Politics Here we go again:The populism and dystopia of Italy's new government

this is not the populism to be worried about

the populism is to blaim the Euro for what goes wrong in Italy
Italy is the poorest performer of Europe lately
and it is because of lack of necessary reforms inside Italy

the Mafia and corruption are some internal problems to be tackled

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corruption_in_Italy

They say that Germany is deindustrializing Italy, the Germans are destroying Italian heavy industry.
 
They say that Germany is deindustrializing Italy, the Germans are destroying Italian heavy industry.

this and other bull shit circulates instead of pinpointing the problems that have to be adressed inside Italy
 
this and other bull shit circulates instead of pinpointing the problems that have to be adressed inside Italy

You have demonstrated in multiple threads and posts a clear Anti-Italian Bias.
 
They say that Germany is deindustrializing Italy, the Germans are destroying Italian heavy industry.

Who is saying that? 60 million Italians in choir or someone in particular? It seems to me very difficult that all 60 million Italians say the same thing.

I can help you.

The one who, more than others, has spread in Italy the idea that the Germans, to be precise the Franco-German axis, have contributed to destroy the Italian heavy industry is a French economist, Alain Parguez.

The French Alain Parguez stated that the main purpose of the French tecnocrats was to destroy Italy, and they were the French to involve the German in this purpose.

Alain Parguez is Emeritus Professor of Economics of the University of Franche-Comte, Besancon (France) and was associated with the Economics Department at the University of Ottawa.

http://www.neties.com/APE.htm


Alain Parguez's statements from a summit held 6 years, in 2012.

"the obsession of the French technocrats and their economists was precisely to destroy the industrial base of Italy"

"One of the main ideologues of the Euro, Jacques Attali, in 1985, in the final phase of the debate on the Maastricht Treaty, states verbatim: "our main objective is to destroy forever any industrial capacity outside Germany and France".

"85% of net German exports, and this also applies to France, are within the eurozone, which is why, contrary to what you might think, they will never peacefully accept the fact that Greece or Italy abandon the eurozone, precisely because the corporations, the big French and German companies, would suddenly find themselves without earnings. It is therefore absurd to accuse countries like Italy and Greece to be responsible for their own deficits; without the deficits of your country (Italy) and Greece, the situation of French and German companies would already be bankrupt."

"There is a fundamental point that too many people ignore: the Germans were extremely reluctant to enter the monetary union; there was a period, especially during the early 1970s, when monetary and fiscal policy was much more expansionary in Germany than in France; so why did the Mitterand regime oblige Germany to enter the
European Union (EU)? The answer is simple: the Kohl government was financed entirely by French secret funds; and that's not all: there was a country that was hated by the French establishment for a very long time; and this country was just yours, Italy; the obsession of the French technocrats and their economists was precisely to destroy the industrial base of Italy; this is why they accused Italian governments of always being too soft about wages, unions and purchasing power.

How could the Italian economy be destroyed? Imposing a revaluation of the currency; and when Italy decided to adopt the euro, this was in conjunction with the decision to a revaluation of at least 45% of the price; therefore, suddenly, the Italians could no longer export outside the euro zone.

It makes me laugh when people say, "but if we leave the euro like we do? It will be a nightmare ". Italy has been completely destroyed by the euro!
Imagine the Italian industry relative prices, for example in the US market: with a sudden increase of 40%, it was clear that Italian exports would collapse overnight. Taking out of Italy game, at this point it was decided to seduce Greece, Portugal, Ireland, for the same reasons: to increase exports."



 
Last edited:
Who is saying that? 60 million Italians in choir or someone in particular? It seems to me very difficult that all 60 million Italians say the same thing.

I can help you.

The one who, more than others, has spread in Italy the idea that the Germans, to be precise the Franco-German axis, have contributed to destroy the Italian heavy industry is a French economist, Alain Parguez.

The French Alain Parguez stated that the main purpose of the French tecnocrats was to destroy Italy, and they were the French to involve the German in this purpose.

Alain Parguez is Emeritus Professor of Economics of the University of Franche-Comte, Besancon (France) and was associated with the Economics Department at the University of Ottawa.

http://www.neties.com/APE.htm


Alain Parguez's statements from a summit held 6 years, in 2012.

"the obsession of the French technocrats and their economists was precisely to destroy the industrial base of Italy"

"One of the main ideologues of the Euro, Jacques Attali, in 1985, in the final phase of the debate on the Maastricht Treaty, states verbatim: "our main objective is to destroy forever any industrial capacity outside Germany and France".

"85% of net German exports, and this also applies to France, are within the eurozone, which is why, contrary to what you might think, they will never peacefully accept the fact that Greece or Italy abandon the eurozone, precisely because the corporations, the big French and German companies, would suddenly find themselves without earnings. It is therefore absurd to accuse countries like Italy and Greece to be responsible for their own deficits; without the deficits of your country (Italy) and Greece, the situation of French and German companies would already be bankrupt."

"There is a fundamental point that too many people ignore: the Germans were extremely reluctant to enter the monetary union; there was a period, especially during the early 1970s, when monetary and fiscal policy was much more expansionary in Germany than in France; so why did the Mitterand regime oblige Germany to enter the
European Union (EU)? The answer is simple: the Kohl government was financed entirely by French secret funds; and that's not all: there was a country that was hated by the French establishment for a very long time; and this country was just yours, Italy; the obsession of the French technocrats and their economists was precisely to destroy the industrial base of Italy; this is why they accused Italian governments of always being too soft about wages, unions and purchasing power.

How could the Italian economy be destroyed? Imposing a revaluation of the currency; and when Italy decided to adopt the euro, this was in conjunction with the decision to a revaluation of at least 45% of the price; therefore, suddenly, the Italians could no longer export outside the euro zone.

It makes me laugh when people say, "but if we leave the euro like we do? It will be a nightmare ". Italy has been completely destroyed by the euro!
Imagine the Italian industry relative prices, for example in the US market: with a sudden increase of 40%, it was clear that Italian exports would collapse overnight. Taking out of Italy game, at this point it was decided to seduce Greece, Portugal, Ireland, for the same reasons: to increase exports."




Obviously paid to say all this by ultra-nationalist Italians. :)
 
Obviously paid to say all this by ultra-nationalist Italians. :)

Of course. :)

On a serious note, there are other foreign academics who in these years have helped to grow certain feelings in Italy. Now I'm not here even to discuss whether they are accurate or not, but I report what happened.
 
Of course. :)

On a serious note, there are others foreign academics who in these years have helped to grow certain feelings in Italy. Now I'm not here even to discuss whether they are accurate or not, but I report what happened.

Indeed, just for the sake of clarity, my personal "economic" philosophy is much further to the right than that of most Italians. I absolutely believe in lowering taxation (I think the flat tax is a very interesting idea), reforming labor laws and pension law and on and on, but that has nothing necessarily to do with whether Italy should be on the Euro. I also have personally been against the Euro from the very beginning. Maybe it's just that I actually read at the time what economists from other countries were saying.

As I've said umpteen times before, most people put their own country first, whether they say so for mass public consumption or not, well, maybe other than a lot of Italians. :)
 
Indeed, just for the sake of clarity, my personal "economic" philosophy is much further to the right than that of most Italians. I absolutely believe in lowering taxation (I think the flat tax is a very interesting idea), reforming labor laws and pension law and on and on, but that has nothing necessarily to do with whether Italy should be on the Euro. I also have personally been against the Euro from the very beginning. Maybe it's just that I actually read at the time what economists from other countries were saying.

As I've said umpteen times before, most people put their own country first, whether they say so for mass public consumption or not, well, maybe other than a lot of Italians. :)

Kenneth Rogoff in the Guardian:
"
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]It is now fairly obvious that the euro was not necessary to the success of the EU, and instead has proved a massive impediment, as many economists on this side of the Atlantic had predicted. Eurocrats have long likened European integration to riding a bicycle: one must keep moving forward or fall down. If so, the premature adoption of the single currency is best thought of as a detour through thick, wet cement."

"For southern Europe as a whole, the single currency has proved to be a golden cage, forcing greater fiscal and monetary rectitude but removing the exchange rate as a critical cushion against unexpected shocks."

" If southern European countries had kept their own currencies, they might never have dug as big a debt hole and would have had the option of partial default through inflation."[/FONT]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/16/the-eurozone-must-reform-or-die-merkel-macron
Kenneth Rogoff is professor of economics and public policy at Harvard University and recipient of the 2011 Deutsche Bank Prize in Financial Economics

This article by Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel prize winning economist, should be read carefully before commenting on these issues:

"The Problem With Europe Is The Euro":
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/10/joseph-stiglitz-the-problem-with-europe-is-the-euro

"[FONT=&quot]It is perhaps natural that the eurozone’s leaders want to blame the victim – to blame the countries in recession or depression or reeling from a referendum result – for bringing about this state of affairs. They do not want to blame themselves and the great institutions that they have helped create, and which they now head. But blaming the victim will not solve the euro problem – and it is in large measure unfair."

[/FONT]
That's why I said that it was a terrible retreat to withdraw the candidacy of the first finance minister. He understood this. The new one will be a disaster: another yes man to the EU.
 
Kenneth Rogoff in the Guardian:
"
[FONT="][B][/B]
[/FONT][/COLOR][/CENTER]
[COLOR=#121212][FONT="]It is now fairly obvious that the euro was not necessary to the success of the EU, and instead has proved a massive impediment, as many economists on this side of the Atlantic had predicted. Eurocrats have long likened European integration to riding a bicycle: one must keep moving forward or fall down. If so, the premature adoption of the single currency is best thought of as a detour through thick, wet cement."

"For southern Europe as a whole, the single currency has proved to be a golden cage, forcing greater fiscal and monetary rectitude but removing the exchange rate as a critical cushion against unexpected shocks."

" If southern European countries had kept their own currencies, they might never have dug as big a debt hole and would have had the option of partial default through inflation."[/FONT]

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/16/the-eurozone-must-reform-or-die-merkel-macron
Kenneth Rogoff is professor of economics and public policy at Harvard University and recipient of the 2011 Deutsche Bank Prize in Financial Economics

This article by Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel prize winning economist, should be read carefully before commenting on these issues:

"The Problem With Europe Is The Euro":
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/aug/10/joseph-stiglitz-the-problem-with-europe-is-the-euro

"[FONT="]It is perhaps natural that the eurozone’s leaders want to blame the victim – to blame the countries in recession or depression or reeling from a referendum result – for bringing about this state of affairs. They do not want to blame themselves and the great institutions that they have helped create, and which they now head. But blaming the victim will not solve the euro problem – and it is in large measure unfair."

[/FONT]
That's why I said that it was a terrible retreat to withdraw the candidacy of the first finance minister. He understood this. The new one will be a disaster: another yes man to the EU.​


I agree that the Euro was a politcal project, decided by politicians ignoring certain economical realities.
But I strongly doubt that Italy would have been better of without the Euro.

"For southern Europe as a whole, the single currency has proved to be a golden cage, forcing greater fiscal and monetary rectitude but removing the exchange rate as a critical cushion against unexpected shocks."

With or without the Euro, greater fiscal and monetary rectitude is required anyway.
He has a point though re unexpected shocks.​
 
I agree that the Euro was a politcal project, decided by politicians ignoring certain economical realities.
But I strongly doubt that Italy would have been better of without the Euro.
"For southern Europe as a whole, the single currency has proved to be a golden cage, forcing greater fiscal and monetary rectitude but removing the exchange rate as a critical cushion against unexpected shocks."
With or without the Euro, greater fiscal and monetary rectitude is required anyway.
He has a point though re unexpected shocks.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/blog/2016/dec/05/italy-euro-economy-competitiveness
.
https://www.irishtimes.com/business...t-can-be-an-obstacle-to-deep-reform-1.3522617
 
You have demonstrated in multiple threads and posts a clear Anti-Italian Bias.

I like Italy, it's a very nice country. I go on holidays there sometimes.
Most Italians are very proud of their own country, and they have some reasons.
But for some, their pride prevents them to face some realities.
Sorry that I'm not cheering along with them.
Not everything is 'magnificent' and 'splendid'.
 
The Euro was aimed to keep Germany ín line, a French desire after the unification of Germany, without the Euro the Deutsch Mark would be the dominant currency in Europe now....no doubt.

And yes it was also a technocratic project without much eye for the sructural differences in Europe. So what is in the monetary policy 'good' for one part of Europe isn't necessarily good for another part.

So big chance it collapses in the end....with probably bad effects (we can't project all now) for all of us in Europe...
 
The Euro was aimed to keep Germany ín line, a French desire after the unification of Germany, without the Euro the Deutsch Mark would be the dominant currency in Europe now....no doubt.

And yes it's was also a technocratic project without much eye for the sructural differences in Europe. So what is in the monetary policy 'good' for one part of Europe isn't necessarily good for another part.

So big chance it collapses in the end....with probably bad effects (we can't project all now) for all of us in Europe...

I'm not so sure about the latter.
After all the Greeks decided not to leave the Euro.
There is a huge difference between the cheap rhetoric and the seriousness of crossing a point of no return.
Both Italian new government parties shouted out loud they would leave the Euro, which would be so much better for Italy.
But nothing to be found about that in their very recent government formation deal.
 
After all the Greeks decided not to leave the Euro.

Greece should have left the euro 8 years ago.

The truth though is that the parties which openly supported an exist from the Eurozone never got more than 1% of the votes.

So, Italy is different.
 
The former French president Nicolas Sarkozy wanted the war against Libya, damaging Italy a lot, because the overwhelming majority of the landings in Italy after Gaddafi's death comes from Libya. Now we know the reason why the French Sarkozy wanted to kill Gaddafi, to hide the fact that he had been financed by the Libyans. The continuous landings of migrants in Italy are the main reason for the rise of populism in Italy. Italy should sue the French government.


French inquiry opens into allegations Gaddafi funded Sarkozy 2007 campaign

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/19/french-inquiry-gaddafi-sarkozy-2007-campaign


Why Did the U.S. and Its Allies Bomb Libya? Corruption Case Against Sarkozy Sheds New Light on Ousting of Gaddafi.

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/28/sarkozy-gaddafi-libya-bombing/
 
Greece should have left the euro 8 years ago.

The truth though is that the parties which openly supported an exist from the Eurozone never got more than 1% of the votes.

So, Italy is different.

well, at least they supported Tsipras and Varoufakis who were going for a large debt relief

that is another similarity between Italy and Greece

the new government parties also campaigned for a debt relief
again, nothing of that is found back in the new government deal


Greece, in the end got partial debt relief and de facto refinancement at new, very favourable rates,
but they had to accept fargoing austerity measures to get it
it was not the way Tsipras and Varoufakis had promised
 
Greece should have left the euro 8 years ago.

The truth though is that the parties which openly supported an exist from the Eurozone never got more than 1% of the votes.

So, Italy is different.

The EU know that a max of 4 million tax paying Greeks can never repay the debt ...........the Greek people did not realise this when they voted
 
The former French president Nicolas Sarkozy wanted the war against Libya, damaging Italy a lot, because the overwhelming majority of the landings in Italy after Gaddafi's death comes from Libya. Now we know the reason why the French Sarkozy wanted to kill Gaddafi, to hide the fact that he had been financed by the Libyans. The continuous landings of migrants in Italy are the main reason for the rise of populism in Italy. Italy should sue the French government.


French inquiry opens into allegations Gaddafi funded Sarkozy 2007 campaign

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/apr/19/french-inquiry-gaddafi-sarkozy-2007-campaign


Why Did the U.S. and Its Allies Bomb Libya? Corruption Case Against Sarkozy Sheds New Light on Ousting of Gaddafi.

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/28/sarkozy-gaddafi-libya-bombing/

I don`t think that Ghedafi was killed just to hide a case of corruption. There was a common interest between France and Great Britain to remove Ghedafi from the power.
 

This thread has been viewed 58751 times.

Back
Top