Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
racko
Posts: 4548
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2001 12:06 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 3:51 am

Airbus is English/French/German/Spanish. Or one could make it easier and just say: Airbus is European.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:04 am

Pelican
Did you know that Germany isn't Europe? It's just a part. I guess you also think Airbus is French...


Not sure what your point is, of course I know that Germany isn't Europe.

Do you know that Germany is Europes largest economy? Do you inderstand how this could drag down the rest?

Yes, I do believe Airbus is a French-based company. What is your fantasy?
 
aloges
Posts: 14807
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:38 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 4:13 am

Quoting Mham001 (reply 51):
Yes, I do believe Airbus is a French-based company. What is your fantasy?


Reality, perhaps. The Airbus headquarters and the biggest assembly halls may be in France, but Airbus is a joint venture of EADS (legally based in the Netherlands) and British Aerospace (based guess where). Airbus has no history of being only one country's pride like Boeing, and its plants throughout Western Europe are not owned and run by suppliers but by Airbus itself.
 
pelican
Posts: 2431
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:22 am

Quoting Mham001 (reply 51):
Not sure what your point is,


You blamed Europe instaed of Germany. That's my point. Germany has the problems not Europe. There are a lot of EUropean countries which are doing well some even better than the US.

pelican
 
StevenUhl777
Posts: 3281
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2001 11:02 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 5:35 am

Just as a sidenote, Germany acts very carefully by "starting" anything - exactly because of our past.

Case in point, Iraq. The fact that nearly 82 million Germans are opposed to war is...well...fine with everyone else, especially their neighbors. While I support the reason for being in Iraq, I think it's also perfectly understandable why Germany chose not to send troops.

I think the German people are VERY aware of the past, minus a few neo-Nazi morons, and are careful not to repeat it. They honor the Oder/Neisee line with Poland. Germany has also taken a huge role in tsunami relief efforts, and actively participates in the war on terror. They are also helping to train Iraqi police, ableit not on Iraqi soil (sand).

For what it's worth, I think they deserve a permanent spot on the UN Security Council. One good way for Dubya to improve relations even further would be if he supported Deutschland's bid for that seat.
 
spinzels
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:00 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:16 am

Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 44):
What are you talking about? WHERE did I say direct interchangability?


I don’t know I can explain it any more clearly than my previous two tries. You put forth a rhetorical question that said what would happen to Germany was happening to the EU, without any explanation for this causality. Your politically-motivated, uninformed slam simply treated them interchangeably: what happens to “A” happens to “B”. And I’m calling you on it. Simple.

Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 44):
I am not ignoring it. You are referring to Civilian Employment...I am referring to Standardized Unemployment...and asked to see conemporary numbers. Are you dense?


Why do you even have to ask for the stats, couldn't you find this information yourself? You mean you started a thread because you couldn’t find some basic economics statistics?

And anyway, do you even realize that this information that you keeping asking for is in this very thread? Try looking at reply #35, where Racko has kindly posted it. How exactly did you miss this? Are you dense?  Laugh out loud


Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 44):
"So viewing Germany’s economy as a leading indicator for the EU (sigh, now saying this for third time) is nonsensical"

I would bet that the German Politicos would disagree with you.


I’ll take that bet. Find me an example of one German politician who does.

Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 44):
So you are saying that Germans are incredilby efficient which explains the high unemployment?


Well, that’s possibly true, but what I was actually saying is right there for you to read in Reply #17, but I’ll post it again for your convenience: “Labor productivity and economic competivity [which are higher in most EU nations] is a far better indicator of the health of an economy than your skewed unemployment statisitics”

Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 44):
I asked two questions in my original post...what is going on over there...and do you think this is a sign of things to come for the EU.


And you got the answers, loads of answers. You should be pleased, but the fact that you are not pleased isn't surprising because you weren't really seeking more information, you were putting forth rhetorical questions that were slams on European economic competivity.

Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 44):
You made this more convoluted than it needed to be.


Well, that’s not particularly gracious towards the guy answering your questions.  Innocent

Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 44):
You are way off base here...point to me where I took a shot at the EU.
Further...I didn't even ask about comparative strengths between the US and EU economies...it was you that injected that topic into this discussion. If you are going to be an ass get your shit straight.


Friend, don’t get yourself so worked up, it’s just an anonymous web forum.
 
mham001
Posts: 5745
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 4:52 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:32 am

>b>Pelican

You blamed Europe instaed of Germany. That's my point. Germany has the problems not Europe. There are a lot of EUropean countries which are doing well some even better than the US.

