Demonstrations outwardly appear to be quite heterogeneous. The Americans care about plenty of bizarre manners, as seen in this video. Applause is forbidden, he is considered to be repressive, but instead are intended as an expression of consent silent gestures. Moreover, everything a speaker says, repeated by the crowd. While in the U.S. so well – in spite of the motto “We are the 99 percent” – actually has to do with unconventional sectarian groups, we looked at the pictures of the German demonstrations in addition to the usual suspects of attacking and Left Party especially many typical Wutbürger the middle class.

Now we must not expect

Spite of worldwide protests by saying that a world revolution is imminent. From New York is the number of participants in the low four figures reported there were about 8,000 in Frankfurt While some maintain this resistance an amazing pathos and probably forget that they demonstrate in open democracies and not in China or Syria. But the previously stated objectives but work mostly vague and ill-conceived or where it is concrete, contradictory. Shall ask about the American branch of the movement both import tariffs and an extensive renunciation of international trade, but also the complete opening of borders to international migration. That the two do not go together but should be obvious.

Otherwise, of course: higher income taxes for the rich and those which it is held to introduce the wealth tax return, a transaction tax on financial markets, a somewhat tighter regulation of financial markets and especially the banks, or equal to the total abolition “of the interest system “. Nonsensical fundamental critique of the market economy takes a total time that is just as problematic Detailfoderungen: The historical experience with the property tax, not only in Germany shows that this is a fairly pay low tax, of which we are fiscally hope not much. In the proportional income tax zone begins with a marginal tax rate of 42% to just under 53,000 euros. Will you now cause really been here loads of over 50%

Course it is asking too much of a protest movement to present a sophisticated concept as a more efficient regulation of financial markets. But the belief in the ability to solve problems of the state seems a little too pronounced. An example to remember: It is now about three and a half years since Bear Stearns needed a bailout. Likewise, long ago, that governments around the world undertook to regulate the banking sector is so new that one too big to fail should be excluded in future. Happened since then has been little critical. Is this just an enforcement issue? Governments are firmly in the hands of the bank lobby? Something of that kind, the representatives of the protest movement would argue that, but there is also another way: This is simply a very difficult problem to solve, not only economically but also in terms of political and constitutional enforceability. The policy is at its capacity limit, or perhaps even beyond.

.

A) economics is a social science, in the “performance” and “progress” are difficult to assess,

B) the price increases the path dependence of fads or a traditional “mainstream” thinking in economics,

C) the price led to an arrogance or presumption of omniscience of the winners.

What price for what?

The simplest answer to the question “how useful is a Nobel Prize in economics?” is that this will not only be abolished, because it never existed. The economics prize was donated by the inventor of dynamite, but the Swedish Riksbank and is therefore correct “price for the Swedish Riksbank Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel”. Alfred Nobel.

Although it is no “real” Nobel Prize in economics, but largely follows the procedure for the prizes for medicine, chemistry and physics. There is science in terms of Nobel's testament.

Back

Nobel Prize. Wanted the Nobel award for literature, and finally peace. Is it to bring “progress”.

Nobel Prize as an amplifier of the mainstream path dependent?

1974, divided the “Nobel Prize in economics” – between Gunnar Myrdal and Friedrich von Hayek. Both were honored in person, but an abolition of the price were inclined. Myrdal protested about, however, that “reactionary” economists such as Hayek and Milton Friedman also later said at the banquet that he had been previously asked whether there should be that price, would have voted overwhelmingly against it. Hayek called as the first reason he feared that such a price could be the moment modern “mainstream” economics deepen further and thus distort the open competition of ideas as a “discovery procedure” by elitist judgments from above.

Hayek himself was suspected by his own course, this totally unexpected honor eliminated temporarily. He was forgotten by the 1974 neoclassical economics was almost completely and this largely critical arguments put forward, perhaps now would be only a small group of historians known idea, it would not be given this award. One may perhaps lucky that the Swedish Academy does not, as Alfred Nobel once demanded that the scientific progress of the award only just last year.

Assar Lindbeck, who headed the jury raises long, but “originality”, “impact on scientific work” and “practical importance” out

If three times the Nobel Prize that is a purpose: a celebration almost imaginative historical past performance, encouragement for future work, and directing attention to work with “practical significance”, so there are certainly not every year winners, all three criteria equally . meet Altogether, however, seems to me in this regard, the Nobel Prize three times more valuable as an indicator and motivator than about the current social science citation index, or strong “mainstream” – and “short-term” heavy rankings of newspapers or universities.

