For what? To see a guy anti EU workers to manipulate against EU workers rights? All we have to do is to tax everything from outside EU market, that we can produce competitive enough inside EU market. There are a lot of goods we cant produce, like this cofee i am drinking in this morning. We import and export, but, we block imports from what we can produce inside. Being able to doing cheaper at the cost of workers rights, are unfair competition and who does it must be punished instead of accepting that economic trojan horse gift of cheaper.
Just a heads up: you don't need to pay back borrowed money with tax money. Look into MMT a bit, you'll find some answers on how modern central banking works there. Draghi doesn't talk about the cost of the European Social model or the cost of the debt financing of his proposals because knows that there aren't. The EU is debt sovereign. It controls its own currency and hands out debt in its own currency. It can always create money out of nothing without causing problems to pay back the debt. The only limit to that is the real productive capacity of the economy. If the market can't absorb the extra currency, or if the currency starts circulating too fast, then you get inflation. Inflation is the real tax that funds things, not the taxes you pay on your salary. As we have seen in the 2010s however, Inflation in the EU is terribly low, which suggests a stagnating economy. In the US about half the inflation it experienced during the pandemic years came from government stimulus, in the EU it was about 20-25% on average. Again, this suggests that there is still capacity to absorb public funding in the EU economy, it's as you state, we're not productive and efficient enough. The way you pay back the public investments is by raising the ceiling of productive capacity, thereby keeping inflation low and thus allowing the central bank to repay the money that it was able to borrow.
Two decades of most EU countries lacking behind on digitalisation is finally catching up with them. An integrated EU capital markets, banking, and fiscal union is also a no brainer
@@konfunable It's easier to start with a clean sheet. The Baltics, particularly Estonia, pretty much swept away their old soviet bureaucracy and built a new one from scratch, leaner and meaner incorporating digital technology. The other side of the iron curtain is trying to change systems that have been around before computers even existed in some cases, and at least when they were too large and expensive to be used for everything.
@@Croz89 It is only partly true. I think the difficulties to change in western Europe is much more political than what you mentioned. Left leaning politics stayed too long. Welfare model is completely unsustainable without hard working post-war boomer generation.
@@konfunable I'm not so sure. Baltic countries still have a welfare state. Perhaps western Europe is a bit more risk averse, having more to lose if things go wrong.
University rankings are often biased towards US and Anglo-Saxon institutions. A significant portion of these rankings is based on research output, which benefits universities where research is conducted directly under the university's name. In many European countries, however, research is frequently carried out by closely affiliated but separately named institutions, which leads to lower rankings for the universities themselves, despite their strong academic and research contributions. This structural difference creates an imbalance in how universities are evaluated/scored internationally.
It would be more useful to look a the quality and efficiency of education rather than the quantity of research done by an university. It is not the universities job to research things, it is to educate and prepare students for doing it themselves. Europe would score low anyhow.
The point about university education is the only one I disagree with. Most universities in the European Union offer excellent education at a very reasonable price. The average quality of this education is way higher than in the US. It is true that the US has many more universities in the top 50, but most people in the US do NOT study in these universities. Once you move away from these top universities, the rest of universities in the US are really expensive and really mediocre, some of them would not even qualify as universities in the EU. This aside from the fact that these university rankings do not evaluate the quality of education, they evaluate research output, prestige, funding and they are not transparent. In fact, you can pay your way up in most of these rankings, something that public universities in the EU will not generally do, but private universities in the US will definitely do, as it is a way to attract rich students that can pay top dollar to get a degree.
@@davisdelp8131 sure buddy, that is why the US has much worse life expectancy, gun crime, homicides per capita, infant mortality, drug abuse, it has national problem with student debt and has the worse health system of the developed world. The human development index and the GINI indices of the US are worse than most of countries in the EU. Bravo!
You're right but I don't see where the disagreement is from. This is exactly about that curve. Europe has a great education, no doubt, but the return on that investment of mass good education is low. You got taxpayers sponsor education of people that do not produce enough value to cover this education they've got. The best researchers are exported to the US universities, where there are the best conditions for them to conduct research and apply skills. The worst are overeducated, getting endless degrees, instead of working, because it's cheap and they can afford everlasting education. I still think education is the last thing that should be sacrificed, but let's get real: despite large inheritance and great education in both stem and liberal arts, all high earning movies, all unicorns and high tech breakthroughs are creating value not there. They can even be made there, with the latest Google research and DeepMind, with Siemens, Airbus and BMW, with the great books and scenarios, but the funny thing is that the most value in Europe is brought by some old overpriced brands.
@@dmitryburlakov6920 I agree, especially because they recieved excellent education and are "free" in the sense that they are not burdened by a huge debt that needs to be repaid, something that is common in the US. We "just" have to deregulate and allow people to grow and create.
I was operating a small online shop until recently. The complexity of compliance to make and sell a basic piece of electronic (no batteries even) to a member state is astounding and different for each member - and it's intentional. Consultant companies will charge you 300 to send you a PDF for 1 country explaining what the rules even are and then you need to follow them. So overall you have to 1) find all CE standards applicable for you 2) test against them 3) comply with VAT rules 4) comply with local garbage laws, pay fees, ensure package has the right local signage 5) comply with local electronic waste rules, pay fees. There is no single market, at least not for EU businesses. Guess how many of these laws Chinese vendors are following. Meantime in the US you test for FCC and ship away.
@@chickenfishhybrid44Sure, but it makes it incredibly difficult to get any business going and scale up to eventually create jobs and generate revenue growth, which in turn all lead to more tax income for the Euro governments.
A problem with Western Europe welfare policies is that they're mostly wholly in favour of really poor people while being financed by upper middle class and NOT by billionaires. If you hold a Phd in Europe, you'd rather work in Switzerland or USA. We're seeing both capital flights and a brain drain.
Yep, they drain middle class which is like 80% for the good of 10% poor which is just by choice btw, the only reason one is poor in In west is because he is lazy.
I agree that we should tax the richest people the most but I would always be willing to pay into a welfare system like we have in the EU. I would actually pay even more to support the poorest as long as I can afford the living of my family. BTW I am working towards my Phd this year.
@@aarionsievosadly many people righfully dont think like that....50 lercent of peolle in germany who get social welfare arent even german cititiens....would you like to pay 50 percent of tax for suxh a rhing ?
@@term164 I mean, you're talking about winning the "produce goods and as much Co2 as possible to kill the planet as quick as possible" competition. People with principles are not very interested in that sort of thing.
@@term164 The EU has a birth rate of 1.3 births/woman. Unless that goes up to 1.6 to 2.0 births/woman, Europe has no potential in this the future. If half the population is old and you have fewer and fewer people entering the workforce, then you’re guaranteed to stagnate like Japan. Canada has a huge problem with this as well. Our birth rates have plummeted down to 1.2 births/woman because no one can afford kids. But at least, we’re not a nation state. An immigrant country like Canada can take in a lot more foreigners than nation states, in order to make up for the declining and aging native population
EU gets most gas from other countries and imports most stuff from China . EU has more ageing population and dwindling young people that tries to settle in US. The ones living in EU needs to pay for old people welfare and the debt that keeps increasing due to massive imports. EU also has immigrant crisis. EU needs a total rebirth .
I think you should not treat the social model as a cost only. It also allows for entrepreneurship: because of the safety net people can start a business without the fear of ending in the gutter. Also, it reduces costs of civil unrest (except in France ;-) ) and a good education and healthy people enable creating opportunities as well. I think the main cause is definitely the capital markets, we should really fix that. E.g. many European startups go to the USA for the capital to scale up. So our innovations after the "valley of death" are basically bought up for a bargain by the Americans.
our social model is only a cost. Evidently it does not allow for entrepreneurship or at least it hasn't thus far except in Sweden but Sweden is only 1 out of 27 EU members.
Spot on. Capital markets are a key issue. But govt. redtape, cost of doing business and language barriers are a close second. If you run a company the state is essentially your enemy in the EU, they treat you like a subject. Instead they should bend over backwards and s you off, because the state doesn't generate a single dime and they don't even appreciate you and your tax payments. What a bunch of parasites.
@@sebastiangruenfeld141 All the scandinavian countries have a higher rate of social mobility and ease of starting a business than US, it's not just Sweden.
@@MickenCZProfi 1. Entrepreneurship isn't measured by social mobility 2. ease of doing business is just one indicator of many. Others are acess to venture capital, taxation, regulatory environment, market size, and societal mindset. Scandinavians, and Europeans in general, famously despise anyone with ambition. We have a crab in the bucket mentality. Not one person is allowed to be too successful so we gotta pull down down. 3. Our social model costs us dearly. The highest taxes in the world and yet we're uncompetitve. With peak boomer right around the corner, we'll spend even more on social stuff. The European social welfare state has worked fine when Europes population was still overwhelmingly young and had huge economic growth. This model simply isn't viable anymore in times like now where half the population is older than 50, and we're importing hordes of economically unproductives who are a drain on our finances rather than a boon.
The EU is going to have to decide how much of its soul it wants to keep to remain competitive. The egalitarian and risk averse culture is part of its identity, but it can be a millstone around its neck in the world of business.
It depends, it makes the economy more stable and makes economic downterms less bad. Yes, this is bad in sectors like tech which is 100% based on innovation moving fast and breaking things. But its incredibly good for having reliable and stable suppliers. Companies like Airbus or Siemes have hugely benefited for this way of working. But sure, it's not perfect
I believe the living conditions are far more important than the GDP. So I prefer "everyone gets a home and something to eat" instead of "some rich kids the newest A.I.-Smart-Apple-Toilette-Brush".
@@aarionsievoexcept what you're getting in the EU is everyone gets no job, a shitty room in a shared tiny apartment with 9000 strangers, 799% taxes, Islamic terrorists, and not being able to afford heating
@@miguel5785 That's why it's wrong. It's advocating decreasing social spending, which the UK did, and all it did was destroy institutions and services, which ruined the economy. Right wing economics is a poverty and death cult.
The Economist is really becoming left wing trash. They had an article calling Christian sexual ethics (sex only between married people) weird, yet we see how out of wedlock children are worse off, and now we have a fertility crisis because people aren’t getting married and having less sex. They’ve lost the plot IMO.
@@Amlux1984 Thinking sex outside marriage is bad, is weird. And it's weird you think children of single parents being worse off is a reason against that. As if you haven't heard of contraception, etc. Or more likely you're lying, perhaps to yourself.
@@Amlux1984 You use state created currency to shop, pay your bank back, pay taxes & ndt save a little state created currency You’re falling for the idea governments should shovel the currency to the top of the economy While you gotta use your bank loan to stay alive
If I am correct it does sound like they recommend an EU federation, loosely aligning the member countries has only worked kind of correctly if the EY wants to be a bigger player they need to be more efficient.
Fundamentally speaking, it all boils down to what you believe is most important here, do we prioritize the Economy prosperity of a nation, at all cost to remain competitive with those countries that are willing to do this, or much like Europe, do we prioritize the egalitarian social model, which is a net cost. Granted as shown in the video the idea that China or the US has it "better" is highly debatable as it only applies to the top income earners, but what is clear is that the Chinese and US economy, the depth of their checkbook is just that much larger, as they can expect more growth due to certain practices which are detrimental to middle and lower income groups. European decline is only prevalent because Europe has chosen not to fall into the unsavory economic practices that are used abroad, all while the capitalist notion keeps the pressure up on nations to remain ever more competitive, the European Social Model is not compatible with the deep Capitalist mindset, and self-fulfilling drive for growth above everything else. Whereas it is quite easy to see that there is a real social and social cohesion cost to China's and USA's society, and while they are ahead globally speaking, there are clear signs of social decay as just basic living / existing is such a tremendous economic struggle for the individual. The point i am making, is that the EU's social model in a vacuum can create a more hospitable and sustainable form of living, and overall more enjoyable life for its inhabitants. However, undeniably this comes at a cost... in a vacuum this cost means very little as there is no competing nation or forces. But Europe does not live in a vacuum; and it is having a rough time balancing the sheets and remaining competitive... It's a fundamental choice we should make because the USA's and China's Social contract is not sustainable in the long run... rich become richer, and poor become poorer, eventually the social debt has to come due, where as the EU's Social Contract is far more sustainable in the long run, granted It's far from perfect, and could do with a good housekeeping, but the overall philosophy is to be commended in my opinion.
Most important thing is to ensure property prices grow out of control indefinitely. Everyone can be cash poor surrounded by crime and crumbling nfrastructure but sit on ainexpensive asset, that in reality they ccan'tdo anything with. That's priority in countries like UK and Canads, with any other state considerations from energy security to governmental efficacy being second. Illusion of prosperity is cheaper and easier to achieve than actual prosperity, and it favours disproportionately those that are likeliest to vote. Why be a nation of shop keepers which requires work, if you can be a nation of landlords which require fuck loads less work?
@@coolbanana165 yeah a new balance should be made, and well China's notion of planning is hardly as structured as we make it out to be. but as Draghi already mentioned, we have to restructure our economy to serve the internal market, and ensure both income and cost of living match when taking into account the European cost of manufacture and wages. This can be considered an Economic plan, which also requires a strong plan to secure strategic resources to upkeep this new reality, as external forces will use and abuse supply lines within their sphere of influence. Finally, taxing the rich is difficult as they are internationals in the sense that their existence and wealth is invisible to the tax system. It requires them also to allow themselves to be taxed, as they can easily relocate and just cut EU out.
"Only applies to the top income earners." You guys really just absolutely refuse to believe the idea that any American other than like Jeff Bezos or Musk have more wealth than Europeans eh? Lol
"The EU's Social Contract is far more sustainable in the long run." That's the most delusional sentence I've ever read. The cost of that social contract is going up while Europe's economy is stagnating and workforce demographics are collapsing. There's absolutely nothing sustainable about that.
As an American, develop a co-operative sector that is the envy of the world. You aren’t going to compete with China, the US and India in the near future, so don’t try to. Take smaller profits, and share them. Compete by being more efficient and using fewer resources. The European social system is worth not having as many McMansions and football stadiums. Take the healthcare and run.
@@chickenfishhybrid44 They’ve been doing so with trade unions in private owned firms and government jobs. I’m talking about developing a cooperative economy like the madragon coop across europe. Credit unions provide credit and most of the production is for local consumption. That way they wouldn’t be as dependent on outside countries. It also means the economy won’t grow very much, which it already doesn’t with large private firms like volkswagon closing plants and moving to the US. I say let them go and start subsidizing local production for local consumption. Draghi would have them fight a losing battle to keep industry and investment that has no shot of being globally competitive, just to keep private profits fat. You need production without private investment and large profit. It’s a totally different model.
EU needs IT software giants...ATM you guys, USA, subjugated the rest of the world in digital. That industry its the most proeminent and hires many well payed engineers
@@havencat9337 The level of investment that it takes to run those giants simply don’t exist in europe. You have fully funded healthcare and pensions, schools, railways, etc. The US doesn’t. It’s very easy to get caught in the glitz and glam of the wealth of the US without realizing all we have to sacrifice in order to have a handful of billionaires launch themselves into space. China and India will lap you if you’re lucky and started funding today.
@@jacobjones630 fair enough, I'm just saying that countries in Europe have already been taking smaller profits and sharing them more in comparison to the US for example.
I most say this is the best journalism I have experience in the whole 2024. I am normally a very EU sceptic but for once a EU politician produced a quality work (Mario Draghi's report), now all EU parliament has to do is implement this into reality. Without many great and well developed industry sectors we can't afford to have a great welfare system, it is common economical sense, therefore growing much needed industries in Europe needs to take precedence over welfare. Yes it will be hard for poor people at first (say 5-ish years) before EU can reap the benefits of its investment, although here I must give a strict warning about how money is allocated and need to be looked over as a hawk, because most of the times money from the state gets swamped up by bad actors only wanting to suck money, just look at Africa if want plenty of horror examples, and it even happened to my closest neighbor city in Norway that wanted to build EV battery factory but the top talent got a better top job offer from the US, and off did they go with lots of hefty pre-paid bonuses and work only halfway done building the factory, leaving the city holding the poop bag.
Not gonna happen, frugal won't budge and other policies requiring cohesive restructuring will be vetoed. Remember China only needs to build one port in Cyprus to destroy whole new take on industrial policy, hell Hunhary might even do it for free.
Great video! I would have loved to hear your opinion on which aspects of the social model can be scaled back. To me, that's pensions. In western europe most pensioners can live as well or better than workers with their pension payments alone, even without accounting for the fact that due to wealth, their expenses are likely to be lower (e.g. no rent for many)
@@TomekSmykowski as far as I know France didn't. France tried to push back retirement age, which is a measure that penalizes those who are about to retire, not pensioners. You may be talking about another instance though
In relation to the EU's common debt. One must ask oneself whether the bureaucrats have the right incentives to allocate capital. In that context, it is relevant to assess what happens to the existing EU joint debt. It is rolled instead of being deducted. Your reservation is therefore legitimate.
This is an excellent video. I think your opinion section was a much-needed critical examination of the report and was well executed. Few people are willing to talk about the elephants in the room when discussing these topics, it's refreshing to hear a pragmatic and grounded voice. I would add that there's a topic that was missed. It probably isn't enough to come up with the investment money somehow. Germany actually has extremely high wealth inequality already yet falls short. US success is driven by capital accumulation, and the willingness to risk investing that capital into bets that probably won't succeed. That second part is crucial. If you listen to venture capitalists in the US (like the All-In podcast), they very often invest in companies that may only have a 5-10% chance of succeeding. The thinking is that, if you have a broad enough net of these kinds of investments, you'll eventually catch a Unicorn and make it all back.
Great video, provides a great basis on which to start reading more in-depth into this stuff. Especially for euroskeptics who truly believe their individual country would be better off without the joint economic power of the EU
i absolutely loved your analysis at the end and would be more open to your analysis at the end of this videos. i think you are unbiased in your assessment of the social model. i would love more videos like this and on eu industrial policies and just more videos from you in general i learn a lot from you so thank you
Mario assumes the EU already is a superpower that is "late" on its counterparts. The pb however is that the EU is not a country, it s a consumer market In order to answer the "problems" that he thinks the EU has, we d have to create a EU "power" from scratch, which isn t necessarily wanted by nor relevant for the majority of EU citizens
We have a direclty elected parliament, we have passports and EU citizenship, we have a juridisical system, etc.. The EU is much more than just a common market place. To start from scratch is utterly wasteful. Reform is the way. To start with directly electing the president
@@jezusbloodie It's true but if you look at 90% of laws that are passed, it's usually about regulating a common market (like regulating crypto or big tech or anti-tax haven policy etc) When ppl answer anti-EU talking points it's usually on the grounds of the common market and econmic prosperity (leaving EU=economic disaster) The biggest pb I see with pro-EU talking points though is that they often take for granted that the EU is in a pre-USA state. Like a federal entity that only needs some centralization and common regulations. What I mean by that is when Ursula VDL makes a "state of the union" speech, like she's in Washington or something However the EU should rather be compared to/inspired by India bc it's a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic pseudo-federation that cooperates only on a few common issues yet The EU doesn't have tech or EV giants, bc its market isn't adapted to the appearance of such companies. And maybe it's for the best The EU, though, has a thriving healtchare market (Novonordisk, Astrazeneca, Boiron, Sanofi etc), the biggest tourism market in the world and would be the 1st agro-power in the world if counted as a single country. It would also be a renewable enrgy giant and probably have the biggest banking sector in the world There are some common sense policies that could be adopted to save money essentially, like a united diplomatic force to have 1 big diplo network with super-embassies for all EU citizens across the world rather than 27 sihtty little ones (would save a lot of €), or creating some common defense capabilities like NATO artillery shells production to avoid the pb we're currently stuck in, namely Ukraine aid not being spent bc production capabilities aren't big enough to transform money into shells (or other defense items) quickly enough But these solutions aren't the ones Mario proposes. Bc what Mario wants is forcing the EU market into creating some irrelevant state-sponsored companies to "give an alternative" to US big tech or Chinese EVs. Spoiler : been tried in France, and it made Daylimotion Some countries/regions are just better at producing certain items, and it should be accepted by bureaucrats. I want to drink French wine, go on a holiday to Italy in my cheap and reliable Chinese/US EV while using US/Korean smartphones I don't want to drive a crappy Skoda EV, drinking Chinese wine watching Dailymotion videos on my Nokia phone
A lot of the productivity gap between the US and Europe probably comes from the strict labor regulations. Not being able to allocate workers efficiently (specially during a phase of rapid change) will keep dragging Europe's economy down. I don't see Europeans favouring such a liberalization though, which makes me pessimistic about Europe's economic future. But if they are serious about solving this problem, artificial work stability unfortunately has to go.
Unemployment is still high. There is no lack of potential workers. But you have sectors creating artificial tension (like construction) because they like fraudulent jobs. Reforming business taxation would be a good start, in a way that taxes more the outcome of business activity rather than the process. Also, making firing easier would help the job market more flexible
Universities in Europe play different role than in the States. For example in Germany scientists go to Max Planck institute to conduct research, THEY MOSTLY DO NOT STAY AT UNIVERSITIES. Max Planck directors have won 18 Nobel Prizes. If Max Planck were a university it would be ranked #2 worldwide, behind Harvard, in publications/citations. Nature's current ranking lists Max Planck as #3 worldwide
Pension privatization would be a great start. It would reduce a substantial burden on the state while directly injecting money into the economy that could be used as investment for new industries. Also, you could have talked about Australia and Switzerland, two countries that have a good welfare state while remaining competitive in the global economy
Just drastically reduce the bureaucrats' numbers and those that remain, make sure they are held accountable for their decisions. End things like "lifetime contracts at twice or five times the national median salary REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU DO".
The Swedish financial crisis in the 1990s wasn't caused by an oversized public sector, it was due to an overheating of the economy due to a combination of relaxed capital controls and a pegged exchange rate which led to a real estate bubble that popped.
As usual great video from this channel thats thoughtful and articulate. My own personal opinion is that we learned a lot about the immense benefits of markets while also learning about where markets are hard to operationalize and where they fail from much policy experimentation after WW2. I wish more people were open to the idea of welfare + business friendly policies. As has been the case in the Nordic countries since the 90s, these countries combine generous welfare programs, but also are generally more pro-market and easier to do business in by a great many metrics (property rights indices, the world bank ease of doing business index, etc.). Holding welfare policies constant, having a more business friendly regulatory environment helps with growth and productivity. One other thing I think is underrated in the policy space is going from in-kind benefits to cash transfer. We do this here in the US with many programs like food stamps or the earned income tax credit to help families, its much easier welfare for gov to produce and more flexible based on consumer needs.
I do want europe to be economically competitive, but I also want the eu to be very, very careful about changing our welfare. Social rights are a thing our previous generations paid with blood, and their purpose is to guarantee a good quality of life to all eu citizens, not to only the most "productive" ones. Besides, more economic inequality does not necessarily lead to more capital invested in innovations, while it surely leads to an harder quality of life for poorer classes with all the due consequences. I'm not saying that the EU legislation is perfect and must not be touched. I'm saying that, instead of giving up our welfare to attract/create private capitals to invest, we could first try other routes, like for example create capitals using eu members national funds.
welfare need to change moreover on retire people.. they went to retirement too soon borrowing money from new generations. They are the only ones who gained from this kind of welfare! We need to do generation justice, we cut their retirement to fund family and young people. I'm an engineer in Italy and half of my salary goes to pay people who worked only 20 years!
this type of thinking is exactly why EU is becoming a backwards and irrelevant place in the world. All the silly regulations for the sake of regulations brought the common folk to their knees. It's good that we have "free healthcare" only that the free check-up or free surgery is a year from now when it can already be too late
I can say that youth are so poor they dont need any of these "social benefits". We have other priorities to worry at young age: buying a house, building a family, raising kids, etc. We dont have capital for any of those. The net salaries are a joke, half of it goes to rent and other half goes to groceries and day to day life. What social benefits?
It actually would be quite easy to finance the welfare, if we would have an effective way to collect the existing(!) taxes. US citizens have to pay wealth tax and this world wide, meanwhile we in the EU talk like the the economy collapses if we have to tax the rich, while they reported in 2016 that roughly the common annual debt of the EU member states is as high as 1/3 of the money which we lose through tax evasion, meaning getting the taes would not only enable us to finance welfare further but even invest in big projects etc.
Wow, great analysis of that report! Heard more about that report but you are the first one who informs me that the European social model is off limits, thanks!
He didn't do a single thing whilst in government Heck, the government lead by conte, prior to the government lead by draghi, did more things lol, draghi took credit for those If anything, the draghi government helped meloni gain votes, by staying out of it, and now we have had since 2 years ago a fuscist and incompetent government
@@marvin2678 nah it's probably to liberate germany from unnecessary bureaucracy, what new companies does Germany have? Most of what it has is from decades ago because new ones cannot emerge because it's impossible for up and coming companies to actually succeed in the long term, due to excessive regulations which are impossible to comply with for smaller organizations, the big established ones then don't have any competition since they're the only ones who can actually comply.
did he fix italy? yes he basically slaughtered us ...of course the Greeks are happy too. What country are you from ? let me guess something like Germany , Denmark , Belgium ?
Great analysis! The EU has been coasting for far too long, we are only now waking up to the fact that the social contract has to be changed if we don't want to lag behing even further.
@@primzahler8377Europe no longer has money for everything, we have to opt. Surely, pensioners won't choose this, but it is the only way for economic growth. Let's see if the population chooses to wither away or try to come back.
There are other ways: 2016 the EU estimated that we roughly lose 3x more through tax evasions than the combined new annual debt of its members is (we are not talking about new taxes here). Meanwhile Estonia cut its tax rate to 20% without lowering quality of social welfare for its citizens by making its public service more efficient through digitization. The problem never was too much social welfare, but how inefficient our states operate and how we collect the needed taxes from the upper 10%.
@@mal_dungreat point! The EU should mandate government structural best practices through funds. I am Portuguese so I get how inefficiently they are applied. Nevertheless, the EU burocracy also doesn't want to cut itself... "Federal" EU has so many good examples at the country level that aren't made commonplace due to political disinterest.
If the amount of public money wasted on EU projects, including H2020, in comparison to final output is any indication to possible solution... we are not coming out of this mess any soon
As an American I think Europe can only stay relevant if it comes strongly together. The Veto should go away too. Spending on certain things for the whole block has to come- now. Like, for example, a 'unified grid' or a standing army. I don't want Europe to become the US, please no, but it will have to 'federalize' on some things if it wants to do well. That's just what I think it will take.
Not at all why would we want him to unify debt when it would be to our detrement? We would do it if there was a common margin of debt but not when Germany has to pay the full brunt of it.
A nice report, but I think we are reading too much into it. First of all, it is a collection of justifications for greater debt at the EU level. Member states do not have the margin for further debt, and the EU level does, but it needs a moral justification for it, so this report provides it. Anything more than that is just waffling. It will be what it will be, the important thing is that there is money.
Europe needs to make it easier for tech workers to opt-into a higher risk, higher performance and higher reward life without paying into overly protective and expensive social insurance systems, or making it impossible for employers to match rewards and punishments to your performance. as it stands it's pretty much only possible to do that as a freelancer or full blown entrepreneur, which brings all sorts of surrounding hassles. Works for me, but the playing field has to be broadened.
Having a solution is one thing, having a popular solution is something completely different! USA and China are ignoring or manipulating their citizen opinions in so many issues it's unbelievable. On the other hand, European politicians are following even the most idiotic policies if it's popular enough...
It's delusional that EU still wants to compare it's technological prowess with US and China. Rather they should be comparing themselves with likes of India, sub Sahara Africa etc. India will also surpass them in less than 5 years.
The extent to which many Europeans seem to think their governments are near completely benevolent is always interesting to me. Do you believe your government doesn't ignore issues or control the narrative and discourse on all sorts of issues?
all fine and dandy but some basic things like digitalization and lower energy costs should lower costs by a lot and increase production. energy is more complicated of course especially since we somehow refuse the pragmatic solutions, but digitalization is doable, estonia has a model to follow, why waiting, why not do it yesterday?
I believe it may already be too late. Volkswagen's struggles with electric vehicle innovation, especially when compared to Japan, China, and the U.S., along with the widespread presence of U.S. military bases and Europe's lack of technological independence-unlike China and the U.S. with their tech giants-make it unlikely for Europe to change course. It seems Europe will continue to rely on U.S. protection.
Chinese EVs are a scam, they could never build them for so cheap unless CCP would pay half the price, slave leighbour and lack of safety standards or general build quality.
"Volkswagen's struggles with electric vehicle innovation, especially when compared to Japan" - care to back up this claim with anything? Specifically "VW compared to Japan"? Japan is still about hybrids, which is fine, but no Japanese company is even in the top 10 of the global market share in BEVs last year. VW, BMW, MB are 5, 6 and 8 places. Based on that inclusion of Japan alone here I have a feeling you don't exactly have the grasp of this topic unless you can provide a source to support your claim.
There is nothing wrong with relying on the US for protection. The whole world relies on the US (except for hostike countries for obvious reasons). The problem is not being competitive in the tech sector. The solution isn't being dependent on the US and China. The solution is being dependent on China and being closely tied with America. Let's hope we get sane people on both sides of the Atlantic so that we won't end up in an era of protectionism.
Europe’s biggest problem is declining birth rates. Especially in Southern and Eastern Europe who now have lower birth rates than Japan. No one can afford kids. People need to be able to earn higher disposable incomes Most of Southern Europe and Eastern Europe have birth rates of around 1.15 births/woman. That’s catastrophically low
@@marvin2678no its not, thats your ideology. Do you think Japanese or Korean hardcore patriarchal society with no significant feminism past has this issue? The thing is, anywhere in the world life quality rises, birth rates decrease, thats known fact. The second thing is economy, if people cant afford kids, it goes even lower. Third thing is relligion, as people get more educated and wealthier, conservative relligion looses its power on people and doesnt force/motivate them to breed kids. Im also almost 30 and not sure if i wanna have children. I have found meaning in life in other things, i have more time and money for myself and my beloved and i think to have children is absolutely each ones thing and is dumb to criticize someone for this decision. There are so many people having children who should never have children... I think if someone has children they need to absolutely want them and has to be their inner individual decision. I also think there is absolutely nothing selfish on not wanting children as some "critics" call people. Noone has any obligation to have children and if ever did, that was morally wrong.
What can you expect with young people paying more and more taxes to fund the old and pay for the debt of the country caused mostly by these old people?
You mean we should strive for a system that does not guarantee that the elder or dependent receive proper care? That would make us more competitive? But what is the goal of competitiveness if it's not guaranteeing proper living conditions?
@@Eddies_Bra-att-ha-grejer I think any human society should be able to care for all their people if even Neanderthals did, especially modern opulent societies like ours. So we should discuss how, not whether we can provide care for all.
Europe is the result of having discussed and suffered many decisions, this is the moment where the EU has to develop its own vision for the world. To create it needs to have a presence in the world and an economy which can back it up
Why is it so difficult to imitate other social models that work? The EU could simply consider copying Switzerland and their decentralized structure. It is extremely democratic and extremely successful.
