http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-swedish-model/2012/04/25/gIQA3rvvgT_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions
The Swedish model for economic recovery
By Robert J. Samuelson, Published: April 25
Amid all the grim economic news from Europe, it's worth noting that there
are also some success stories. Well, of course, you say: Germany. Okay.
But there's another conspicuous candidate, and it might seem surprising:
Sweden. To many Americans, Sweden is a bloated, inefficient welfare state.
But the reality and the stereotype don't match.
Sweden's job growth (as a percentage) rivals Germany's since 2006; present
unemployment at 7.5 percent is low among advanced economies; inflation
averages about 2 percent; economic growth in the past five years slightly
exceeds Germany's; and government debt as a share of the economy is lower
than Germany's, according to a detailed presentation this week from Anders
Borg, Sweden's finance minister, at the Peterson Institute for
International Economics in Washington.
What's intriguing is that Sweden suffered its own economic crisis in
1992 — and its response will please and discomfort American liberals and
conservatives alike.
Conservatives can take heart that many post-crisis policies came right
from their playbook. Sweden's income tax base was broadened and tax rates
were sharply reduced. (In 1996, the average marginal rate — the rate on
the last bit of income — was 46 percent; in 2010, it was 33 percent.)
Spending was cut on old-age pensions, child allowances, unemployment
benefits and housing subsidies. Union power over wages was reduced. Many
markets (banking, air travel, telecommunications, electricity production)
were deregulated. Low inflation and balanced budgets became broadly
embraced popular goals.
On the other hand, liberals will also be reassured. Although Sweden
trimmed social benefits, it hardly abandoned the welfare state. Overall
government spending is still about 50 percent of the economy (gross
domestic product), much higher than in the United States ,where the usual
ratio is about 35 percent. To reduce income tax rates, the government
raised other taxes. Gasoline and cigarette taxes were increased; so were
taxes on dividends and capital gains, hitting the rich. Altogether,
deficit reduction totaled a huge 12 percent of GDP from 1991 to 1998.
Slightly more than a third of that came from higher taxes.
The lesson, Borg argued, is that it's possible to embrace conservative
economics and liberal social policy at the same time. The aims were clear:
to reward work by cutting income tax rates; to push people back into the
labor market by reducing some government benefits; and to promote
productivity by increasing competition. Productivity and "real"
(after-inflation) wage gains improved markedly. Still, Sweden has less
economic inequality than most advanced countries.
Can the Swedish model be applied elsewhere? It requires, Borg said, a
broad political consensus about what needs to be done. Although spending
cuts are "preferable to tax hikes," deficit reduction should rely on both.
He also argued that Sweden has been much more successful than the United
States in controlling health spending. As recently as 1980, health
spending in both countries — as a share of GDP — was roughly equal. Now
Sweden's spending is about half the U.S. level. Among other things, he
said, Sweden has relied on higher patient co-payments to discourage people
from overusing health services.
Unfortunately, in one crucial respect, the Swedish experience can't be
duplicated. In the early 1990s, the rest of the world economy was
relatively healthy. Sweden could offset the depressing effects of its
domestic policies by exporting more — and that's what happened, aided by a
huge devaluation of its currency, the krona. The devaluation made its
exports more price-competitive.
"They let it [the krona] go down by about 25 percent, and that produced an
export boom," says economist Desmond Lachman, a former top economist at
the International Monetary Fund who has studied the Swedish crisis. "It
allowed them to do massive [budget] adjustment without putting the economy
into a deep recession."
Austerity is more bearable when only one or a few countries embrace it and
when devaluation can stimulate exports. In Europe, neither of these
conditions now holds. Many countries — not just Greece, Ireland, Portugal,
Spain and Italy — have adopted austerity policies. And all major debtor
countries use the euro, making it impossible for any one to resort to a
unilateral devaluation. Sweden's good fortune is that it had its crisis
two decades ago.
Read more on the European debt crisis
Five economic lessons from Sweden
David M. Smick: The euro zone's vicious cycle
The Post's View: Europe's day of fiscal reckoning is at hand
Gordon Brown: Europe's shortsighted response to a worsening fiscal reality
Robert J. Samuelson: Europe's financial crisis never went away
--
I am using the free version of SPAMfighter.
We are a community of 7 million users fighting spam.
SPAMfighter has removed 613 of my spam emails to date.
Get the free SPAMfighter here: http://www.spamfighter.com/len
The Professional version does not have this message
Kunjungi situs INTI-net
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/inti-net
Kunjungi Blog INTI-net
http://tionghoanet.blogspot.com/
http://tionghoanets.blogspot.com/
Tulisan ini direlay di beberapa Blog :
http://jakartametronews.blogspot.com/
http://jakartapost.blogspot.com
http://indonesiaupdates.blogspot.com
*Mohon tidak menyinggung perasaan, bebas tapi sopan, tidak memposting iklan*
0 komentar:
Posting Komentar