I haven't blamed anybody of anything. I did point out that Europe in general is shrinking and while the EU is infatuated with trying to compete with the US in size, power, influence, etc, China is about to swallow you. Germany as the largest contributor to the Eu economy is a European problem.

I understand some euro countries are doing well. Netherland, Denmark, Luxembourg, etc. There are some states here larger than those countries doing better than the US economy as well. So?

Curious, exactly how much soverienty will remain if the Eu constitution is passed?
 
787
Posts: 271
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 11:57 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:44 am

Wow the Europeans/Germans are mighty testy in this thread. German unemployment is STILL 11.4 % a seven-year high. Even after all the feisty banter here. It is obvious that something is wrong.
 
ushermittwoch
Posts: 2617
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:18 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:47 am

Quoting Slider (reply 48):
Usher- Just to clarify, there are some states that do not charge sales tax on grocery food. Minnesota is one, for example.


"We pay no tax in the US on groceries, and we noticed that tax as well"

You are right on Minnesota, as everyone can see in the link I provided. Your pal here is totally wrong though and maybe you should read what he wrote before trying in vain to prove something that he didn't say?
He clearly and falsely, which following his posts isn't surprising, states that people in the US (incl. Kansas et al.) do not pay taxes on food, which is a blatant falsehood.
 
slider
Posts: 7755
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 11:42 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 6:59 am

787- Yeah, maybe they're unemployed and frustrated, dunno...  Wink/being sarcastic


Usher- No offense, but no need to get all in a tizzy..I was posting a clarification of fact, not to defend/attack his or your posts. Just sayin, that's all. Geez.

Mham001- True about these being German problems, but the social engineering is also notorious in France as well--they're falling on their ass trying to deal with it. 35 hour work weeks aren't and can't work, period, and these omnipresent labor strikes of one form or another are ridiculous. But hey, there's always the Italians....  Smile
 
jamesag96
Topic Author
Posts: 2007
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2001 2:59 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:03 am

Quoting Spinzels (reply 55):
don’t know I can explain it any more clearly than my previous two tries. You put forth a rhetorical question that said what would happen to Germany was happening to the EU, without any explanation for this causality. Your politically-motivated, uninformed slam simply treated them interchangeably: what happens to “A” happens to “B”. And I’m calling you on it. Simple.


Show me where I did this...please show me.

Quoting Spinzels (reply 55):
You mean you started a thread because you couldn’t find some basic economics statistics?


Nope...I said this in reply 3:
Quoting JamesAg96 (reply 3):
I wonder how contemporary rates compare.


Quoting Spinzels (reply 55):
than your skewed unemployment statisitics

My skewed statistics?

Quoting Spinzels (reply 55):
You should be pleased, but the fact that you are not pleased isn't surprising because you weren't really seeking more information, you were putting forth rhetorical questions that were slams on European economic competivity.

I asked what was causing the high unemployment rates...and no where can you find slams on European economic competetivity in my posts.

Quoting 787 (reply 57):
Even after all the feisty banter here. It is obvious that something is wrong.


Yeah...which was the catalyst for the original question...what the heck is going on to which a few answered..thank you.
 
pelican
Posts: 2431
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2004 9:51 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 8:27 am

Quoting 787 (reply 57):
Wow the Europeans/Germans are mighty testy in this thread. German unemployment is STILL 11.4 % a seven-year high. Even after all the feisty banter here. It is obvious that something is wrong.


Indeed, and because I'm testy I recommend you to read the posts form German members. No one is denying that Germany has big economical troubles.

Quoting Mham001 (reply 56):
I did point out that Europe in general is shrinking and while the EU is infatuated with trying to compete with the US in size, power, influence, etc, China is about to swallow you.


Can you explain how is Europe shrinking nowadays?
Most Europeans are not as frightened by China like many Americans seem to be. A growing Chinese economy means not only competion but also a growing market for our growing exports. And you still confuse Germany and Europe. Sure the German problem is also a problem to the rest of the EU. But what can Europe do about it? Nothing. Germany has to solve its problems alone.

pelican
 
B2707SST
Posts: 1289
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 5:25 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 11:44 am

Quoting Spinzels (reply 42):
Greatly exaggerated? One person who disagrees with you is Federal Reserve vice-chairman, Roger W. Ferguson, who has found that discouraged workers are a key explanation for the significant decline in labor force participation. http://www.federalreserve.gov/boardd...hart1


Discouraged workers were not the focus of Ferguson's speech; his two mentions of discouraged workers are peripheral at best. This is a rather salient quote:

"Although the absence of a sizable increase in discouraged workers might be viewed as evidence against a cyclical interpretation, the rise in school enrollment may reflect a decline in the opportunity cost of attending school associated with the lack of new job opportunities in a weak labor market."

