D\’ye think that Frances Coppola will still speak to us oiks now?

After all, she\’s got a Nobel Laureate citing her blog post as evidence…..

And while I didn’t think of it until now, there’s even a case to be made that labor mobility within Europe is actually worsening the problem, making the euro less sustainable.Via FTAlphaville, Frances Coppola documents the extraordinary rates of emigration among young people in Europe’s disaster economies — not really a surprise when you consider the incredible levels of youth unemployment. But as she says, once those young people are gone, who will pay the taxes to support retirees?

Much too posh for the likes of us now, eh?

18 thoughts on “D\’ye think that Frances Coppola will still speak to us oiks now?”

  1. Some of us have been avoiding speaking to her for 50 years!

    And on the young people going – it’s a repeat of the 1950s for Spain and Italy (and in the case of Ireland almost every decade from 1850 to 1970)

  2. @serf.

    Exactly. They often send money home as well.

    I’d have thought that it would actually be a fiscal blessing for the PIGS if their unemployed youth left to find jobs elsewhere.

    They will be quick enough to return when things pick up.

  3. Definitely a woman. Was on R4 Today a couple of a weeks ago, talking sense about banks.

    Of course some of the people leaving will not be unemployed. A key part of the problem is that it is not the unemployable who are leaving, but instead the more employable.

    Krugman’s point is that Europe needs a common fiscal area – eg Germans paying for Greek retirement. Was always going to be a hard sell.

  4. I’m sure Frances will still speak to us. She lacks the haughtiness of a certain North Norfolk based ‘influential economics blogger’. Perhaps we do need the ‘Courageous State’ after all? I am sure on the heels of capital controls will also come restrictions on the free movement of Labour. After all I don’t think the Korea DPR has the same problem with an exodus of Young people….

  5. I would imagine that pensions and care for the elderly dwarf unemployment benefits in these countries. Also as someone above said, those who emigrate are probably the most employable anyway.

  6. Frances is the only person who has ,very elegantly and thoroughly, convinced me, that I was wrong on this site on several occasions. So all those who still believe that banks don’t create money for example better hope that she’s not around when you utter such foolishness. An education to be put in your place by her,( he says with somewhat mixed feelings).

  7. Tim, I think you’re teasing the lady because I’m sure you recognize the quality of the economic analysis on her blog. What’s more she doesn’t use all those rude words that a certain economics blogger is famed for. And she can sing and look very elegant. No wonder you’re envious.

    Tim adds: Tsk. One teases people because one likes them. One, if one happens to be a far side of middle aged economics blogger, teases fragrant female economics bloggers because one can, despite the possession of a wife, imagine (hopefully!) long and interesting discussions of Ugandan affairs.

    One teases because one is interested, not because one is envious.

    Harumpfh. And now we return you to your regularly scheduled content. Which is actually, the reason that I blog. Precisely that others know more than I do and by expressing my beliefs and misunderstandings they are corrected. As Ms. Coppola has done on occasion (although I still insist that individual banks do not create money while the banking system does create credit) and as every and any commenter (except DCB Reed) has done on this blog on occasion.

  8. Fragrant and brainy Frances is not actually pointing out anything new. And she’s probably wrong.

    1. Remittances (H/T above) make up for the exodus. The Philhippines has been running an entire economy on these, not just from sailors either.

    2. Mass emigration is far better correlated with family size than educational achievement. So talk of a brain drain is drivel.

  9. @bloke in france, Sir, you are not a gentleman. I lay down my cloak over your puddle of criticism so the fragrant Frances may step over it.

  10. I have inelegantly shown DBC Reed to be wrong but he still fails to believe it. Frances Coppola has occasionally* shown me to be wrong and I have not only believed it but changed my opinion as a result. What is more impressive is that a self-opinionated little xxxx like Paul Krugman has acknowledged she is right.
    *Just once she took offence at a flippant comment and it turned that she, and my wife, and 90+% of those commenting on the issue (even most men) were wrong but I’ve been wrong slightly more often.

  11. So Much For Subtlety

    bloke in france – “1. Remittances (H/T above) make up for the exodus. The Philhippines has been running an entire economy on these, not just from sailors either.”

    I am not sure they make up for the exodus. How has the Philippines economy been doing lately? Compared to say South Korea or Singapore, both of whom were poorer than the Philippines as recently as 1965.

    I can think of three ways that remittances are bad for your economy. One is that they take the best and brightest out of your economy and send them somewhere else. Instead of building social capital and making money at home, they are building social capital elsewhere and sending money home. Take someone who moves to Saudi Arabia and opens a construction company. Instead of a web of local sub-contractors all benefiting, Saudi Arabia gets that instead.

    The second is they systematically distort your own economy. Why learn a skill that the Philippines needs when your aim is to be a nurse in London? How many nurses does the Philippines need? The majority of African students in Britain are said to be doing Social Work. They all want to work for INGOs. The majority of Chinese are doing Engineering. (I hope the majority of Indians are doing law. That will f**k them up nicely).

    The third is the Dutch disease. Remittances push the currency higher. Local exporters cannot compete. They go out of business.

    Here is my prediction – the Philippines will remain a remittance economy indefinitely. Poor, highly populated, poorly educated and undevelopped.

    “2. Mass emigration is far better correlated with family size than educational achievement. So talk of a brain drain is drivel.”

    That hardly applies to southern Europe with their 1.2 birthrates. But I expect you are right.

  12. So Much For Subtlety

    I agree with much of your analysis. However emigration and remittance economies are created by incompetent wanker politicians, who fail to create the conditions in which the departed could have thrived.

    Stopping people moving to other countries would not make local politicians any better, and would probably make them even worse.

  13. Serf, there is a counter-argument to that. If the enterprising folk cannot leave they might make their politicians do a bit better. This is akin to the argument that you should make the pushy middle classes send their kids to the sink comp so they will improve the sink comp for their own kids, benefiting the kids whose parents don’t give a monkey’s.

    I’m not saying I necessarily agree, though. I’m more of a fan of international competition, personally.

  14. So Much For Subtlety

    Serf – “Stopping people moving to other countries would not make local politicians any better, and would probably make them even worse.”

    I do not disagree with your diagnosis of the politics of the Philippines at all. And I am about to cite one of the worst (in a moral sense) economists of the 20th century – Albert Hirschman. Whose famous book Exit, Voice, and Loyalty made this exact point. People faced with a bad situation have two basic choices – they can leave or they can voice their objections and try to improve the situation. Hirschman is the sh!t who invented the idea that middle class children ought to be forced to attend state schools because then middle class parents would make sure they worked.

    Now obviously I think this idea is vile. But when applied to the Philippines it may make sense. After all, as long as the Philippines relies on its prostitutes, nurses, construction workers and jazz singers overseas, the government never has to get better. They can be as stupid as they want. But no matter how bad the government is, enough pressure from the inside can make a change. As it did even in the Soviet Union.

    For the Philippines own good, I hope the remittance economy comes to an end and the government fixes its own domestic problems.

    But they will not.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *