Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Fighting austerity Reclaiming the European Project ISS Development Research Seminars 2012-13 Social Policy after the Financial Crisis 11 December 2012 Marica Frangakis Nicos Poulantzas Institute Outline Definition of concepts; theoretical issues Etymology – Ideology – Hegemony Policy vehicles for the implementation of austerity in the EU Fiscal consolidation – Liberalisation – Privatisation Implications of austerity for the economy and for society Deepening recession – Unemployment - Poverty Reflections on outlook and alternatives Etymology – Ideology – Hegemony: Where do the terms come from, how are they used & to what effect “Austerity” (most looked up-word in 2010) : “nonindulgence, ascetism, self-denial, self-discipline, plainness, sobriety, puritanism, solemnity, strictness, etc.’ (Collins Thesaurus of the English Language, 2002) Capture of terms linked to universal values: Implicitly, notion of public debt is rejected, as ‘inherently bad/wrong’ analogy with private debt Rationale - If it is prudent for individuals to avoid getting into debt, would it not be wise for governments to do the same? If a government does become indebted, would it not be best for it to suppress expenditure &/or increase public receipts, so as to reduce, if not extinguish, the public debt? Public debt fetichism – rationale and fallacies Robert Skidelsky: Does debt matter? Fallacies – 1. Governments have “monetary sovereignty’; 2. Reducing the public deficit shrinks the economy; 3. Public debt = transfer of wealth from taxpayers to bond holders, not a net burden; 4. No connection between size of public debt and price government must pay to finance it; 5. Low borrowing costs for governments do not necessarily reduce interest rate the cost of capital for private sector Ideological undertones - Attempt by financial industry to shift public discourse from the need for radical changes in the financial sector to the ‘living-beyond-one’s means’ accusation in order to secure more bail-outs for the banks and deflect pressures for financial policy reform Austerity: economic necessity or political project? Theoretical presumption - The effect of any government deficit is mitigated by compensatory changes in the representative agent’s spending decisions. Hence, reducing government deficit allows the private sector to consume more. Also, high public debt ratios reduce the rate of growth through a rise in savings and through the crowding out of private investment supply side considerations Fallacy - As Keynes argued long ago, running a government deficit is a necessity, especially if it is held domestically, since it provides the private sector with new funds for saving and a means to save (interest-bearing government bonds), thereby increasing private sector wealth and reducing the need to save from current income, i.e. leading to increased demand and consumption. More so at a time of crisis and recession Hegemony - The power of the narrative “… our fundamental outlook about the economy, at the level of the average person, is closely bound up with stories of excess borrowing, loss of governmental and personal responsibility, and a sense that matters are beyond control. That kind of loss of confidence may well last for years” (Robert J. Shiller, The Great Debt Scare) Eurobarometer Social Climate Index – evaluation of the current situation (range from -10 to +10) EU27 - 2012, -0.8; 2011, -0.6; 2010, -0,7; 2009, -0.7 Highest values (2.8) in Benelux, Nordic, Austria and Germany Lowest values in Southern and Eastern countries; Greece – the lowest ranked member state in 3 out of 4 years (-5.8) Uncertainty about recovery+decline in income/confidence = holds back new investment & household consumption EU austerity policy vehicles Stability and Growth Pact - Upper limits on public deficit (3% GDP) & public debt (60% GDP) + ‘excessive deficit procedure’: adjust via fiscal austerity or face sanctions; Austerity policy becoming stricter since beginning of crisis ‘Fiscal compact’ - Changing national legislation, preferably via amendments to EZ member states’ constitutions, to include: (i) ‘debt brake’ – max. allowed structural (cyclically adjusted) budget deficit 0.5% GDP; (ii) debt