Czech President Vaclav Klaus is one of the few European politicians to believe in the classical liberal ideals of individual freedom, personal responsibility, free markets, and small government. He has wisely warned about the European Union superstate being erected in Brussels is a dangerous mix of centralization, bureaucratization, and harmonization. The economic troubles in Europe show he has been right on the mark, of course, so we should all pay attention as he discusses the prospects for Europe in a column for the Wall Street Journal:
I have not rejoiced at the current problems in the euro zone because their consequences could be serious for all of us in Europe—for members and non-members of the euro zone, for its supporters and opponents. Even the enthusiastic propagandists of the euro suddenly speak about the potential collapse of the whole project now, and it is us critics who say we have to look at it in a more structured way. The term “collapse” has at least two meanings. The first is that the euro-zone project has not succeeded in delivering the positive effects that had been rightly or wrongly expected from it. It was mistakenly and irresponsibly presented as an indisputable economic benefit to all the countries willing to give up their own long-treasured currencies. Extensive studies published prior to the launch of the European single currency promised that the euro would help to accelerate economic growth and reduce inflation and stressed, in particular, that the member states of the euro zone would be protected against all kinds of external economic disruptions (the so-called exogenous shocks). This has not happened. After the establishment of the euro zone, the economic growth of its member states has slowed down compared to previous decades, increasing the gap between the rate of growth in the euro-zone countries and that in other major economies—such as the United States and China, smaller economies in Southeast Asia and other parts of the developing world, as well as Central and Eastern European countries that are not members of the euro zone. Economic growth in Europe has been slowing down since the 1960s, thanks to the increasingly damaging economic and social system which started dominating Europe at that time. The European “soziale Marktwirtschaft” is an unproductive variant of a welfare state, of state paternalism, of “leisure” society, of high taxes and low motivation to work. The existence of the euro has not reversed that trend. According to the European Central Bank, the average annual rate of growth in the euro-zone countries was 3.4% in the 1970s, 2.4% in the 1980s, 2.2% in the 1990s and only 1.1% from 2001 to 2009 (the decade of the euro). A similar slowdown has not occurred anywhere else in the world (speaking about “normal” countries, e.g. countries without wars or revolutions).
Hello from Canada.
The humanitarian and economic disaster that is Venezuela was self-inflicted in a free election by clueless voters who were promised more “free” stuff, equality, and that the rich were going to pay their “fair” share for a socialist utopia.
As with all the failed socialist experiments before theirs, the rich fled the country with their businesses, jobs and wealth, the middle class was left holding the bag and decimated by taxes, and the “free” stuff eventually ran out, but the clueless voters got their “equality”.
Now everyone in is equally poor and miserable in the socialist utopia of Venezuela, except for their socialist masters and their political elite ruling class cronies.
The Liberals in Canada have already corrupted the electoral process with their never ending stream of taxpayer funded “free” stuff to secure the vote of their supporters, and with every election cycle they keep promising more.
If we allow the taxpayer funded vote buying scam, coupled with the government sanctioned weed/population sedation project to continue, Canada will be on par with Venezuela in no time.
Everything the government gives away for “free”, has to be taken away from somebody else.
Eventually the “free” stuff will held over your heads and once the system reaches the “Venezuelan” point of no return, it can and will be taken away if you don’t think or act according to the dictates and whims of the political elite ruling class.
The socialist Armageddon can be avoided only if all democracies did the right thing and repealed the “right” to vote for all the taxpayer funded “free” stuff people whose only purpose in life is to vote for the lib handing out the most “free” stuff.
Not only are the wards of the state too stupid to take care of themselves, they have been proven to be too stupid to make informed decisions at the ballot box.
[…] I’ll make one final point. There are five morals to the story, but there are dozens of nations giving us real-world examples every day. […]
[…] I’ll make one final point. There are five morals to the story, but there are dozens of nations giving us real-world examples every day. […]
I always thought of “small government” not as a liberal (Democrat) viewpoint, but as a conservative principle.
[…] I’ll make one final point. There are five morals to the story, but there are dozens of nations giving us real-world examples every day. […]
[…] I’ll make one final point. There are five morals to the story, but there are dozens of nations giving us real-world examples every day. […]
[…] There’s a very large welfare state and the tax burden is quite onerous, both of which hinder growth, but Germany has been more responsible than the United States in recent years. And while this may be damning with faint praise, this modest bit of fiscal discipline is helping the nation survive as many other European welfare states are on the verge of collapsing. […]
[…] I’ll make one final point. There are five morals to the story, but there are dozens of nations giving us real-world examples every day. […]