Category: Europe Published on Monday, 21 May 2012 10:51 Written by Wieck Wildeboer
Irresponsible risk-taking brought the banks sector in the United States and Europe in 2008 on the edge of the abyss. Authorities had no choice but had to cost the taxpayers try to prevent chaos. A collapse of the financial sector would lead to the collapse of the entire national economy.
For the rescue of the banks were huge amounts needed, while economic growth stagnated or turned negative and the deficits of public budgets only increased. The United States tried to work out of the malaise by "quantitative easing", a euphemism for running the money presses. The problems for the eurozone were much more complicated since a joint fiscal and monetary policies only existed on paper and there. Converting these paper arrangements to reality and in particular the rule that budget deficits should be limited to 3% of GDP, meanwhile led to high unemployment in those countries in the eurozone who were accustomed to live on credit. The governability of Greece is now a question mark and the social unrest in Spain takes the day. Germany insists, out of pure self interest, to maintain the 3% rule, whilst even the Financial Times (finally) recognizes that a country can be cut out of a recession. Something seems to emerge a consensus that economic growth must be promoted if it is still unclear exactly what politicians here in mind and who the investment needed for growth to start paying.
Besides the banking crisis and the debt crisis of the Netherlands government is now in a third verzeilt crisis hit, a political crisis over the budget proposals for 2013. The government fell and had to be stepped in by smaller opposition parties to a budget proposal in time to get to Brussels. New elections were called for September and there has to be seen whether the "coalition budget" enough votes to then plans to continue. According to the latest polls that coalition is not more than 67 seats in parliament. Moreover, the impact of proposals on the purchasing power and employment have not been calculated. Meanwhile the Dutch economy stagnates in a lack of consumer confidence in the economic future. People give their money out.
Consumer confidence is also inhibited because the belief in the capacity of the Dutch institutions to prevent future economic disasters have to look far. The Fourth Crises.
When the institutional organization of Dutch society came to be under financial pressure were the shortcomings of that organization soon surfaced. Despite a multitude of boards of directors and supervisory bodies (often by well-paid staffs ex-politicians) drove one after another scandal over. Vestia, the largest fund for social housing turned to gambling beaten with unclear financial products and suffered heavy losses, the privatized railways do not meet the standard, the privatized postal collection losses, market forces in health care has only costs hunted without their quality of care. The supervisor of semi-government organization COA could not prevent a financial mess was created and the amount of vacant office buildings is steadily increasing. The most disastrous in this litany is that neither the Bank nor the Dutch Financial Markets Authority were able to control the banking sector. Despite their arrogance, these institutions were to have no idea of the exposures by the banks were taken. They advised that even small Dutch savers with confidence their savings with Icesave could pennies lodging, until shortly before the time the bank went under.
Who takes this fourth crisis and dares the institutional organization of the Netherlands on the agenda?
Click HERE to read more from Wieck Wildeboer columns.