Europe does not have an independent political strategy. Market integration is to ensure political unity and coordination. They know that the wrong strategy has led to the energy crisis, but they still follow the United States. Now Europe's production materials are the most expensive. This has led to many large companies moving to the United States. Isn't this capital harvesting?
That a private Pension system is something that actually Benefizkonzert private investment is a really interesring point. I neuer thought about it. It World be interesting to know if a country live switzerland which Haß a mixed Model is havinf Mode investment through this compared to a system like the German one for example which is entirely tax based
To be frank on other part of the report draghi does ooint out that oublic investments and welfare ahould go hand in hand, most european countries have funds based welfare, like the case of most if the nordics, pensions and helthcare are payes thtough funds that are mandatory and are more flexinle that the statist model of welfare even if still overseen by the state. He suggests that the savings from these funds ahould be invested towards the 800bil euro target as far as public investment goes, or at least this is how i interpreted it. This way theoretically welfare doesnt come at the expense of invesent but tecnically they power each other
No euro without common fiscal policy. It's frankly ridiculous how this idiotic arrangement is now simply accepted and not discussed in increasing competitiveness
Well, who would have expected that eu is killing its economy, what an incredible surprise, it was totally unpredictable. In poland we know it for like 12 years at least.
What we also forget is that infuence of activism in politics and some areas of science has had a profound influence on the competative basis of the EU. There is enough gas under the north of the Netherlands to lower energy prices in the EU significantly. However the comfort of 10000 to 30000 people is more important. We have become decadent.
I think what you've said of Tax policy being something that solely compells to national governments is precisely part of the problem. We should stop avoiding topics of discussion saying that since they are national it solely affects states. Let me be clear EVERYTHING that a single state does has an impact in the whole of the EU. German nativity with Russia worsened the energy situation, French colonial adventures worsen the migrant situation, Swedens inability to integrate its migrant population has had an impact in Scandinavian security etc etc etc. We are treating the EU like a Bus travelling in the night, in which every passenger knows a portion of the road and one by one says it to the Bus driver, instead of agreeing for a common map all together QUICK. My only positive thought is that the youth and new generation of policy makers are aware of that. But we need to act QUICK and accept the fact that the actions of one affects us all.
digitalization and IT, that is the problem! Look in the stock market who are the bigest companies and the giants that hire most people and pays very well - TECH and SOFTWARE! USA made EU a digital colony!
Very insightful! Thank you for this video. After two decades of borrowing and printing money to avert the negative effects of natural systemic corrections, europeans (like me) are never going to accept any consessions that infringe on their lifestyle or rights. Things have to get much worse before things get better.
Bro its simpel. How to compete with a country with no debt limit and against a country with no real freedom other than work and do what they party tells you. When you are a not even a country but a union of countries with all different laws and agenda's. As long if Europe is 3th place it is all ok.
I understand your concern about the cost of the welfare state, but I don't agree with it. In my opinion, a tech-driven EU *HAS* to reap its benefits FOR the welfare systems. This comes with serious optimisation measures being a main driver to bring down the cost of the public sector. In this process, I think it also has to make itself more entrepreneurial and competitive against the private sector, reaching an equilibrium of the two. I agree that staying as world leaders in education is necessary to accomplish this. I also think that technological development has to translate to economies that are still diversified and self sufficient, but where there are no solutions to agrarian, manufacturing, and industrial jobs that people do not want to do any more.
I would like to suggest an idea that I believe could help address some of Europe's economic challenges: allowing individuals to take on a voluntary second job without paying taxes on the additional income. This approach could potentially boost productivity and incentivize those who are willing to work more by letting them keep all the money they earn from their second job. The positives include increased disposable income for workers, which could stimulate consumer spending and indirectly boost tax revenue through higher sales and VAT. Additionally, it rewards individuals for their extra effort and could help reduce reliance on social welfare systems. I realize this goes against the European culture of work life balance, hence it should be implemented without a mandate.
Between my friends, aged 26-28yo, so many have abused the unemployment checks, staying home for months while they could have found jobs. Now this is an example, why can't this benefit be more strict, or transformed from free money gave out to favorable borrowing for people in need? Why must the state and the taxpayer waste their money like that?
u are part of the problem too by not reporting them. for the most part such actors arent a big problem to the economy except in greece or italy which has a corruption problem
@@cia5649 there's nothing to report. You lose your job, you get your monthly checks. It's up to you if you want to search for a new job (and lose the checks) or just sit on your ass.
@@m.m.511I'm not sure where are you from but in Spain you get these checks but you need to be actively looking for employment and you cannot deny several employment offers otherwise you lose whatever money you get. So, I hardly believe what you are saying and I don't think that Spain is an exception with this way of dealing with slackers
Honestly you just sound like a shit friend. Maybe there's some reason your friends are having a hard time, and having an unempathetic friends doesn't help.
The EU is a nightmare for a a start up. But If the EU is serious about it they would just need to create their own industrial bank (similar to China) and offer free IP after demonstrations. Loan the money with the IP as collateral. This would make the EU a power house in Hardware tech. Most of the battle for start ups is protecting there IP from large companies at the same time getting it in front of companies.
The problem woth Draghi's report it's that it is wrong. Yes, GDP per capita PPP compared to the EU is the same as 30 or 20 years ago, it only fell on 2023, not because of lack of high tech, but because of cheap energy from Russia stopped flowing. But many countries thrive, Japan, Korea, Chile, without big energy sources.
On the other hand waiting until blood is spilled befor introducing regulation (and sometimes not even then if the respective lobby is powerful enough) also doesn't sound particularly appealing.
I live in Sweden and i disagree on some of your points. First of all every country in eu had drastically different landscape when it comes to laws and culture. You cannot generalize about the "social model" because while generally being more humane than in usa and china, it is different everywhere. Secondly you dont take into account the benefit of the social model when it comes to preventing illness and medical costs. In sweden we work quite a lot, and we have one of the highest wealth inequalities in the world, and still have a problem with innovation, research and startups. Your options after getting a phd are basically no other than to move abroad, because there are no jobs for you here. I think the bigger problem is the deep seated generational wealth and complacency of those controlling it. We also generally produce products for internal consumption or luxuries for export to the US and china, so we end up being dependent on the ability of the middle class in those economies to affird our stuff
Your idea that scial welfare is more expensive than private ensurance is completly wrong: Its a fact that the incometax is the same in Denmark and USA, but whats paid for is not comparable, like education and health.
It is not a question of how expensive it is in this case, it is a question of who bears the cost of it. In the case of Europe it is mostly the wealthy and companies through taxation. In the US that risk is born by the individual - which leaves more surplus/profit for the wealthy and companies. The income tax (Tax as share of labour cost) in Denmark is 35.5%, while in the US it is 28%. And the level at which the top tax rate applues is far lower in Denmark (1.3 times average income) than in the US (8.5 times average income). Source: taxfoundation.org/blog/scandinavian-social-programs-taxes-2023/#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20the%20tax%20wedge,OECD%20average%20of%2034.6%20percent. Cheers, Hugo
The EU should accept that some degree of inequality is inherent to our society. Those who produce value cannot be expected to always subsidize those that produce nothing.
Get early access to the next video, by becoming a Patreon Supporter www.patreon.com/IntoEurope
how many subscribers for your eyebrows to get a haircut?
For what? To see a guy anti EU workers to manipulate against EU workers rights? All we have to do is to tax everything from outside EU market, that we can produce competitive enough inside EU market.
There are a lot of goods we cant produce, like this cofee i am drinking in this morning. We import and export, but, we block imports from what we can produce inside.
Being able to doing cheaper at the cost of workers rights, are unfair competition and who does it must be punished instead of accepting that economic trojan horse gift of cheaper.
Just a heads up: you don't need to pay back borrowed money with tax money.
Look into MMT a bit, you'll find some answers on how modern central banking works there.
Draghi doesn't talk about the cost of the European Social model or the cost of the debt financing of his proposals because knows that there aren't.
The EU is debt sovereign. It controls its own currency and hands out debt in its own currency. It can always create money out of nothing without causing problems to pay back the debt.
The only limit to that is the real productive capacity of the economy. If the market can't absorb the extra currency, or if the currency starts circulating too fast, then you get inflation.
Inflation is the real tax that funds things, not the taxes you pay on your salary.
As we have seen in the 2010s however, Inflation in the EU is terribly low, which suggests a stagnating economy.
In the US about half the inflation it experienced during the pandemic years came from government stimulus, in the EU it was about 20-25% on average.
Again, this suggests that there is still capacity to absorb public funding in the EU economy, it's as you state, we're not productive and efficient enough.
The way you pay back the public investments is by raising the ceiling of productive capacity, thereby keeping inflation low and thus allowing the central bank to repay the money that it was able to borrow.
How many euros do you get from a video?
Two decades of most EU countries lacking behind on digitalisation is finally catching up with them. An integrated EU capital markets, banking, and fiscal union is also a no brainer
For me as a Lithuanian it is so crazy to see how behind the western Europe is in digitalization.
@@konfunable It's easier to start with a clean sheet. The Baltics, particularly Estonia, pretty much swept away their old soviet bureaucracy and built a new one from scratch, leaner and meaner incorporating digital technology. The other side of the iron curtain is trying to change systems that have been around before computers even existed in some cases, and at least when they were too large and expensive to be used for everything.
@@Croz89 It is only partly true. I think the difficulties to change in western Europe is much more political than what you mentioned. Left leaning politics stayed too long. Welfare model is completely unsustainable without hard working post-war boomer generation.
@@konfunable I'm not so sure. Baltic countries still have a welfare state. Perhaps western Europe is a bit more risk averse, having more to lose if things go wrong.
@@Croz89 They do but it is nothing compared to Germany of France for example.
University rankings are often biased towards US and Anglo-Saxon institutions. A significant portion of these rankings is based on research output, which benefits universities where research is conducted directly under the university's name. In many European countries, however, research is frequently carried out by closely affiliated but separately named institutions, which leads to lower rankings for the universities themselves, despite their strong academic and research contributions. This structural difference creates an imbalance in how universities are evaluated/scored internationally.
University rankings are published by a chinese firm named Shanghai Institute or something
how about nobel prizes?
especially for science and technology.
ALWAYS AN EXCUSE for being so weak
It would be more useful to look a the quality and efficiency of education rather than the quantity of research done by an university. It is not the universities job to research things, it is to educate and prepare students for doing it themselves. Europe would score low anyhow.
The point about university education is the only one I disagree with. Most universities in the European Union offer excellent education at a very reasonable price. The average quality of this education is way higher than in the US. It is true that the US has many more universities in the top 50, but most people in the US do NOT study in these universities. Once you move away from these top universities, the rest of universities in the US are really expensive and really mediocre, some of them would not even qualify as universities in the EU. This aside from the fact that these university rankings do not evaluate the quality of education, they evaluate research output, prestige, funding and they are not transparent. In fact, you can pay your way up in most of these rankings, something that public universities in the EU will not generally do, but private universities in the US will definitely do, as it is a way to attract rich students that can pay top dollar to get a degree.
The us has the best of the best and gets the best is just what happens
@@davisdelp8131 sure buddy, that is why the US has much worse life expectancy, gun crime, homicides per capita, infant mortality, drug abuse, it has national problem with student debt and has the worse health system of the developed world. The human development index and the GINI indices of the US are worse than most of countries in the EU. Bravo!
You're right but I don't see where the disagreement is from. This is exactly about that curve. Europe has a great education, no doubt, but the return on that investment of mass good education is low. You got taxpayers sponsor education of people that do not produce enough value to cover this education they've got. The best researchers are exported to the US universities, where there are the best conditions for them to conduct research and apply skills. The worst are overeducated, getting endless degrees, instead of working, because it's cheap and they can afford everlasting education. I still think education is the last thing that should be sacrificed, but let's get real: despite large inheritance and great education in both stem and liberal arts, all high earning movies, all unicorns and high tech breakthroughs are creating value not there. They can even be made there, with the latest Google research and DeepMind, with Siemens, Airbus and BMW, with the great books and scenarios, but the funny thing is that the most value in Europe is brought by some old overpriced brands.
And despite this, I still think that the "brain capital" Europe got by its education policies can get gains higher than anyone can expect.
@@dmitryburlakov6920 I agree, especially because they recieved excellent education and are "free" in the sense that they are not burdened by a huge debt that needs to be repaid, something that is common in the US. We "just" have to deregulate and allow people to grow and create.
I was operating a small online shop until recently. The complexity of compliance to make and sell a basic piece of electronic (no batteries even) to a member state is astounding and different for each member - and it's intentional. Consultant companies will charge you 300 to send you a PDF for 1 country explaining what the rules even are and then you need to follow them. So overall you have to 1) find all CE standards applicable for you 2) test against them 3) comply with VAT rules 4) comply with local garbage laws, pay fees, ensure package has the right local signage 5) comply with local electronic waste rules, pay fees. There is no single market, at least not for EU businesses. Guess how many of these laws Chinese vendors are following. Meantime in the US you test for FCC and ship away.
That's not protectionism, though. Simply consumer protection, right?
This guy has neoliberal leanings
That’s what has harmed US and Europe
What’s really needed is a New Deal for the 21st Century
@@chickenfishhybrid44Sure, but it makes it incredibly difficult to get any business going and scale up to eventually create jobs and generate revenue growth, which in turn all lead to more tax income for the Euro governments.
@@davidramljak9961 I was being sarcastic
A problem with Western Europe welfare policies is that they're mostly wholly in favour of really poor people while being financed by upper middle class and NOT by billionaires. If you hold a Phd in Europe, you'd rather work in Switzerland or USA. We're seeing both capital flights and a brain drain.
Yep, they drain middle class which is like 80% for the good of 10% poor which is just by choice btw, the only reason one is poor in In west is because he is lazy.
100%
I agree that we should tax the richest people the most but I would always be willing to pay into a welfare system like we have in the EU. I would actually pay even more to support the poorest as long as I can afford the living of my family. BTW I am working towards my Phd this year.
@@aarionsievosadly many people righfully dont think like that....50 lercent of peolle in germany who get social welfare arent even german cititiens....would you like to pay 50 percent of tax for suxh a rhing ?
So wahst the solution?
It's crazy how much potential the EU has, but currently, it's suffocating itself with needles bureaucracy and laws.
Laws that protect the environment, workers, and all sorts of lovely things.
@@Scapestoat Won't be much to protect if EU falls behind other world players.
@@term164 I mean, you're talking about winning the "produce goods and as much Co2 as possible to kill the planet as quick as possible" competition.
People with principles are not very interested in that sort of thing.
@@term164 The EU has a birth rate of 1.3 births/woman. Unless that goes up to 1.6 to 2.0 births/woman, Europe has no potential in this the future. If half the population is old and you have fewer and fewer people entering the workforce, then you’re guaranteed to stagnate like Japan.
Canada has a huge problem with this as well. Our birth rates have plummeted down to 1.2 births/woman because no one can afford kids. But at least, we’re not a nation state. An immigrant country like Canada can take in a lot more foreigners than nation states, in order to make up for the declining and aging native population
EU gets most gas from other countries and imports most stuff from China . EU has more ageing population and dwindling young people that tries to settle in US. The ones living in EU needs to pay for old people welfare and the debt that keeps increasing due to massive imports. EU also has immigrant crisis. EU needs a total rebirth .
Outstanding summary. Thank you. Began reading the report but lost the will to live a quarter of the way through.
Reality Check! 👌🏼
1. Common Ideas
2. Common Resources
3. Common Finance
4. Common Security
5. Common Future
6. Common Sense
I think you should not treat the social model as a cost only. It also allows for entrepreneurship: because of the safety net people can start a business without the fear of ending in the gutter. Also, it reduces costs of civil unrest (except in France ;-) ) and a good education and healthy people enable creating opportunities as well.
I think the main cause is definitely the capital markets, we should really fix that. E.g. many European startups go to the USA for the capital to scale up. So our innovations after the "valley of death" are basically bought up for a bargain by the Americans.
our social model is only a cost. Evidently it does not allow for entrepreneurship or at least it hasn't thus far except in Sweden but Sweden is only 1 out of 27 EU members.
Spot on. Capital markets are a key issue.
But govt. redtape, cost of doing business and language barriers are a close second. If you run a company the state is essentially your enemy in the EU, they treat you like a subject. Instead they should bend over backwards and s you off, because the state doesn't generate a single dime and they don't even appreciate you and your tax payments. What a bunch of parasites.
@@sebastiangruenfeld141 All the scandinavian countries have a higher rate of social mobility and ease of starting a business than US, it's not just Sweden.
@@MickenCZProfi 1. Entrepreneurship isn't measured by social mobility
2. ease of doing business is just one indicator of many. Others are acess to venture capital, taxation, regulatory environment, market size, and societal mindset. Scandinavians, and Europeans in general, famously despise anyone with ambition. We have a crab in the bucket mentality. Not one person is allowed to be too successful so we gotta pull down down.
3. Our social model costs us dearly. The highest taxes in the world and yet we're uncompetitve. With peak boomer right around the corner, we'll spend even more on social stuff. The European social welfare state has worked fine when Europes population was still overwhelmingly young and had huge economic growth. This model simply isn't viable anymore in times like now where half the population is older than 50, and we're importing hordes of economically unproductives who are a drain on our finances rather than a boon.
@@sebastiangruenfeld141Completely agree wih you
The EU is going to have to decide how much of its soul it wants to keep to remain competitive. The egalitarian and risk averse culture is part of its identity, but it can be a millstone around its neck in the world of business.
It depends, it makes the economy more stable and makes economic downterms less bad. Yes, this is bad in sectors like tech which is 100% based on innovation moving fast and breaking things. But its incredibly good for having reliable and stable suppliers. Companies like Airbus or Siemes have hugely benefited for this way of working. But sure, it's not perfect
It has jack shit to do with "egalitarian". It is the eco bullsh1t that needs to go away and HEAVY tariffs on chinese junk !
I believe the living conditions are far more important than the GDP. So I prefer "everyone gets a home and something to eat" instead of "some rich kids the newest A.I.-Smart-Apple-Toilette-Brush".
@@aarionsievoexcept what you're getting in the EU is everyone gets no job, a shitty room in a shared tiny apartment with 9000 strangers, 799% taxes, Islamic terrorists, and not being able to afford heating
@@aarionsievoYou're absolutely right.
You should make more opinion videos. It is better than The Economist. Not kidding.
It's more right wing than the economist, maybe that's why.
@@miguel5785 That's why it's wrong. It's advocating decreasing social spending, which the UK did, and all it did was destroy institutions and services, which ruined the economy.
Right wing economics is a poverty and death cult.
The Economist is really becoming left wing trash. They had an article calling Christian sexual ethics (sex only between married people) weird, yet we see how out of wedlock children are worse off, and now we have a fertility crisis because people aren’t getting married and having less sex. They’ve lost the plot IMO.
@@Amlux1984 Thinking sex outside marriage is bad, is weird.
And it's weird you think children of single parents being worse off is a reason against that. As if you haven't heard of contraception, etc. Or more likely you're lying, perhaps to yourself.
@@Amlux1984
You use state created currency to shop, pay your bank back, pay taxes & ndt save a little state created currency
You’re falling for the idea governments should shovel the currency to the top of the economy
While you gotta use your bank loan to stay alive
If I am correct it does sound like they recommend an EU federation, loosely aligning the member countries has only worked kind of correctly if the EY wants to be a bigger player they need to be more efficient.
Fundamentally speaking, it all boils down to what you believe is most important here, do we prioritize the Economy prosperity of a nation, at all cost to remain competitive with those countries that are willing to do this, or much like Europe, do we prioritize the egalitarian social model, which is a net cost.
Granted as shown in the video the idea that China or the US has it "better" is highly debatable as it only applies to the top income earners, but what is clear is that the Chinese and US economy, the depth of their checkbook is just that much larger, as they can expect more growth due to certain practices which are detrimental to middle and lower income groups.
European decline is only prevalent because Europe has chosen not to fall into the unsavory economic practices that are used abroad, all while the capitalist notion keeps the pressure up on nations to remain ever more competitive, the European Social Model is not compatible with the deep Capitalist mindset, and self-fulfilling drive for growth above everything else.
Whereas it is quite easy to see that there is a real social and social cohesion cost to China's and USA's society, and while they are ahead globally speaking, there are clear signs of social decay as just basic living / existing is such a tremendous economic struggle for the individual.
The point i am making, is that the EU's social model in a vacuum can create a more hospitable and sustainable form of living, and overall more enjoyable life for its inhabitants. However, undeniably this comes at a cost... in a vacuum this cost means very little as there is no competing nation or forces. But Europe does not live in a vacuum; and it is having a rough time balancing the sheets and remaining competitive...
It's a fundamental choice we should make because the USA's and China's Social contract is not sustainable in the long run... rich become richer, and poor become poorer, eventually the social debt has to come due, where as the EU's Social Contract is far more sustainable in the long run, granted It's far from perfect, and could do with a good housekeeping, but the overall philosophy is to be commended in my opinion.
I'd say do both. Have European welfare, and tax the rich more to spend on long term investments. Somewhat of an economic plan, like China.
Most important thing is to ensure property prices grow out of control indefinitely. Everyone can be cash poor surrounded by crime and crumbling nfrastructure but sit on ainexpensive asset, that in reality they ccan'tdo anything with. That's priority in countries like UK and Canads, with any other state considerations from energy security to governmental efficacy being second. Illusion of prosperity is cheaper and easier to achieve than actual prosperity, and it favours disproportionately those that are likeliest to vote. Why be a nation of shop keepers which requires work, if you can be a nation of landlords which require fuck loads less work?
@@coolbanana165 yeah a new balance should be made, and well China's notion of planning is hardly as structured as we make it out to be.
but as Draghi already mentioned, we have to restructure our economy to serve the internal market, and ensure both income and cost of living match when taking into account the European cost of manufacture and wages. This can be considered an Economic plan, which also requires a strong plan to secure strategic resources to upkeep this new reality, as external forces will use and abuse supply lines within their sphere of influence.
Finally, taxing the rich is difficult as they are internationals in the sense that their existence and wealth is invisible to the tax system. It requires them also to allow themselves to be taxed, as they can easily relocate and just cut EU out.
"Only applies to the top income earners." You guys really just absolutely refuse to believe the idea that any American other than like Jeff Bezos or Musk have more wealth than Europeans eh? Lol
"The EU's Social Contract is far more sustainable in the long run." That's the most delusional sentence I've ever read. The cost of that social contract is going up while Europe's economy is stagnating and workforce demographics are collapsing. There's absolutely nothing sustainable about that.
Wonderful. Can recommend reading the whole report. Especially chapter 1 and 2 really gets to the heart of the matter, our general lack of productivity
As an American, develop a co-operative sector that is the envy of the world. You aren’t going to compete with China, the US and India in the near future, so don’t try to. Take smaller profits, and share them. Compete by being more efficient and using fewer resources. The European social system is worth not having as many McMansions and football stadiums. Take the healthcare and run.
Taking smaller profits and sharing them is what they've already been doing.
@@chickenfishhybrid44 They’ve been doing so with trade unions in private owned firms and government jobs. I’m talking about developing a cooperative economy like the madragon coop across europe. Credit unions provide credit and most of the production is for local consumption. That way they wouldn’t be as dependent on outside countries. It also means the economy won’t grow very much, which it already doesn’t with large private firms like volkswagon closing plants and moving to the US. I say let them go and start subsidizing local production for local consumption. Draghi would have them fight a losing battle to keep industry and investment that has no shot of being globally competitive, just to keep private profits fat. You need production without private investment and large profit. It’s a totally different model.
EU needs IT software giants...ATM you guys, USA, subjugated the rest of the world in digital. That industry its the most proeminent and hires many well payed engineers
@@havencat9337 The level of investment that it takes to run those giants simply don’t exist in europe. You have fully funded healthcare and pensions, schools, railways, etc. The US doesn’t. It’s very easy to get caught in the glitz and glam of the wealth of the US without realizing all we have to sacrifice in order to have a handful of billionaires launch themselves into space. China and India will lap you if you’re lucky and started funding today.
@@jacobjones630 fair enough, I'm just saying that countries in Europe have already been taking smaller profits and sharing them more in comparison to the US for example.
I most say this is the best journalism I have experience in the whole 2024. I am normally a very EU sceptic but for once a EU politician produced a quality work (Mario Draghi's report), now all EU parliament has to do is implement this into reality. Without many great and well developed industry sectors we can't afford to have a great welfare system, it is common economical sense, therefore growing much needed industries in Europe needs to take precedence over welfare. Yes it will be hard for poor people at first (say 5-ish years) before EU can reap the benefits of its investment, although here I must give a strict warning about how money is allocated and need to be looked over as a hawk, because most of the times money from the state gets swamped up by bad actors only wanting to suck money, just look at Africa if want plenty of horror examples, and it even happened to my closest neighbor city in Norway that wanted to build EV battery factory but the top talent got a better top job offer from the US, and off did they go with lots of hefty pre-paid bonuses and work only halfway done building the factory, leaving the city holding the poop bag.
yup,most NGOs are money sucking machines for bs programs. All that is finally catching up to the EU
Not gonna happen, frugal won't budge and other policies requiring cohesive restructuring will be vetoed. Remember China only needs to build one port in Cyprus to destroy whole new take on industrial policy, hell Hunhary might even do it for free.
Great video! I would have loved to hear your opinion on which aspects of the social model can be scaled back. To me, that's pensions. In western europe most pensioners can live as well or better than workers with their pension payments alone, even without accounting for the fact that due to wealth, their expenses are likely to be lower (e.g. no rent for many)
Some governments tried to cut down pensions (e.g. France and Poland) it didn't go well.
@@TomekSmykowski understandable
Why ? They paid Into the system and have a right to get Out of it
Having pensions is not a bad thing. But if it doesn't find a way back to the economy by local spending, it has no use.
@@TomekSmykowski as far as I know France didn't. France tried to push back retirement age, which is a measure that penalizes those who are about to retire, not pensioners. You may be talking about another instance though
good stuff, great to see the youth waking up to the eu mistakes, well done
In relation to the EU's common debt. One must ask oneself whether the bureaucrats have the right incentives to allocate capital. In that context, it is relevant to assess what happens to the existing EU joint debt. It is rolled instead of being deducted. Your reservation is therefore legitimate.
This channel deserves more views.
This is an excellent video. I think your opinion section was a much-needed critical examination of the report and was well executed. Few people are willing to talk about the elephants in the room when discussing these topics, it's refreshing to hear a pragmatic and grounded voice.
I would add that there's a topic that was missed. It probably isn't enough to come up with the investment money somehow. Germany actually has extremely high wealth inequality already yet falls short. US success is driven by capital accumulation, and the willingness to risk investing that capital into bets that probably won't succeed. That second part is crucial. If you listen to venture capitalists in the US (like the All-In podcast), they very often invest in companies that may only have a 5-10% chance of succeeding. The thinking is that, if you have a broad enough net of these kinds of investments, you'll eventually catch a Unicorn and make it all back.
Worth keeping Goodhart’s law in mind with all of this analysis.
Great video, provides a great basis on which to start reading more in-depth into this stuff. Especially for euroskeptics who truly believe their individual country would be better off without the joint economic power of the EU
i absolutely loved your analysis at the end and would be more open to your analysis at the end of this videos. i think you are unbiased in your assessment of the social model. i would love more videos like this and on eu industrial policies and just more videos from you in general i learn a lot from you so thank you
Mario assumes the EU already is a superpower that is "late" on its counterparts. The pb however is that the EU is not a country, it s a consumer market
In order to answer the "problems" that he thinks the EU has, we d have to create a EU "power" from scratch, which isn t necessarily wanted by nor relevant for the majority of EU citizens
We have a direclty elected parliament, we have passports and EU citizenship, we have a juridisical system, etc.. The EU is much more than just a common market place. To start from scratch is utterly wasteful. Reform is the way. To start with directly electing the president
@@jezusbloodie that is the last thing you should do. the first thing is making a system that isnt vulnerable to one person disagreeing.
The European Parliament ......!!!!????
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
@@jezusbloodie It's true but if you look at 90% of laws that are passed, it's usually about regulating a common market (like regulating crypto or big tech or anti-tax haven policy etc)
When ppl answer anti-EU talking points it's usually on the grounds of the common market and econmic prosperity (leaving EU=economic disaster)
The biggest pb I see with pro-EU talking points though is that they often take for granted that the EU is in a pre-USA state. Like a federal entity that only needs some centralization and common regulations. What I mean by that is when Ursula VDL makes a "state of the union" speech, like she's in Washington or something
However the EU should rather be compared to/inspired by India bc it's a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic pseudo-federation that cooperates only on a few common issues yet
The EU doesn't have tech or EV giants, bc its market isn't adapted to the appearance of such companies. And maybe it's for the best
The EU, though, has a thriving healtchare market (Novonordisk, Astrazeneca, Boiron, Sanofi etc), the biggest tourism market in the world and would be the 1st agro-power in the world if counted as a single country. It would also be a renewable enrgy giant and probably have the biggest banking sector in the world
There are some common sense policies that could be adopted to save money essentially, like a united diplomatic force to have 1 big diplo network with super-embassies for all EU citizens across the world rather than 27 sihtty little ones (would save a lot of €), or creating some common defense capabilities like NATO artillery shells production to avoid the pb we're currently stuck in, namely Ukraine aid not being spent bc production capabilities aren't big enough to transform money into shells (or other defense items) quickly enough
But these solutions aren't the ones Mario proposes. Bc what Mario wants is forcing the EU market into creating some irrelevant state-sponsored companies to "give an alternative" to US big tech or Chinese EVs.
Spoiler : been tried in France, and it made Daylimotion
Some countries/regions are just better at producing certain items, and it should be accepted by bureaucrats. I want to drink French wine, go on a holiday to Italy in my cheap and reliable Chinese/US EV while using US/Korean smartphones
I don't want to drive a crappy Skoda EV, drinking Chinese wine watching Dailymotion videos on my Nokia phone
@@ivanyaroslavskiy what an insightful response. Well written
we need more Europe, this viedeo is one of the best on the problems of the EU.
A lot of the productivity gap between the US and Europe probably comes from the strict labor regulations. Not being able to allocate workers efficiently (specially during a phase of rapid change) will keep dragging Europe's economy down. I don't see Europeans favouring such a liberalization though, which makes me pessimistic about Europe's economic future. But if they are serious about solving this problem, artificial work stability unfortunately has to go.
Thats the dumb calitalistic view
I can't wait for him to find a job in Zimbabwe for 1 euro an hour ...on the other hand, one must first experience one's own medicine.
Unemployment is still high. There is no lack of potential workers.
But you have sectors creating artificial tension (like construction) because they like fraudulent jobs.
Reforming business taxation would be a good start, in a way that taxes more the outcome of business activity rather than the process.
Also, making firing easier would help the job market more flexible
@@marvin2678 How soviet union failed ? Becuase it lagged behind economicaly and didnt have much sustainbility
sweden is doing it, so nope that is not the problem
Part 3 of your video is on point. Thanks a lot for that part, which almost all media would sweep under the rug.
Universities in Europe play different role than in the States. For example in Germany scientists go to Max Planck institute to conduct research, THEY MOSTLY DO NOT STAY AT UNIVERSITIES.
Max Planck directors have won 18 Nobel Prizes. If Max Planck were a university it would be ranked #2 worldwide, behind Harvard, in publications/citations. Nature's current ranking lists Max Planck as #3 worldwide
Pension privatization would be a great start. It would reduce a substantial burden on the state while directly injecting money into the economy that could be used as investment for new industries. Also, you could have talked about Australia and Switzerland, two countries that have a good welfare state while remaining competitive in the global economy
Such a good video, I learned a lot and I agree with your opinion at the end
You are the best!! Your work is very important to us the viewers and me, young Geopolitics student. Thank you very much ❤❤
Hit 200k today. Thank you for all the knowledge and nuggets you had thrown my way over the last months. Started with 14k in last month 2024
best EU channel
Just drastically reduce the bureaucrats' numbers and those that remain, make sure they are held accountable for their decisions. End things like "lifetime contracts at twice or five times the national median salary REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU DO".
The Swedish financial crisis in the 1990s wasn't caused by an oversized public sector, it was due to an overheating of the economy due to a combination of relaxed capital controls and a pegged exchange rate which led to a real estate bubble that popped.
As usual great video from this channel thats thoughtful and articulate. My own personal opinion is that we learned a lot about the immense benefits of markets while also learning about where markets are hard to operationalize and where they fail from much policy experimentation after WW2. I wish more people were open to the idea of welfare + business friendly policies. As has been the case in the Nordic countries since the 90s, these countries combine generous welfare programs, but also are generally more pro-market and easier to do business in by a great many metrics (property rights indices, the world bank ease of doing business index, etc.). Holding welfare policies constant, having a more business friendly regulatory environment helps with growth and productivity. One other thing I think is underrated in the policy space is going from in-kind benefits to cash transfer. We do this here in the US with many programs like food stamps or the earned income tax credit to help families, its much easier welfare for gov to produce and more flexible based on consumer needs.
Spending is not equal to investment
I do want europe to be economically competitive, but I also want the eu to be very, very careful about changing our welfare. Social rights are a thing our previous generations paid with blood, and their purpose is to guarantee a good quality of life to all eu citizens, not to only the most "productive" ones.
Besides, more economic inequality does not necessarily lead to more capital invested in innovations, while it surely leads to an harder quality of life for poorer classes with all the due consequences.
I'm not saying that the EU legislation is perfect and must not be touched. I'm saying that, instead of giving up our welfare to attract/create private capitals to invest, we could first try other routes, like for example create capitals using eu members national funds.
welfare need to change moreover on retire people.. they went to retirement too soon borrowing money from new generations. They are the only ones who gained from this kind of welfare! We need to do generation justice, we cut their retirement to fund family and young people. I'm an engineer in Italy and half of my salary goes to pay people who worked only 20 years!
this type of thinking is exactly why EU is becoming a backwards and irrelevant place in the world. All the silly regulations for the sake of regulations brought the common folk to their knees. It's good that we have "free healthcare" only that the free check-up or free surgery is a year from now when it can already be too late
I can say that youth are so poor they dont need any of these "social benefits". We have other priorities to worry at young age: buying a house, building a family, raising kids, etc. We dont have capital for any of those. The net salaries are a joke, half of it goes to rent and other half goes to groceries and day to day life. What social benefits?
It actually would be quite easy to finance the welfare, if we would have an effective way to collect the existing(!) taxes. US citizens have to pay wealth tax and this world wide, meanwhile we in the EU talk like the the economy collapses if we have to tax the rich, while they reported in 2016 that roughly the common annual debt of the EU member states is as high as 1/3 of the money which we lose through tax evasion, meaning getting the taes would not only enable us to finance welfare further but even invest in big projects etc.
@@mal_dun That's not quite easy
Wow, great analysis of that report! Heard more about that report but you are the first one who informs me that the European social model is off limits, thanks!
Draghi is one you can trust to fix things. He fixed italy when they messed up. A proper technocrat.
He didn't do a single thing whilst in government
Heck, the government lead by conte, prior to the government lead by draghi, did more things lol, draghi took credit for those
If anything, the draghi government helped meloni gain votes, by staying out of it, and now we have had since 2 years ago a fuscist and incompetent government
Yeah, it would've been interesting to see him continue being PM.
Yeah His solution IS simply milking Germany ...
@@marvin2678 nah it's probably to liberate germany from unnecessary bureaucracy, what new companies does Germany have? Most of what it has is from decades ago because new ones cannot emerge because it's impossible for up and coming companies to actually succeed in the long term, due to excessive regulations which are impossible to comply with for smaller organizations, the big established ones then don't have any competition since they're the only ones who can actually comply.
did he fix italy? yes he basically slaughtered us ...of course the Greeks are happy too. What country are you from ? let me guess something like Germany , Denmark , Belgium ?
Great content. Actually reading the report and provide a detailed summary like this is public service. Thank you
Great analysis! The EU has been coasting for far too long, we are only now waking up to the fact that the social contract has to be changed if we don't want to lag behing even further.
How is changing the social contract related to new economic policy ?
@@primzahler8377 everything, collapse of social welfare
@@primzahler8377Europe no longer has money for everything, we have to opt. Surely, pensioners won't choose this, but it is the only way for economic growth. Let's see if the population chooses to wither away or try to come back.
There are other ways: 2016 the EU estimated that we roughly lose 3x more through tax evasions than the combined new annual debt of its members is (we are not talking about new taxes here). Meanwhile Estonia cut its tax rate to 20% without lowering quality of social welfare for its citizens by making its public service more efficient through digitization.
The problem never was too much social welfare, but how inefficient our states operate and how we collect the needed taxes from the upper 10%.
@@mal_dungreat point! The EU should mandate government structural best practices through funds. I am Portuguese so I get how inefficiently they are applied. Nevertheless, the EU burocracy also doesn't want to cut itself...
"Federal" EU has so many good examples at the country level that aren't made commonplace due to political disinterest.
If the amount of public money wasted on EU projects, including H2020, in comparison to final output is any indication to possible solution... we are not coming out of this mess any soon
As an American I think Europe can only stay relevant if it comes strongly together. The Veto should go away too. Spending on certain things for the whole block has to come- now.
Like, for example, a 'unified grid' or a standing army.
I don't want Europe to become the US, please no, but it will have to 'federalize' on some things if it wants to do well. That's just what I think it will take.
I really liked your opinion at the end. Sometimes what is being said (in politics) is not enough to understand what has not been said.
All german people want Mario Draghi the next Chancellor 🙏🏻🇩🇪🇪🇺
He's Italian?
Not at all why would we want him to unify debt when it would be to our detrement? We would do it if there was a common margin of debt but not when Germany has to pay the full brunt of it.
ahaha Poor you..poor masochist
@@universo5564how
No German Likes him
Good point! It's time to talk about the social model. Something needs to be changed.
A nice report, but I think we are reading too much into it. First of all, it is a collection of justifications for greater debt at the EU level. Member states do not have the margin for further debt, and the EU level does, but it needs a moral justification for it, so this report provides it. Anything more than that is just waffling. It will be what it will be, the important thing is that there is money.
Europe needs to make it easier for tech workers to opt-into a higher risk, higher performance and higher reward life without paying into overly protective and expensive social insurance systems, or making it impossible for employers to match rewards and punishments to your performance. as it stands it's pretty much only possible to do that as a freelancer or full blown entrepreneur, which brings all sorts of surrounding hassles. Works for me, but the playing field has to be broadened.
Excellent video. Good job
Implement the Plan soon
Having a solution is one thing, having a popular solution is something completely different! USA and China are ignoring or manipulating their citizen opinions in so many issues it's unbelievable. On the other hand, European politicians are following even the most idiotic policies if it's popular enough...
It's delusional that EU still wants to compare it's technological prowess with US and China. Rather they should be comparing themselves with likes of India, sub Sahara Africa etc. India will also surpass them in less than 5 years.
@@euphoria728and don't think India will surpass Europe in just 5 years, probably in 10
The extent to which many Europeans seem to think their governments are near completely benevolent is always interesting to me. Do you believe your government doesn't ignore issues or control the narrative and discourse on all sorts of issues?
all fine and dandy but some basic things like digitalization and lower energy costs should lower costs by a lot and increase production. energy is more complicated of course especially since we somehow refuse the pragmatic solutions, but digitalization is doable, estonia has a model to follow, why waiting, why not do it yesterday?
I believe it may already be too late. Volkswagen's struggles with electric vehicle innovation, especially when compared to Japan, China, and the U.S., along with the widespread presence of U.S. military bases and Europe's lack of technological independence-unlike China and the U.S. with their tech giants-make it unlikely for Europe to change course. It seems Europe will continue to rely on U.S. protection.
exactly
Chinese EVs are a scam, they could never build them for so cheap unless CCP would pay half the price, slave leighbour and lack of safety standards or general build quality.
"Volkswagen's struggles with electric vehicle innovation, especially when compared to Japan" - care to back up this claim with anything? Specifically "VW compared to Japan"? Japan is still about hybrids, which is fine, but no Japanese company is even in the top 10 of the global market share in BEVs last year. VW, BMW, MB are 5, 6 and 8 places. Based on that inclusion of Japan alone here I have a feeling you don't exactly have the grasp of this topic unless you can provide a source to support your claim.
@@MagicNash89 It's bot propoganda brah soon as it said "American military bases"... if you know, you know.
There is nothing wrong with relying on the US for protection. The whole world relies on the US (except for hostike countries for obvious reasons). The problem is not being competitive in the tech sector.
The solution isn't being dependent on the US and China. The solution is being dependent on China and being closely tied with America. Let's hope we get sane people on both sides of the Atlantic so that we won't end up in an era of protectionism.
Europe’s biggest problem is declining birth rates. Especially in Southern and Eastern Europe who now have lower birth rates than Japan. No one can afford kids. People need to be able to earn higher disposable incomes
Most of Southern Europe and Eastern Europe have birth rates of around 1.15 births/woman. That’s catastrophically low
Problem IS feminsim and consumerism, Not the Economy
@@marvin2678no its not, thats your ideology. Do you think Japanese or Korean hardcore patriarchal society with no significant feminism past has this issue? The thing is, anywhere in the world life quality rises, birth rates decrease, thats known fact. The second thing is economy, if people cant afford kids, it goes even lower. Third thing is relligion, as people get more educated and wealthier, conservative relligion looses its power on people and doesnt force/motivate them to breed kids. Im also almost 30 and not sure if i wanna have children. I have found meaning in life in other things, i have more time and money for myself and my beloved and i think to have children is absolutely each ones thing and is dumb to criticize someone for this decision. There are so many people having children who should never have children... I think if someone has children they need to absolutely want them and has to be their inner individual decision. I also think there is absolutely nothing selfish on not wanting children as some "critics" call people. Noone has any obligation to have children and if ever did, that was morally wrong.
@marvin2678 what a meaningless salad of buzzwords
What can you expect with young people paying more and more taxes to fund the old and pay for the debt of the country caused mostly by these old people?
Increasing productivity is the only way forward
You mean we should strive for a system that does not guarantee that the elder or dependent receive proper care? That would make us more competitive? But what is the goal of competitiveness if it's not guaranteeing proper living conditions?
They won't receive any care if there's no money, which there won't be if the economy isn't competitive.
@@Eddies_Bra-att-ha-grejer and they won't receive any care if there's no care
@@miguel5785 How do you want it, no care no money, or no care but with money?
@@Eddies_Bra-att-ha-grejer I think any human society should be able to care for all their people if even Neanderthals did, especially modern opulent societies like ours. So we should discuss how, not whether we can provide care for all.
@@miguel5785 You're not answering my question at all, you're just complaining that I'm not proposing some kind of impossible utopia.
Europe is the result of having discussed and suffered many decisions, this is the moment where the EU has to develop its own vision for the world. To create it needs to have a presence in the world and an economy which can back it up
Why is it so difficult to imitate other social models that work? The EU could simply consider copying Switzerland and their decentralized structure. It is extremely democratic and extremely successful.
Europe does not have an independent political strategy. Market integration is to ensure political unity and coordination. They know that the wrong strategy has led to the energy crisis, but they still follow the United States. Now Europe's production materials are the most expensive. This has led to many large companies moving to the United States. Isn't this capital harvesting?
That a private Pension system is something that actually Benefizkonzert private investment is a really interesring point. I neuer thought about it. It World be interesting to know if a country live switzerland which Haß a mixed Model is havinf Mode investment through this compared to a system like the German one for example which is entirely tax based
Excellent
I'm happy
To be frank on other part of the report draghi does ooint out that oublic investments and welfare ahould go hand in hand, most european countries have funds based welfare, like the case of most if the nordics, pensions and helthcare are payes thtough funds that are mandatory and are more flexinle that the statist model of welfare even if still overseen by the state.
He suggests that the savings from these funds ahould be invested towards the 800bil euro target as far as public investment goes, or at least this is how i interpreted it.
This way theoretically welfare doesnt come at the expense of invesent but tecnically they power each other
Nothing about housing eating the middle and working class, as usual. Nothing to see here folks, houses are like any other good.
... or the fact that we would have enough money in the budgets if we just would be able to collect the evaded taxes ...
Into Europe already made a video on the housing shortage.
No euro without common fiscal policy. It's frankly ridiculous how this idiotic arrangement is now simply accepted and not discussed in increasing competitiveness
It's insane how violation of Maastricht treaty is not punished
Good video. important topic.
Good video
Well, who would have expected that eu is killing its economy, what an incredible surprise, it was totally unpredictable. In poland we know it for like 12 years at least.
What we also forget is that infuence of activism in politics and some areas of science has had a profound influence on the competative basis of the EU. There is enough gas under the north of the Netherlands to lower energy prices in the EU significantly. However the comfort of 10000 to 30000 people is more important. We have become decadent.
I probably missed that part of this plan, where talked about deregulation and detaxation.
Awesome. Maybe you should have an opinion more often.
Probably nothing will happen.
Didn't he exacerbate some of the union's biggest flaws?
I really hope this works. I really do. Otherwise Europe is cooked.
I think what you've said of Tax policy being something that solely compells to national governments is precisely part of the problem.
We should stop avoiding topics of discussion saying that since they are national it solely affects states. Let me be clear EVERYTHING that a single state does has an impact in the whole of the EU. German nativity with Russia worsened the energy situation, French colonial adventures worsen the migrant situation, Swedens inability to integrate its migrant population has had an impact in Scandinavian security etc etc etc.
We are treating the EU like a Bus travelling in the night, in which every passenger knows a portion of the road and one by one says it to the Bus driver, instead of agreeing for a common map all together QUICK.
My only positive thought is that the youth and new generation of policy makers are aware of that. But we need to act QUICK and accept the fact that the actions of one affects us all.
No, no, no no Companies, you are killing "CONCRETE" Man !
The EU is between a rock and a hard place.
digitalization and IT, that is the problem! Look in the stock market who are the bigest companies and the giants that hire most people and pays very well - TECH and SOFTWARE! USA made EU a digital colony!
Very insightful! Thank you for this video. After two decades of borrowing and printing money to avert the negative effects of natural systemic corrections, europeans (like me) are never going to accept any consessions that infringe on their lifestyle or rights. Things have to get much worse before things get better.
Bro its simpel. How to compete with a country with no debt limit and against a country with no real freedom other than work and do what they party tells you. When you are a not even a country but a union of countries with all different laws and agenda's. As long if Europe is 3th place it is all ok.
I understand your concern about the cost of the welfare state, but I don't agree with it. In my opinion, a tech-driven EU *HAS* to reap its benefits FOR the welfare systems. This comes with serious optimisation measures being a main driver to bring down the cost of the public sector. In this process, I think it also has to make itself more entrepreneurial and competitive against the private sector, reaching an equilibrium of the two.
I agree that staying as world leaders in education is necessary to accomplish this.
I also think that technological development has to translate to economies that are still diversified and self sufficient, but where there are no solutions to agrarian, manufacturing, and industrial jobs that people do not want to do any more.
Europe doesn't even need private investment dawg, the government can just pick winners.
I would like to suggest an idea that I believe could help address some of Europe's economic challenges: allowing individuals to take on a voluntary second job without paying taxes on the additional income. This approach could potentially boost productivity and incentivize those who are willing to work more by letting them keep all the money they earn from their second job. The positives include increased disposable income for workers, which could stimulate consumer spending and indirectly boost tax revenue through higher sales and VAT. Additionally, it rewards individuals for their extra effort and could help reduce reliance on social welfare systems. I realize this goes against the European culture of work life balance, hence it should be implemented without a mandate.
That’s called under the table work in my country and it’s a problem in lost tax revenue
They should put “boomer tax” on all boomers who did not have at least 2 children.
Why didnboomers have so little children ?
That would be struck down in court cause it would be viewed as discriminatory 😊
Less government intervention, not more.
Between my friends, aged 26-28yo, so many have abused the unemployment checks, staying home for months while they could have found jobs. Now this is an example, why can't this benefit be more strict, or transformed from free money gave out to favorable borrowing for people in need? Why must the state and the taxpayer waste their money like that?
u are part of the problem too by not reporting them. for the most part such actors arent a big problem to the economy except in greece or italy which has a corruption problem
@@cia5649 there's nothing to report. You lose your job, you get your monthly checks. It's up to you if you want to search for a new job (and lose the checks) or just sit on your ass.
@@m.m.511 then they are hardly living good
@@m.m.511I'm not sure where are you from but in Spain you get these checks but you need to be actively looking for employment and you cannot deny several employment offers otherwise you lose whatever money you get. So, I hardly believe what you are saying and I don't think that Spain is an exception with this way of dealing with slackers
Honestly you just sound like a shit friend. Maybe there's some reason your friends are having a hard time, and having an unempathetic friends doesn't help.
Absolutely goated video
The EU needs to step up its game up and boost its economy and productivity.
The EU is a nightmare for a a start up. But If the EU is serious about it they would just need to create their own industrial bank (similar to China) and offer free IP after demonstrations. Loan the money with the IP as collateral. This would make the EU a power house in Hardware tech. Most of the battle for start ups is protecting there IP from large companies at the same time getting it in front of companies.
"Prides itself on regulating things that didn't exist yet" Ouch.
The problem woth Draghi's report it's that it is wrong.
Yes, GDP per capita PPP compared to the EU is the same as 30 or 20 years ago, it only fell on 2023, not because of lack of high tech, but because of cheap energy from Russia stopped flowing.
But many countries thrive, Japan, Korea, Chile, without big energy sources.
Wow !! Evaluating regulation impact before passing it!! Collective EU bureaucrat heads 🤯🤯🤯
I think it was supposed to be a graph at 1:11 but there wasn’t
Excessive regulation is really the crux of it. The EU loves bureaucracy.
On the other hand waiting until blood is spilled befor introducing regulation (and sometimes not even then if the respective lobby is powerful enough) also doesn't sound particularly appealing.
The EU. ? A job creation scheme for failed
2 nd rate politicians who want to stay on
the Gravy train...!!
Devolved is the right term for the US model.
I live in Sweden and i disagree on some of your points. First of all every country in eu had drastically different landscape when it comes to laws and culture. You cannot generalize about the "social model" because while generally being more humane than in usa and china, it is different everywhere. Secondly you dont take into account the benefit of the social model when it comes to preventing illness and medical costs. In sweden we work quite a lot, and we have one of the highest wealth inequalities in the world, and still have a problem with innovation, research and startups. Your options after getting a phd are basically no other than to move abroad, because there are no jobs for you here. I think the bigger problem is the deep seated generational wealth and complacency of those controlling it. We also generally produce products for internal consumption or luxuries for export to the US and china, so we end up being dependent on the ability of the middle class in those economies to affird our stuff
Your idea that scial welfare is more expensive than private ensurance is completly wrong: Its a fact that the incometax is the same in Denmark and USA, but whats paid for is not comparable, like education and health.
It is not a question of how expensive it is in this case, it is a question of who bears the cost of it. In the case of Europe it is mostly the wealthy and companies through taxation. In the US that risk is born by the individual - which leaves more surplus/profit for the wealthy and companies.
The income tax (Tax as share of labour cost) in Denmark is 35.5%, while in the US it is 28%. And the level at which the top tax rate applues is far lower in Denmark (1.3 times average income) than in the US (8.5 times average income).
Source: taxfoundation.org/blog/scandinavian-social-programs-taxes-2023/#:~:text=In%202021%2C%20the%20tax%20wedge,OECD%20average%20of%2034.6%20percent.
Cheers,
Hugo
sooo… collective debt with assistance of the banking union and capital markets union are our only hope. - sounds about right!
The EU should accept that some degree of inequality is inherent to our society. Those who produce value cannot be expected to always subsidize those that produce nothing.
and what prevents those who dont benefit which are 99% to raise to the arms and overthrow the ologarchy in powee