Nobel prize for arrogance and presumption of knowledge?

Even if one expressed the first two reasons for the abolition of the Nobel Prize in economics in his speech to the 1974 royal ceremonies like this:

.

Cosi fan tutti

2 The addiction of the states to spend money they do not have to obtain and not by raising taxes, she has always been urged to take out loans that they never want to pay back, if possible, at least not real. The shapes of the final non-repaying are always the same: the surprise of the creditors by inflation, the surprise of foreign creditors by currency devaluation and the expropriation of creditors by shedding debt in bankruptcy. Tackling the problem at its root is not to allow these three outcomes.

Are currently members of the European Monetary Union, the first and second way is no immediate danger. But again it will be a danger if a European fiscal union is created and mutated the European Central Bank under the pressure of debt communalist interests subservient to a central kind of old.

3 In contrast to the often unbridled affection for the state debt is the tendency of investors to grant itself heavily indebted countries more loans, the interest rate is true only if, a minor problem. Despite the popular will at the insistence of creditors to participate in the cost of the renovation of a debt-ridden state always re-established in a way, as if in a bankruptcy, the creditors were to blame in the same manner as the debtor. That there are black sheep among the creditors allow the debtor an effective diversion. Nevertheless remains true: the saving of money and lend the same need protection from insecurity, not punitive in need.

wait

Conversion, it needs good nerves

4 The signs of a turning point in the nearly decade-long term on all sides to excess government debt policy in Europe are certainly present, although not yet reliable. To promote such a change must be a strategic goal of the federal government and it is also avowedly. On all the details of their policy is therefore in the light of this objective look. The requested change is not achieved through treaties or decisions of the European Council, or new institutional arrangements. As important as these are manifest, the only change in the apparent subordination of the States, which call for the financial markets of anyone whose solvency is not to be in question. It is a process that can not help but presented as a number of marked turbulence. The process can be done, is what is called for in the first place – and requires good nerves. Shield him against excessive market reactions, but also against all sorts of symptoms impatient insistence on therapy is important in the second place – and requires a lot of wisdom. Finally, straightforwardness in dealing with the recalcitrant and their beats and hooks with crazed markets at the end – and certainly on the road – even the successful ones are not certified. Clear vision, in this sense is a wise policy of good but not so nervous.

.

It is desirable for each of us to have the potential to achieve something in the future. Power in the first sense, of the one who owns them, so basically as something “good” and are considered desirable. If the means for achieving the goal, however, involve the use of power in the second sense, this can lead to a different evaluation – particularly by persons other than the power holders. Because, of course, not the ends justify any use of “power over” others. This is especially true when money and politics combine their power.

2 Money

If money can be used to exert power in the second sense here indicated, it should be viewed with suspicion. Especially if wants “money” with access to political power, then we need him in the state with the same suspicion as to meet all kinds of political power.

As long as money from other natural or legal persons – “train to train, goods for money” – and is accepted in exchange for goods or services will be exchanged freely, it is the preferred means of “power to “no” to exert power over “. Money makes the donor power only because it gives the recipient the potential exercise of power itself, etc.

Anyone who has understood the preceding mechanism, will tend to reject the demonization of endemic nonsense of money and economy of exchange. The bite reflex against the cash economy, which many religions – including the Marxist-secular religion – indicates, is completely unjustified. Just as the market – especially for correct interpretation of the German order theory – the largest loss of power tool markets.

Both the disempowerment and empowerment are however under the condition that there is a functioning competitive markets. This is typically the case, unless the government intervenes with its coercive power to certain market players to prefer over others. The power of money in the first sense, however, loses her innocence when she turns into power in the second sense.

3 “Money power” and political power

In the money economy is the “labor power” of the monetary assessment by others to see. “.

Thank Hobbes appears as a cynic. But it is by no means far-fetched that the economic successes of the past 30 years to go back, especially in emerging markets and the deregulation of labor markets. In developed countries need to be subject to the willingness to work, the price paid for evaluation. Because open payments usually far less damage than hidden or modified by regulations, it is perhaps no coincidence that those countries that cut into the best indices for the measurement of economic freedom, are typically characterized by relatively high transfers.

.

