, but any union kind of goes bad when the cashflow goes only one way, and Germany, Denmsrk, The netherlsnds, ans sweeden is a bittiered of bailing sotheren european contries in return for local reformes that fail to show up.
That's the story Germany likes to spin. In fact Germany is one of the serial offenders when it comes to ignoring EU economic rules. But when they do it nothing happens; when Greece (which has a higher working hours per person than "hard-working" Germany) does the same thing they get slaughtered.
Re: The hard working pay for the lazy (Score:2)
Oh man.....
He is Dutch, garÃon! His nickname means 'red meat' in Nederlands. Google is your friend here...
I'm guessing you're American or German or French, Spanish or Italian...big countries and their citizens never pay attention to outsiders....
Another point. The deal was way worse until the Netherlands and others too put their foot down.
And yes, I'm Bulgarian who works and lives in NL. I know.
South Europe's working and fiscal ethics doesn't even come close to Northern Europe.
More than 75% of all EU m
Re: (Score:2)
"what they see as 'German EU' going ever more marxists by the day " - good to see not just UK brexiters subject to conspiracy theories
"Personally I adored the idea of the EU, but it was destroyed by (mostly) Germany and France...sad. So I'm with UK on this one and I hope NL will follow..." - you should be here in the UK to see just how well its going. Hint - its not.
Re: The hard working pay for the lazy (Score:2)
How come you don't just cut the red states out? Set their federal taxes to zero and stop funding them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: The hard working pay for the lazy (Score:2)
I think they'd be ok with that. With no federal taxes, the rich and many businesses would flood in.
Who ever tried?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: The hard working pay for the lazy (Score:2)
Kansas is the exact opposite of what I'm saying.
State taxes max out around 10-13% depending on details. Federal goes up to almost 40%.
If I got a 40% tax cut for moving to a red state from my deep blue California, I'd be there ASAP. It would be stupid not to move for such a huge gain.
With all the new wealth, they could raise state sales and property taxes very high and still attract a ton of the rich and their businesses.
No one has ever tried it, considered it or done the math on it.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not even the US Federal government has that much power to dictate terms to the individual states. Much of the power the Federal Government has gained in that direction is by putting conditions on money it flows through to the states (i.e. here's some money for X, Y and Z, but if you don't do it the way we want, then we yank the funds).
In many ways the EU resembles the United States under its original constitution; the Articles of Confederation. This created a weak federal government with little power to rai
Re: (Score:2)
Except for interstate and international trade, international relations, and a few other constitutional powers given to the the federal governments, states are supposed to be sovereign governments. (Though the natural and constitutional rights of individual people are supposed to be above the powers of state and federal governments.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: The hard working pay for the lazy (Score:2)
France and to a lesser extent Italy are net contributors to the EU budget.
They help poorer countries such as Greece and Poland.
Re: The hard working pay for the lazy (Score:2)
Forgot my sid source. It's from 2018.
https://www.statista.com/chart... [statista.com]
Re: The hard working pay for the lazy (Score:2)
Remember that those poorer countries are only poor in money, not in things. Because the money is sucked off e.g. to Germany. Without importing, they would not be poor. And without exporting so much, Germany, France etc would not be so rich.
And from what I know, it is not exactly a matter of fully free choice. It is rather the whole point of the EU. (Apart from giving my former countrymate and farmer-related collague of my grandparents, Junker, a power stiffie, because he can't literally wear a narrow mousta
Re: (Score:2)
Then the question is: who pays? Without a doubt, the northern countries are better able to pay for their own stimulus packages as well as pay towards a European relief fund. They can get much cheaper loan
Re: (Score:3)
From the article:
Crucially, the final compromise also included budget rebates for four fiscally hawkish northern countries, reducing Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands, Austria and Sweden's net contributions by more than 50 billion euros over seven years.
In the end, it largely came down to offering enough sweeteners to that group, which had been pushing for a smaller package. To bring them on board, Merkel, Macron and leaders from Europe's South agreed to reduce the grants envelope from 500 billion euros as proposed.
Re: (Score:2)
By the way, I have always been against those rebates. Better to have a fairer way to compute each country's contribution. Especially as the re
Re: (Score:2)
I know you're trolling but, for the record, Germany and The Netherlands have some of the lowest average hours worked per year of not just the EU but all OECD countries.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda... [weforum.org]
Re: (Score:2)
They've also been smart enough to not rack up enormous government debts. And they still have high GDP per capita.
Re: (Score:2)
All countries are hit hard by the COVID-19 measures.
But with this plan countries that where hit much harder are paying for countries that where barely hit at all.
People helping each other, imagine that!
I bet some people in your country pay more taxes than others. Is that fair?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
At least now they don't have unelected officials in Belgium telling them how many refugees to accept.
Re: (Score:2)
Or being subject to the EU Court of Human Rights that determined your free speech ends where other's religious feelings begin [coe.int].
It's just the politically correct censorship from the UK government itself that liberty loving people have to worry about now.
Re: (Score:2)
Norms are an intrinsic part of being in a common market. You can't avoid that fact by ignoring it.
It's a tradeoff, like so many things in life; if you want frictionless access to a large and diverse market, you're forced to live with values that are alien to you. Free trade means you have to accept things that may seem silly to you, like restrictions on GM foods, or consumer privacy protections, or water pollution standards.
It's quite legitimate to say you'd rather take the economic hit than live with va
Re: (Score:2)
That "peace" is nothing but newspeak for removal of freedom.
Your mental retardation never ceases to amaze us all.
Re: (Score:2)
Like a Nazi parade. Everyone marches precisely in the same direction.
You do know that every army works like that, right? The problem with the Nazis was the concentration camps and the mass murders, not the uniformity. There are places where there's uniformity without slaughter and places where there's slaughter without uniformity.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not newspeak... it's inherent in the definition of peace.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is sad to see the EU still has not recovered from the last financial crisis.
WTF are you talking about. The EU and the USA both recovered basically toe in toe each with the economy shrinking and growing at the same rate after the last financial crisis and both countries basically fully recovered within 2 years. Now as to the recent EU downturn that has everything to do with mental retardation across the English channel and nothing at all to do with the last financial crisis or the recovery thereof.
How about actually trying to stimulate the economy with more jobs
Err unemployment is the lowest it's been in 20 years, you can't just throw the word "j
Re: (Score:2)
Income taxes have little to do with economic growth.
This is wrong. If taxes went down, people could spend more. Also, 50% of government spending is dead weight loss. Reducing dead weight loss will benefit everyone.
Re: (Score:2)