reduction roadmap - each year government debt to be reduced by 1/20th of difference between actual level and 60% GDP benchmark; (iii) sanctions on non-complying countries to be imposed by European Court of Justice: interest-bearing deposits/fines (Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance) Austerity and conditionality “Within the new framework of the European semester, the European Council endorsed the priorities for fiscal consolidation and structural reform. It underscored the need to give priority to restoring sound budgets and fiscal sustainability, reducing unemployment through labour market reforms and making new efforts to enhance growth” (E.C., 24/25 March 2011, Conclusions, p. 2) ‘Austerity’, a multifaceted policy = fiscal consolidation + labour market reform + market liberalisation’ EU/IMF Programmes for Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Hungary, Latvia and Romania Conditionality for monetary support = ECB and Outright Monetary Transactions & for fiscal aid = EFSF & ESM Economic implications of austerity Fiscal consolidation – Cutting down goverment consumption impacts negatively on output/economy – The larger the multiplier, the greater the effect IMF: “… the multipliers used in generating growth forecasts have been systematically too low since the start of the Great Recession, by 0.4 to 1.2 … the multipliers implicitly used to generate these forecasts are about 0.5. So actual multipliers may be higher in the range of 0.9 to 1.7 (WEO Oct 2012: 41-43) Public & social expenditure cuts: more negative effects than raising taxes; ‘frontloading’ fiscal cuts: harsher/more protracted negative effects on output than gradual consolidation; long-run hysteresis effects As GDP debt ratio explodes and financial pressures GDP growth rates 2008-2012 (% pa; 2005 market prices) EU27 UK Germany France Italy Ireland Greece Spain Portugal 2008 0,3 -1 1,1 -0,1 -1,2 -2,1 -0,2 0,9 0 2009 -4,3 -4 -5,1 -3,1 -5,5 -5,5 -3,1 -3,7 -2,9 2010 2,1 1,8 4,2 1,7 1,8 -0,8 -4,9 -0,3 1,4 2011 1,5 0,9 3 1,7 0,4 1,4 -7,1 0,4 -1,7 2012 -0,3 -0,3 0,8 0,2 -2,3 0,4 -6 -1,4 -3 Czech Slovenia Slovakia Republic Poland Hungary Bulgaria Romania Estonia Latvia Lithuania 2008 3,4 5,8 3,1 5,1 0,9 6,2 7,3 -4,2 -3,3 2,9 2009 -7,8 -4,9 -4,5 1,6 -6,8 -5,5 -6,6 -14,1 -17,7 -14,8 2010 1,2 4,4 2,5 3,9 1,3 0,4 -1,6 3,3 -0,9 1,5 2011 0,6 3,2 1,9 4,3 1,6 1,7 2,5 8,3 5,5 5,9 2012 -2,3 2,6 -1,3 2,4 -1,2 0,8 0,8 2,5 4,3 2,9 Public debt/GDP ratio, 2008-2012 (%) EU27 UK Germany France Italy Ireland Greece Spain Portugal 2008 62,2 52,3 66,8 68,2 106,1 44,5 112,9 40,2 71,7 2009 74,6 67,8 74,5 79,2 116,4 64,9 129,7 53,9 83,2 2010 80,2 79,4 82,5 82,3 119,2 92,2 148,3 61,5 93,5 2011 83 85 80,5 86 120,7 106,4 170,6 69,3 108,1 2012 86,8 88,7 2008 22 27,9 28,7 47,1 73 13,7 13,4 4,5 19,8 15,5 2009 35 35,6 34,2 50,9 79,8 14,6 23,6 7,2 36,7 29,3 2010 38,6 41 37,8 54,8 81,8 16,2 30,5 6,7 44,5 37,9 2011 46,9 43,3 40,8 56,4 81,4 16,3 33,4 6,1 42,2 38,5 2012 54 51,7 45,1 55,5 78,4 19,5 34,6 10,5 41,9 41,6 81,7 90 126,5 117,6 176,7 86,1 119,1 Czech Slovenia Slovakia Republic Poland Hungary Bulgaria Romania Estonia Latvia Lithuania An extreme case (so far) – The Greek economy in collapse 180 GDP Gross capital formation Final consumption expenditure Domestic Demand 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Social implications of austerity - Channels Labour market: unemployment; underemployment – inactivity – flexibility The ‘lost’ generation - NEETs Long-term unemployment Wages: moderation and deflation; wage share on a long-term downward trend Commodification of public services – esp. education and health – through liberalisation and privatisation Financial distress - poverty/social exclusion EU27 employment & unemployment Unemployment rates (%) Oct 12 Youth (<25) UK SE FI SK SI RO PT PL AT NL MT HU LU LT LV CY IT FR ES EL IE EE DE DK CZ BG BE EU27 EU17 Unemployment rates (%) Oct 12 Total 20.6 7.8 7.7 7.7 23 18.8 30.1 14 17.5 8.6 23 6.9 39.1 17.3 4.3 5.5 6.6 27.8 10.4 8.5 9.8 16.8 29.9 10.8 18.6 5.1 24.3 12.4 14.2 12.9 11.1 10.7 31.9 29.3 36.5 25.5 55.9 57 26.2 25.4 29.9 14.7 5.4 19.1 9.6 8.1 7.7 7.3 13.7 20.7 30.3 12.6 18.8 7.5 23.4 23.9 10.7 11.7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Share of ‘Neither in employment nor in education or training” (NEETs) among 15-24 year olds (%) Long-term unemployment rate as % of active population 2008 & 2012 Flexibility - Underemployment & hidden unemployment (million persons) Wage moderation/deflation (% pa) EU27 UK Germany France Italy Ireland Greece Portug Spain al 2008 0,8 -1,5 1,3 0,2 1,3 8,8 -1,1 4,4 1,4 2009 0,7 1,4 -1 1,3 -0,4 3,9 1,2 4,3 1,9 2010 1,1 0 1,4 1,5 1,9 -0,9 -3,7 -0,4 0,3 2011 0,7 -0,7 2,2 1,5 0 0 -4,4 -0,3 -1,4 2012 0,5 0.3 2008 2,9 4 2,2 5,6 1,9 7,3 14,5 4 2,4 4,3 2009 -1,7 3,7 -2,9 -0,2 -5 4,9 -5,9 -1,8 -11,6 -6,7 2010 5 4,5 5 3,3 -2,7 8,2 1,5 1,1 -5,6 -2,4 2011 0,6 -0,6 3,5 0,9 -0,1 2,2 -4 -3 11,7 -1,7 2012 -0,6 -1,5 1,7 1,2 0 4,1 0,2 1,8 0,7 1,2 1,3 0,3 -0,3 -0,9 -6,4 0,2 -3,2 Czech Slovenia Slovakia Republic Poland Hungary Bulgaria Romania Estonia Latvia Lithuania Wage share as % GDP at current factor cost 68 67 66 65 64 63 62 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 EU27 EU17 Linear (EU27) Linear (EU17) Commodification of public services Healthcare and education – ‘citizenship rights’ – commodification goes back to 1970s, picking up in 1990s and escalating in current crisis Europe 2020 targets for education – Reducing early school leavers to less than 10% (14% 2011) & increasing tertiary education attainment to more than 40% (35% 2011) Experience points to the fact that the use of market mechanisms or greater reliance upon the private sector does not lead to reduced costs, nor to greater efficiency. Instead, it results in increased inequalities in terms of access and quality of services, especially for the poorer sections of the population, as well as in worsening conditions for those employed in these sectors Financial distress of EU households by income quartile of household 2000-2012 Changes in proportion (%) of people at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE) 2008-2010 Children in poverty – Social transfers make little difference Political implications of austerity – Fragile legitimacy of European project under question The case of Greece - The political system in flux: Electoral results 2009, 2012 (% share of votes) 2009 New Democracy 6 May 2012 17 June 2012 33.48 18.85 29.66 SYRIZA (Radical Left Alliance) 4.60 16.78 26.89 PASOK (Panhellenic socialist movement) 43.92 13.18 12.28 Independent Greeks (split from ND) -- 10.6 7.51 Golden Dawn (fascists) -- 6.97 6.92 Democratic Left (split from SYRIZA) -- 6.11 6.26 KKE (Communist Party) 7.54 8.54 4.50 LAOS (extreme right wing) 5.63 -- -- The games financial markets play… Overall … Austerity – Based on theoretical fallacies with regard to the nature of the public debt and the implications of fiscal contraction for the economy and for society More of a political project, aiming at increasing the flexibility of the labour market and the shrinking of the social provisioning role of the state; the ‘political economy of the crisis’ reading The ‘fiscal profligacy’ narrative needs to be displaced The experience of the EU and esp. of its peripheral states reveals the failure of the current regime to revive the economy and to address the social ills – instead, undermining cohesion Right & Left are facing each other in the restructuring of the political system/project; danger of the rise of the populist and fascist right in the face of the fragmentation of the Left; actors Reflections on alternatives Short-term measures - (i) Change in the narrative – regain the hegemony; (ii) abandonment of austerity policy – fighting poverty and inequality; (iii) reinstatement of public services incorporation of social welfare objectives in economic policy; (iv) reversal of the deterioration in worker rights and employment protection regime; (v) kick-starting the economy especially in the periphery Long-run project – (i) Foster long-term policy of sustainable development designed to deal with divergences within EU; (ii) adapt EMU to serve long-run goals; (iii) strengthen worker rights and restructure institutional framework, so that antagonistic wage policies are avoided; (iv) regulate finance Reclaiming the European project – To the extent that the current regime precludes socially progressive solutions, need to change the EU radically; reclaim the European project