Significantly

Is the medium, but very internationally oriented structure of the machine and plant construction. What role does this apparent contradiction to the success?

Lindner:Because I see no contradiction. On the contrary: the middle-class structure is the result of a highly specialized, tailored to the needs of the customer product offerings. The narrower the niche product, the less it can afford a company to use only the German and European markets only. In addition: Asia has replaced Europe as the biggest market for engineering products. This means two things: Sitting in Asia – first – attractive customers. Comes from Asia – second – a more attractive offer, which is pushing for our European home market. I strongly encourage our farmers were medium-sized machines: Go into the lion's den, where he met your competitors, you mete with him there, you do together before he attaches himself to you before your own door.

Corporate profits gushing, but a large part being produced abroad and earned. What have the Germans from the boom of one of its key industries?

Lindner:A lot. We can only be successful internationally, if we produce abroad. And that also creates jobs in Germany. Finally, the machine is domestic production last year alone grew by 9.4 percent. For this year we expect an increase of 14 percent. The number of employees is already growing again. Many companies – including my company – have specific profit-sharing schemes for their employees. This means that these participate directly by the company's success.

The downside of this success story we are feeling in times of crisis. To what extent is bad for us, the high dependence on exports, which is typical for mechanical and plant engineering?

Lindner:The focus on the world market not only makes us more competitive. It helps us even in times of crisis. What would we gain if we had had in the financial crisis, lower dependence on foreign markets? Nothing! The demand for capital goods has slumped in Germany. Through our worldwide presence, we were able to buffer the decline at least somewhat. For even in times of global crisis, there are markets that are growing against the global trend. They can not begin to develop only when it goes downhill. If they are not known and there present, did not have good references and can demonstrate successful projects, they have no chance.

The economic and financial crisis seems to have gotten over the machinery and plant very well. When the pre-crisis level is reached?

Lindner:If we can realize the projected 14-percent growth this year, the production levels of our industry is only six percent below the unusually high level of 2008. We are so close to it already this year.

One thing is already certain: The next crisis will come. Who or what will trigger it in your opinion?

.

As we go from here? If you durchdekliniert the foreseeable development of ideas through to the end, the answer is not that difficult. Because the systemic causes of the crisis are analyzed sufficiently, the hopelessness of the reconstruction of Greek public finances is often busy and the behavior patterns of political actors can be studied on a daily basis – everything else can be derived deductively. Here, the following four scenarios, will help prove at the end of which only one to be viable.

Keep it up – more of it

The current policy is influenced by the idea that the crisis was the end result of nervous financial markets which are dominated by short-sighted and self-interested and irrational by rating agencies and greedy financial investors. It came therefore primarily important to get through the crisis, while salvaging a time when the financial markets will have calmed down. Not solve problems, but time buy is the motto. Although the crisis countries a strict austerity program is enacted, but enforcement is reluctant and rather serves the domestic political calm in the donor countries as the crisis management in recipient countries.

Under this scenario is preferred behavior patterns, be clamped as big umbrellas and rescue them if necessary, continue to increase, if it should later turn out to be too small. Rescue systems are backed by the acquisitions of dubious government bonds by the ECB to carry excessive lending target in the central banking system and in future perhaps through the issuance of euro bonds.

This policy must fail because it ignores the causes of the crisis and because it sets insufficient incentives for the stakeholders: The fearing for their re-election of politicians in the crisis countries in this scenario, you have every reason to pretend iron savings will only, and to ensure that its own people as little adjustment pains are inflicted. And investors can continue to trust that hold the bonds they purchase only a minimal risk of default because the parachutes there are already addressed in doubt.

The scenario is not sustainable, because it implies continually rising public debt in the crisis countries. It would also make an “orderly” bankruptcy of the crisis countries, among which a moderate debt with average stay is likely to be meant in the monetary union to change anything essential. After all, it would ultimately only bought time, since the causes of the ever-increasing debt would not be eliminated. The rescue for these countries are thus barrels without soil.

It would also be attractive for other countries to rely on parachutes and move to the consolidation of public finances at the St. indefinitely. More and more countries would move from the donor to the recipient side of the parachutes, until finally the creditworthiness of the few remaining donor countries would be affected and all the rescue packages together on itself.

Incentive efficient debt restructuring

.

The ECJ has

This hustle and bustle to an end now. In other words, the ECJ has the mechanism that is based on the vertical price discrimination undermined; arbitrage is thus possible. The British viewers can now also buy a Greek decoder card, which is much cheaper compared to the UK.

