Válságkezelés Európában: új gazdaságfilozófia felé? (Towards a New Philosophy of Crisis Management in Europe?)

Az évek óta tartó európai válságkezelés leírása és a részletek bemutatása helyett a rögtönzött, politikai alapon hozott lépések gazdaságelméleti értelmezésére törekszünk. Kutatási alapkérdésünk a következő: igaz-e még a 70-es évek végének felismerése, ami szerint sem szerkezeti, sem szabályozási eredetű válságot nem lehet keresletélénkítéssel leküzdeni? Igaz-e, hogy a szuverén EU-tagállamokon belül bármi okból hiányzó belső elköteleződést nem lehet pótolni a külső fegyelmezéssel? Ennek fényében vizsgáljuk a költségvetési és a bankunió 2012 októberében körvonalazott és jóváhagyott tervezetét is. _____ This paper attempts to provide a theoretical interpretation of new policy initiatives in the EU culminating in the launching of a fiscal and banking union in June, 2012. This step is reinforced by the new ECB strategy launched in September 2012. These measures were a result of a series of policy improvisations rather than of any secret master plan, still they add up to a new model of European integration. Our research question is if, and to what degrees the insights from the crisis of the 1970s hold. Accordingly no amount of easy money may remedy ills deriving from regulatory and structural inefficiencies. Second, we contend that no amount of external straightjacket/disciplining may replace domestic commitment of national governments in implementing structural reforms rather than fiscal adjustments on the margin.

On the new economic philosophy of crisis management in the European Union

This essay attempts to go beyond presenting the bits and pieces of still ongoing crisis management in the EU. Instead it attempts at finding the ‘red thread’ behind a series of politically improvised decisions. Our fundamental research question asks whether basic economic lessons learned in the 1970s are still valid. Namely, that a crises emanating from either structural or regulatory weaknesses cannot and should not be remedied by demand management. Our second research question is the following: Can lacking internal commitment and conviction in any member state be replaced or substituted by external pressure or formalized procedures and sanctions? Under those angles we analyze the project on establishing a fiscal and banking union in the EU, as approved by the Council in December 2012.

Post Crisis Lessons for Open Economies: Are They All New?

This paper will argue that the American economy could and will absorb the recent shocks, and that in the longer run (within a matter of years), it will somehow convert the revealed weaknesses to its advantage. America has a long record of learning from its excesses to improve the working of its particular brand of capitalism, dating back to the imposition of antitrust controls on the robber barons in the late 1800s and the enhancement of investor protection after the 1929 crash. The American economy has experienced market imperfections of all kinds but it almost always has found, true, not perfect, but fairly reliable regulatory answers and has managed to adapt to change, (e. g. Dodd-Frank Act on financial stability). The U.S. has many times pioneered in the elaboration of both theoretical and policy oriented solutions for conflicts between markets and government to increase economic welfare (Bernanke, 2008, p. 425). There is no single reason why it should not turn the latest financial calamities to its advantage. At the same time, to regain confidence in capitalism as a global system, global efforts are indispensable. To identify some of the global economic conflicts that have a lot to do with U.S. markets in particular, we seek answers to global systemic questions.

Google’s Antitrust Cases Competition Analysis in New Economy Markets

Today, global economic performance largely depends on digital ecosystems. E-commerce, cloud, social media, sharing economy are the main products of the modern innovative economic systems which are constantly raising new regulatory questions. Meanwhile the United States has an unimpeachable dominance in innovation and new technologies, as well as a large and open domestic market, the EU is only recently discovering the importance of empowering the European digital economy and aims to break down its highly fragmented cross-border online economic environment. As global economy is rapidly becoming digital, Europe’s effort to create and invest in common digital market is understandable. The comprehensive investigations launched by the European Commission into the role of social network, search engine, or sharing economy internet platforms, which are new generation technologies dominated by American firms; or the recent decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union declaring that the Commission’s US Safe Harbor Decision is invalid1 might be considered as part of an anti-American protectionist policy. However, these measures could rather be seen as part of a broader trend to foster European enterprises in technology developments.