Looking at the breakdown of causes for labor force non-participation ( http://www.federalreserve.gov/boardd...ches/2005/200501072/chart7_600.gif ), one finds that the "cannot find work" category is remarkably constant and has barely budged from its long-term trend since 2001.

By far the biggest explanatory factor is "school." While it is true that a weak labor market does induce people to return to school, relying on this third-round effect to illustrate weakness in the US labor market is fairly questionable. Ferguson's broad theme is that the US is increasingly geared toward high-skill jobs, a trend which can cause labor market dislocations. It is also an essential change for the US to remain economically strong.


Quoting Spinzels (reply 42):
At any rate, I believe you are missing the point.


In your first point, you stated that "...the US classifies a lot of jobless Americans as “discouraged” and removes them from the unemployment lists for the purpose of calculating the unemployment rate." I was merely pointing out that discouraged workers as defined by the BLS do not make up "a lot" of the labor force and that discouraged worker counts are relatively steady over the business cycle.

Additionally, you stated that according to the OECD's normalized rates, "the U.S. does much worse than our official unemployment rates indicate." According to the second OECD link you provided, US unemployment was 5.8% in 2002. According to the BLS, averaging monthly data, US unemployment was 5.8% in 2002. If anything, it appears that the OECD is normalizing everyone else to our methodology, and in any case, there is no discrepancy between their figures and the official BLS figures.


Quoting Spinzels (reply 42):
It is acknowledged that unemployment rates are higher in Germany than they are in the U.S. (See, at least, replies 1, 10, and 26). The disagreement is that this one statistic for one EU member state is not a good measure of the overall economic health of the EU.


That's certainly true, but the unemployment rate is one of the two most important statistics describing a country's economic climate. The other is GDP growth, and on both counts, Germany and France are struggling and the US is performing fairly well.


I'd also like to comment on export statistics. The idea that "exports=good, imports=bad" is an unfortunate artifact of the Keynesian system as expressed through Simon Kuznet's national income accounts, in which net exports are "subtracted" from GDP. This fallacy of this view can be seen in two ways.

First, the world in total is not a net importer or a net exporter. It is a closed system. Therefore, every net exporter must be matched by a net importer somewhere else. This fact and Keynesian national income aggregates lead to the shallow and erroneous conclusion that trade is a zero-sum game: in the closed system of the world, the exporters benefit at the expense of the importers. This view fails to recognize that all voluntary trade benefits both parties, or else they would not engage in it. Apart from simple mistakes, which are human and inevitable, and fraud and coercion, which must be prevented and punished, all voluntary trade is a positive-sum game.

The US is currently the engine driving world exports. Without the US consumer/importer, China and other net exporters would have precious few markets in which to sell their products. It's amusing to see these nations harangue us about our trade deficit one the one hand and then bite their nails on the other about what a falling dollar will mean for their export competitiveness. You can't have both -- either the US runs a large trade deficit and buys your net exports or we don't.


Second, net exporters are also by definition capital exporters. The identity (S - I) + (T - G) = Xn, where S is domestic savings, I is domestic investment, T is taxes, G is government spending, and Xn is net exports, is easily obtained from the two basic national income identities (Y = C + I + G + Xn and Y = C + S + T). Therefore, while it may appear that imports (in the form of net exports, where Xn = X - M) are "subtracted" from GDP, lower net exports must also mean less net foreign investment or lower government surpluses, neither of which is "good" even according to Keynes.

The reason the US is running a large trade deficit is because domestic investment exceeds domestic savings (which is nearly zero, thanks to loose monetary policy and unrelenting pressure to consume) and government spending exceeds tax revenue. The US is able to finance its current account deficit by attracting foreign investment; the Treasury is still seeing strong demand for US government bonds and the Dow Jones is only about 1,000 points below its all-time high.

I'd argue that the government budget deficit (T - G) is in fact a problem, but abstracting from this for a moment, there is nothing intrinsically better about running a trade balance surplus and a financial account deficit than the converse. A nation's status as a net exporter does not by itself indicate anything about the strength of its economy.


Quoting Spinzels (reply 42):
And there is also the annoyance that the person who cited the stat was more interested in slamming the EU than he was in having a discussion about the comparative strengths of the US and the EU economies.