To capture

The economically relevant consequences of this ruling to, worth a look again at the business model: for example, sells the Premier League live broadcast nationally defined rights of their games on national single pay channel at different prices. These stations make the Games accessible to their subscribers. Stations that have sold so far this regionally defined subscriptions run at high prices, now in danger of losing subscribers by the onset of arbitrage. Therefore, these stations no longer be willing to pay relatively high prices for the broadcast rights with the result that the revenues can drop the respective leagues.

In the case of the Premier League, which is about 1.8 billion pounds sterling. In addition, the risk of arbitrage proves to be comparatively low, as prevails in the German interest to consumer countries, Austria and Switzerland a similar price level as in Germany. The economic impact on the Bundesliga thus keep within very narrow limits, although of course the revenue prospects for future commercialization abroad deteriorated.

From an economic perspective

Arrangement is to be welcomed unreservedly the verdict, because it breaks the monopolistic structures and the possibilities of vertical price differentiation greatly restricted. It also allows more competition in the relevant markets. To what extent this is the benefits to consumers will depend on the reaction possibilities of the provider. The providers can not prevent arbitrage between national markets and see this as a threat, they will raise prices in the markets in which the rights have been comparatively sold cheaply or at least ensure that the pay channel in accordance with their Subscription prices converge.

Also will work together with the rights of the pay-TV services provider, in order to obtain the vertical market division upright. The pharmaceutical industry with monolingual instruction leaflets or the automotive industry show here with warranty restrictions on feasible ways. In addition to a relevant regional product differentiation, possibly using the transmission format or reporting – what good is a British audience a comment in Hungarian – which contain the provider still possibilities of covert market split approximately in the form of “limited” technical possibilities such as the functioning of the software, access updates or remedy the faults.

.

What are “actions harmful to their neighbors”? These include first of all the classic negative externality – ie Attacks that do not act on the market – and in extreme cases of war, but also cross-border environmental pollution or fishing in international waters. Hayek's criterion corresponds to the so-called “classic goal of freedom” of the 18th Century, as we find it, for example, Wilhelm von Humboldt:

“The state abstain from all care for the positive welfare of citizens, and go no further step, as to their security against themselves and against foreign enemies is necessary – for no other end uses it restricts their freedom”
.

Exactly how the state has only inside the task of protecting individual citizens from attacks of other citizens, so should the international organization to preserve the individual member state against attacks from other Member States. Hayek thus transmits in a remarkably ingenious way, the national organizing principle for the international order: his criterion is consistent
.From the classic goal of freedom implies that the state should protect the property and must not interfere with freedom of contract. Transferred to the international level, this means that no trade and capital flows may be limited by the states. Therefore, the international organization is also responsible for Hayek, “to say 'No' to all sorts of restrictive measures”.
Belong to the “actions harmful to their neighbors” and the so-called “market spillovers”, ie international interdependence through the market? For it may well be that the wrong monetary policy in a country – attracts the other countries affected – for example, the U.S. in the years 1929-32 or 2003-04. Also in this issue are consistent Hayek Answer:

“There could be no more effective check against the abuse of money by the government than if people were free to refuse any money they distrusted and to prefer money # in which they had confidence … Therefore, let us deprive governments.

Monetary policy should not fall within the jurisdiction of the international organization. Also in the monetary system, there should be no barriers to entry. The producers of money – even of base money – should rather be in competition with each other. The interdependence of the market provides precisely for efficiency.
What does this mean for the European Union?

 The Member States should have no common currency and central bank – unless a currency prevails in the competition, and market access remains free. And the interdependence through the market for government debt is not sufficient reason to communitise fiscal policies. The European Union should impose its Member States are not “how to use their resources”. This also rules out a common fiscal policy. It is also incompatible with a European agricultural policy, industrial policy, structural policy, energy policy, transport policy, research policy and regulations of the labor and financial markets. Hayek, yes – yes, he calls – the Common Market. However, a more comprehensive would be preferable as the only European solution. Hayek is an international environmental and fisheries policies. But here is the global solution – the Kyoto Protocol of the UN – superior to that of Europe.Hayek advocated an international security policy. Since the externalities go far beyond Europe, NATO is better suited than the security policy of the EU..

