Mittwoch, 9. Juni 2010

Einschätzung zum Sparprogram der Bundesregierung

Clemens Fuest ist nicht so angetan vom Programm der Bundesregierung - und hat wohl Recht damit, dass der Umfang des Programms mittelfristig nicht ausreicht, gerade weil bei vielen Posten unklar ist, ob und in welcher Höhe sie tatsächlich Einnahmen generieren, bzw. Minderausgaben schaffen.

Auch Wolfgang Wiegard, Mitglied des Sachverständigenrats, meint, dass man mehr hätte machen können.

Kommentare:

Christoph hat gesagt…

warum hätte man denn "mehr machen" sollen? Ich habe bisher kein wirklich überzeugendes Argument gehört warum man gerade jetzt die exit strategie anschmeißen sollte. Abgesehen vom reinen Sachzwang Schuldenbremse.

Hier eine, wie ich finde, interessante externe Sicht:

Merkel’s hair-shirt

Published: June 8 2010 20:14, Financial Times

Germany is the only European country where puritanism is populist. Other countries have had fiscal frugality forced upon them by bond markets, but the government of Angela Merkel, the chancellor, has chosen to cut spending and raise taxes as a vote-winner. The deficit, expected to be about 5 per cent this year, will be back under 3 per cent by 2013.

These cuts have been marketed as the biggest austerity drive in German postwar history. They are not: the plan is for a modest further tightening in a country with relatively tight fiscal policy. Ms Merkel noted that “the last few months have shown ... how important it is to have solid finances.” True. But Germany’s public finances are already strong.

The annual cost to the German government of borrowing for 10 years is now a mere 2.52 per cent. (The US government yield, over the same period, stands at 3.18 per cent.) Bunds are the ultimate safe asset: recent price movements show that the German state is considered a safe bet even when the eurozone itself is doubted.

This programme will not break a European recovery, but it encourages the notion that deficits are morally wrong. This is dangerous. The German economy is now running strongly but, as other governments cut spending, that might not last. Germany may yet need to deploy fiscal stimuli to get the continental economy moving. The Merkel government’s rhetoric risks making it politically impossible to do that.

Ms Merkel’s package has other weaknesses. A proposed comprehensive financial transactions tax is still vague and, if it were imposed unilaterally, would damage German business. Slashing the armed forces would also be ill-judged. It suggests that Germany is becoming more introverted and less likely to repeat its intervention in Afghanistan. But this component of the package reveals the purpose of the austerity drive: it is a play to seize the political agenda.

Germans are upset by the deficit, and by the rescue of Greece. They also dislike the Afghan campaign – an issue now at the top of the agenda following the resignation of Horst Köhler, the president, after he implied that Germany could use its military for more than self-defence. The package is designed to reaffirm Ms Merkel’s reputation for those modern German traits: fiscal hawkishness and suspicion of military action. But her package risks making it harder for Germany to do the right thing in the future for the economy, or for European security.

Jonas Dovern hat gesagt…

Wahrscheinlich hätte man gar nicht "mehr" machen sollen, was den Umfang (Nettoeffekt beim Budget) angeht (, wobei ja der Umfang des beschlossenen noch gar nicht klar ist, bei den ganzen neuen Maßnahmen, die mal irgendwann (sprich: vielleicht) eingeführt werden). Man hätte aber auf jeden Fall über eine Erhöhung der Besteuerung hoher Einkommen und hoher Vermögen/Erbschaften mehr zusätzliche Einnahmen generieren können, ohne die Konjunktur kurzfristig auch nur annähernd zu belasten.

Kommentar veröffentlichen