I'll agree with you there. Ultimately, because economics is largely positive-sum game, nations are not "competing" with each other; they are cooperating, and everyone benefits from greater prosperity anywhere. The US will benefit from a strong EU economy, a strong Chinese economy, and a strong world economy. As David Ricardo, an Englishman, put it on the subject of trade blockades and embargoes with Germany and France:
They could send us no commodities: they could take none from us: our domestic commerce itself would languish from want of emulation, example, and instruction: and we ourselves should soon fall into the same abject condition to which we had reduced them. I shall therefore venture to acknowledge that not only as a man, but as a British subject, I pray for the flourishing commerce of Germany, Spain, Italy, and even France itself.
--B2707SST

[Edited 2005-03-03 03:48:57]

[Edited 2005-03-03 04:35:32]
 
Boeing7E7
Posts: 5512
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:35 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:20 pm

Quoting Ushermittwoch (reply 46):


You are right on Minnesota, as everyone can see in the link I provided. Your pal here is totally wrong though and maybe you should read what he wrote before trying in vain to prove something that he didn't say?
He clearly and falsely, which following his posts isn't surprising, states that people in the US (incl. Kansas et al.) do not pay taxes on food, which is a blatant falsehood.



By food they mean "prepared food". I said groceries which are not taxed. Of the 9 states I've lived in, none have had a grocery tax.

[Edited 2005-03-03 06:25:22]
 
jcs17
Posts: 7376
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2001 11:13 am

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Thu Mar 03, 2005 2:43 pm

I used this report in an economics class, I think it's worth a read for those who blindly extoll the EU and its greatness in regards to worker productivity, GDP, and taxation rates. There are just a lot of basic facts here that many of you are ignoring. It is written by the Timbro Institute of Stockholm, entitled the "EU versus the USA."

http://www.timbro.com/euvsusa/pdf/EU_vs_USA_English.pdf
 
spinzels
Posts: 334
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2004 11:00 pm

RE: German Jobless Rate...

Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:19 am

Quoting B2707SST (reply 62):
Discouraged workers were not the focus of Ferguson's speech; his two mentions of discouraged workers are peripheral at best.


I disagree, actually about a third of Ferguson’s speech addresses the issue of discouraged workers and other workers who are leaving the labor force in large numbers—and why their departure is being picked-up in the persistent decline in the US labor force participation rate, but is being completely missed by the BLS unemployment rate, producing the dichotomy where labor force participation rates continue to decline, while at the same time the unemployment rate has been falling. Here's what Ferguson says:

"In addition, though the unemployment rate has fallen since the middle of 2003, the participation rate currently remains near the low point reached in the first half of 2004."

Indeed Ferguson worries that the unemployment rate may be such an inaccurate measure of the labor market that it is no longer a useful tool for making monetary policy:

"Moreover, the possibility of a change in the relationship between the unemployment rate and economic slack is likely to be greater--and thus the signals from the labor market may be harder to read--when the labor market behaves atypically, as in many respects it has behaved over the past three years."

Ferguson recognizes that workers officially classified as “discouraged” can’t make up the difference here, but he notes that other groups of non participants in the labor force may make up the difference (particularly retired and disabled nonparticipants):

"Instead, the rise in nonparticipation since 2000 is associated with an increase in the proportions of individuals attending school, reporting themselves as ill or disabled, or retired. Whether these patterns are more indicative of cyclical or of structural changes in participation is difficult to pin down, however. Although the absence of a sizable increase in discouraged workers might be viewed as evidence against a cyclical interpretation, the rise in school enrollment may reflect a decline in the opportunity cost of attending school associated with the lack of new job opportunities in a weak labor market. Similarly, the increase in disability rates--or even, to some extent, retirement rates--could have both cyclical and structural elements." (You did indeed reproduce the salient portion of Ferguson’s speech, you just didn’t reproduce enough of it!)

Ferguson’s insight is that workers who would previously be classified as “discouraged” are now being classified as either retired or disabled—two categories of non participation that have been increasing greatly in the past five years (See Ferguson's Chart 7).

Indeed Ferguson particularly notes that the growth of retired nonparticipants is not because of an aging population:

"changes in the age composition of the population have, thus far, not accounted for much of the drop in the participation rate."

Similarly there is no evidence that we actually have more disabled workers , rather it is far more likely that we have more disability claims . Not suprising, since disability claims on the whole have been increasing significantly in the US in the past few year. (Thanks in no little part to those miserable lawyers!  Angry )

Thus, Ferguson effectively shows that many nonparticipants in the workforce should either be classified as “discouraged” or be given multiple classifications such as “discouraged” and “retired” or “discouraged” and “disabled”.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Badstig, Virtual737 and 24 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos