Updated 2019-02-25 at 13.50: the Article has been added to a correction.
A couple of already rich northern european countries are the clear economic winners in the euro, while several countries in the south have lost, some of them large. This according to a new report from the european policy of the German think tank CEP.
the main Reason why losers are more than winners are the euro crisis, which briserade 2010-2011.
on to the single european currency was introduced 20 years ago. Every German is, today, seen as a proportion of the country’s total economy, 3.390 million richer than if the country had left D-land, according to the report’s assessment.
Also for the Netherlands, the euro has been a special assistant”. The country’s GDP per person is 1.116 million higher in the day than it had made with the preservation of the nlg.
on the other hand, mean the authors of the report Mr Gasparotti and Matthias their kullas, had each of the italians have been the equivalent of the entire 8.756 million richer if they had retained their own lira.
An almost equal loss of business, the euro has been for France, according to the study. The French GDP per person is 5.570 million lower than it would have with the franc left.
If you accumulate the effect of the euro in all years from introduction in 1999 to 2017 will be the final result, plus 23.000 euros per German, minus 73.000 euros for each Italian, and minus 56.000 € per frenchman.
A conclusion that is perhaps surprising is that krislandet Greece still barely is the plus with the latter way to count. The overall economic prosperity of Greece is in the day 190 euro higher per person than if the country did not participate in the monetary union the third stage.
It is due to the country’s GDP rose very sharply in the first euroåren, before the bubble burst in 2010-2011. Then, the case has been deep, but not as deeply as the lift was high. Another way to see it is possibly that the Greek economy was overvalued prior to the crash.
for the individual participating countries is that they can’t increase their national competitiveness artificially through to devalue when the economy is appealing.
instead, they are whipped to implement structural reforms and dampen wage increases in industries that are not competitive. Where the report indicates Spain, as the last four five years have done exactly that.
the Spaniards won something on the euro until 2010. Subsequently, the losses from year to year has been greater than the previous winnings, but after 2014 shrinking the bathroom steadily, thanks to improvements in efficiency and modernisation of the economy.
If the pace of reforms is kept by Spain in the few years that have reversed the accumulated negative result and join the countries that have joined plus.
All of the surveyed countries have had periods of time when the euro has benefited the growth, in most cases at the beginning of the currency’s existence, but for most of them weighing periods when the common currency rather been a sinker heavier, in all cases so far.
if the euro’s economic advantages and disadvantages, ” notes the authors of the report. There have been assessments of how much to trade in the internal market would benefit from a common currency (with mixed findings), but how the downside to get rid of devalveringsvapnet beats is little known.
Gasparottis and their kullas method has been to compare the eight eurozone countries – Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Spain, Portugal and Greece – with countries outside the euro area which previously had a similar growth, and which have not been exposed to any country-specific economic shock.
Italy has, for example, compared with Australia, Japan, the Uk and Israel, while Portugal has been compared with Barbados, New Zealand, Israel and Singapore. Germany’s ”basket” consisted of Bahrain, Japan, the united kingdom and Switzerland.
they were old in the EU-the farm before they joined the euro. In this way, it has been clear to has been the actual entry on the union’s internal market can affect the growth rate. Otherwise, for example, Finland and Slovakia have been included.
To Ireland, an old member of the EU, which is also one of the eurozone’s tillväxtraketer, is not included in the comparison due to the lack of sufficient data. The same applies to Luxembourg.
a Total of use in day 19 of the EU countries adopted the euro as their currency.
Correction: In an earlier version indicated the cumulative effect of eurointrädet over 20 years as the change in level of GDP per capita. The last are, naturally, considerably higher than the latter.