It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why is the European economy not growing?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 07:42 PM
Here's another graph that shows taxes in various countries:

Figure 8.9 OECD Petrol Prices and Taxes

It looks like the pre-tax price of fuel is about the same in Europe as it is in the US but the taxes push European fuel way up.

Fuel Tax Inquiry

[edit on 16-2-2005 by AceOfBase]

posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 07:47 PM

It would seem that 99% would be shrinking, 100% would be static and 101% would be growing.

The explanation for relative REGIONAL comparisons of GDP growth, somewhat more difficult than national level ones, might come out sector by sector, as well as in what is actually reported in the measures.

posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 07:50 PM
Man Norway and the UK are getting boned in taxes
Im suprised they havent all switch over to hybrids after having to pay that much for gas.

[edit on 16-2-2005 by ShadowXIX]

posted on Feb, 16 2005 @ 08:01 PM
I forgot to post this interesting assemblage of indicators.

"The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy in the world, with a per capita GDP of $37,800. In this market-oriented economy, private individuals and business firms make most of the decisions, and the federal and state governments buy needed goods and services predominantly in the private marketplace. US business firms enjoy considerably greater flexibility than their counterparts in Western Europe and Japan in decisions to expand capital plant, to lay off surplus workers, and to develop new products. At the same time, they face higher barriers to entry in their rivals' home markets than the barriers to entry of foreign firms in US markets. US firms are at or near the forefront in technological advances, especially in computers and in medical, aerospace, and military equipment; their advantage has narrowed since the end of World War II. The onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market" in which those at the bottom lack the education and the professional/technical skills of those at the top and, more and more, fail to get comparable pay raises, health insurance coverage, and other benefits. Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households. The years 1994-2000 witnessed solid increases in real output, low inflation rates, and a drop in unemployment to below 5%. The year 2001 saw the end of boom psychology and performance, with output increasing only 0.3% and unemployment and business failures rising substantially. The response to the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 showed the remarkable resilience of the economy. Moderate recovery took place in 2002 with the GDP growth rate rising to 2.4%. A major short-term problem in first half 2002 was a sharp decline in the stock market, fueled in part by the exposure of dubious accounting practices in some major corporations. The war in March/April 2003 between a US-led coalition and Iraq shifted resources to the military. In 2003, growth in output and productivity and the recovery of the stock market to above 10,000 for the Dow Jones Industrial Average were promising signs. Unemployment stayed at the 6% level, however, and began to decline only at the end of the year. Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups."

[edit on 16-2-2005 by MaskedAvatar]

posted on Feb, 17 2005 @ 10:34 AM

Originally posted by sardion2000
Raising thier prices as soon as the price of Oil goes up, then when Oil goes back down thier prices take months to get back down to normal after an especially high spike. Typical price gouging, they know the end is near for them so they are taking advantage while they can and it really pisses me off sometimes.

- Oh yeah, that one happens here all the time too.....and they love to occassionally throw in the odd one because - they claim - currency movements make it 'necessary'.

You'll not find the record profit making oil industry high on anyone's popularity list ('cept maybe for amongst their top-brass and major share-holders).

You can buy into this 'it's all the gov's fault' stuff if you like, I just keep hearing about their 'all-time world's biggest record level of profit for any human enterprise ever' headlines and draw my own conclusions.

If the European govs hadn't racked up the tax level on the price of fuel the oil co.s would have come after that money themselves.

It's called 'pricing for what the market will bear' I believe.
Pure capitalism and purely to be expected especially over such a high-demand 'good'.

We had a series of 'protests' over the price of fuel a few of years back and on 2 separate occassions the UK gov dropped plans to hike the price of fuel through an increase in fuel duty.
The result?
Withing 3mths each time the oil companies had upped prices to the projected new level and pocketed the projected tax increase for themselves citing the rise in the price of oil/US dollar movements/UK currency movement/demand/ supply etc etc balh blah blah whatever to justfiy their escalating profits.

But thankfully, in the main, the European Gov's all saw this some time ago and spiked that particular little 'gun years ago.
Better the money goes to the wider public good and not the already priviledged super-wealthy private pockets IMO.

My bet is that in the US it will still end up a story of prices rising ultimately to something closer to European levels but totally all for the benefit of the narrow private sector these things always end up benefitting and zero for the wider public interest.

Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Man Norway and the UK are getting boned in taxes
Im suprised they havent all switch over to hybrids after having to pay that much for gas.

- They have just about arrived in our dealerships. I expect them to do very well soon.

60 - 70 +mpg is being claimed.

Plus there is a large shift to 'duel fuel' with the advent of low taxes on LPG (liquid propane gas). This works out at almost the same 'performance' as petrol (gasoline) - there is a very slight power drop and you would get a fraction less 'mpg s' - but at half the price.

But back to the main topic.

How, in a world of finite resources can we always expect 'growth', in the classic sense, anyway? Why is this almost always cited as 'good' and a reasonable expectation?

[edit on 17-2-2005 by sminkeypinkey]

posted on Feb, 22 2005 @ 02:32 PM
The Eurozone surplus grew in 2004 but the EU-25 trade was dragged down by Britain, who had a big deficit.

The eurozone trade surplus widened to 74.4 billion euros (98 billion dollars) in 2004 from 69.7 billion the previous year, the European statistics office Eurostat reported Tuesday.

Exports grew eight percent in value and imports nine percent last year, the agency said.

But the full 25-member European Union reported a trade deficit of 60.9 billion euros in 2004 against 57.8 billion in 2003. Exports increased 10 percent and imports nine percent.

The difference in the eurozone-EU results reflects a huge deficit incurred by Britain, which is not a member of the eurozone. The British shortfall came to 87.9 billion euros in the first 11 months of last year.

Eurostat found that the European Union increased its trade surplus with its principal partner, the United States, to 69.9 billion euros in the first 11 months of 2004 from 62.4 billion in the same period last year.

So much for Dild O'Reilley's boycott.

[edit on 22-2-2005 by AceOfBase]

new topics

top topics
<< 1   >>

log in