It was known, Martin Luther, who – speaking in the Hirschmanschen Economics – mustered the courage to theological first voice-option and loyalty to the prescribed position left to choose finally the spiritual exit-option, for him, the church and punished worldly power with the activities of life threat. Like all exit options, including the Lutheran break opened from the then prevailing dogma of the Catholic Glaubenspräskriptionen dialogue to settle the dispute, the counterpoint, so the competition in Theology.

Exit options with their institutional character of secession undermine the power of the Catholic spiritual – as well as Protestant – Church members in their mid-faith organization show indeed no mere theory but a reality. It seems to atomize the religious beliefs of individuals growing.

This corresponds to the secular development of civil societies that derive public acceptance in principle of political and ecclesiastical authorities not by historically dominated hierarchical thinking with more or less arrogant supremacy of truth, but by the compelling spiritual and political achievements of the government actors towards citizens. It seems that was developing in the Christian churches – including, but visibly reluctant, in the Catholic – in a similar hierarchy relativizing understanding matters of faith. And if the EKD will toward the Catholic Church, and not vice versa, this development oppose by “more ecumenism” an institutionally negotiated spiritual harmonization of Catholics and Protestants, then it goes straight into the backward-oriented direction. Its eye-catching wooing more uniformity reduces the creative differentiation in the minds of their believers. Catholic and likes to remain Catholic, Protestant and likes to remain Protestant and others like it and will remain different. The people have a spiritual choice, this “freedom to God” indicated by the Benedict speaks so pointedly

And this freedom to the current harmonization affine theological ecumenical aspirations of the EKD contradicts principle, one should confront the EKD quietly with the competitive spirit, which indeed is in church circles prejudice caused so unpopular, but by Martin Luther submissions to almost 500 years so faith-innovative churches, and was effectively introduced into the former monopoly organization of faith. Luther's conversion to fundamentalist religious ecumenism foreign competition and the institutional church-exit option, the Protestant owes its existence.

Organized religious monopolies

Although many people still give spiritual support and counseling. But for an increasing number of people taking the fascination of freedom too obvious to prescribed religious dogmas of the faith world, he has done in the history of Christianity has always been, but the current nostalgia for harmonizing theological ecumenism him disabled. She carries the germ of the spiritual sclerosis in itself.

.

Let's look again briefly at the facts. Greece has around € 350 billion debt, which are pretty much 150 percent of GDP. Through the first bailout of which 110 billion were secured €. For the participating states will have to stand straight. Now in these days is the second parachute with a volume of a further € 109 billion. If that is sealed, then nearly 63 percent of Greek government debt by € States and the IMF have been secured, and there remain 131 billion €, which are not hedged.

Let us now once against all expectations, the policy would decide against the second bailout, instead, to admit the Greek default and seek to conduct an orderly insolvency procedures in the way. Would then let the world? Certainly not. For the non-€ on the first bailout secured debt, or about 240 billion, the following points be noted: The market value of the corresponding bonds varies between 30 and 50 percent of the nominal value, corresponding to approximately 70 to 120 billion €. Therefore, one could proceed as follows: the EFSF all exchanges in the 240 billion € contained € against Greek bonds of investment grade securities with a nominal value of EFSF 50 percent of the nominal value of the original paper, ie 120 billion. The owners of these securities – primarily banks and insurance companies – would thus have to accept a book loss of 120 billion €, stand against the current market value, on average, but even good
.The EFSF would depreciate the value of the collateral accepted Greek bonds completely, so that also suffered a book loss of € 120 billion, so that Greece would of debt in this way to 240 billion €. Then there still would remain a liability in the amount of € 110 billion or 51 percent of GDP. These are precisely the € 110 billion, secured by the first bailout. That Greece should extend for a fresh start.

For a partial relief of Greece is again brought into play, that the Greek commercial banks are no longer able to refinance then, because then they have no or too few securities and eligible year, more that they can deposit at the ECB. That they were being torn so in the maelstrom, building on a whole range of the usual doomsday scenarios. But that need not be so: in our scenario, they look for the debt section that is either such securities on the first rescue funds secured and almost as safe as German government bonds, or hold investment grade securities of EFSF, for the same thing applies. . It is true however, that the financial sector would have to write off a total of € 120 billion, and that includes the ECB. However, this is a book loss, the first is already priced in and the second, no one can seriously argue that he was not to be processed by the capital markets.

.