Suchergebnisse

Monetary integration in the EC will continue with the desired hardening of the European Monetary System that is expected to lead to an EC central bank in the 1990s. Why has the European Monetary System been so successful and what role has the Deutsche Bundesbank played in monetary policy and the EMS in Europe? This book gives an assessment of the EMS developments and its stability record, analyzes the impact of German monetary unification and shows how financial market liberalization as well as the EC 1992 project affect the process of Economic and Monetary Union. The progress in the EMS is occuring in a period of both thorough changes in the U.K. and in European East-West relations and global economic changes. The problems of EC monetary union and EC central banking are discussed and questions of the transition phase of monetary policy are raised. The further progress of EMU - including the creation of an EC central bank - is analyzed both theoretically and from a political-economy perspective. Creating a common central bank and an EC currency raises new issues for the consistency of monetary and fiscal policy in Europe, where U.S. experiences provide valuable insights

AbstractSince 1991 there has been a reinforcement of the World Market Economy, not least since China and the, then new Russian Federation have joined the World Trade Organization and because of EU Eastern enlargement and ASEAN integration deepening, while the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations seemed to indicate stronger regional integration dynamics. With the Trump Administration, the situation has changed dramatically as President Trump is supportive of neither multilateralism in general nor of the EU, which is weakened through BREXIT, in particular. Trump's focus on the US merchandise trade balance deficit is ill-placed and import tariffs imposed on China seem to be excessive as the optimum tariff rate is miscalculated on the basis of the traditional formula – while a new adequate formula would include the role of sectoral US outward FDI stocks. Asia, the EU and the US could define fighting the Corona World Recession as a global public good, but the United States is weakened in the corona pandemic crisis; the EU is facing serious problems in avoiding a Euro Crisis 2 problem and the €750 billion EU loan package could undermine the Eurozone's stability while being inadequate to minimize the risk of a Euro Crisis 2. At the same time, the prospects for EU cooperation are declining due to political disappointment concerning the national corona pandemic policy in some member countries. An effective anti-corona pandemic policy would mean to organize a consistent EU-ASEAN cooperation or a G20 cooperation with a later extension to UN Organizations, including the IMF, the World Bank and the WHO. Post-corona, global governance could change strongly because of the long-term political scarring effects of the pandemic shock which could undermine EU and Western stability. Networked international leadership in support of multilateralism is an innovative – but difficult - option for EU-ASEAN-Mercosur.

AbstractThe novel coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic represents a major challenge for the world economy. While a detailed longer-term diffusion path of the new virus cannot be anticipated for individual countries, one may anticipate international supply shocks and declining GDP growth in many OECD countries and China in 2020; and one should expect falling asset prices in Asia, the United States and the European Union plus the United Kingdom – except for the price of risk-free government bonds. In the course of 2020/21 the US, the EU and the UK, as well as other countries, will face both an increasing number of infected patients as well as a higher case fatality ratio. Health care expenditures in the US could increase more than in the Eurozone and the EU in the medium term, a development that undermines the international competitiveness of the United States. The analysis suggests that per capita income is a positive function of the effective trade openness and of the new Global Health Security Index indicator from the NTI/Johns Hopkins University. A rising health care-GDP ratio in the US is equivalent to a rising US export tariff. As regards the coronavirus challenge, the ratio of acute care beds to the elderly in OECD countries shows considerable variation. Due to international tourism contraction alone, output growth in the Eurozone, the US and China can be expected to fall by about 1.6% in 2020. The COVID-19 challenge for the US Trump Administration is a serious one, since the lack of experts in the Administration will become more apparent in such a systemic stress situation – and this might well affect the November 2020 US presidential election which, in turn, would itself have considerable impacts on the UK and the EU27 as well as EU-UK trade negotiations. Integrating the health care sector into macroeconomics, which should include growth analysis, is an important task. The role of health quality - and health insurance coverage - for endogenous time horizons and economic welfare, respectively, is emphasized.

US-Präsident Donald Trump hat am 3. November 2020 zwar eine Niederlage erfahren, dennoch könnte der seit 2016 politisch in den USA herrschende Populismus als Mischung aus neuem Nationalismus und Protektionismus für einige Jahre andauern. Die US-Wahlen fanden unter besonderen Bedingungen statt: so löste der Corona-Schock einen weltweiten Wirtschaftsschock aus. ; The United States is characterised by a structural populism problem that persists even without Trump as president. Its economic policy is fundamentally contradictory. The US fiscal and deficit policy under Trump was considered risky even before the corona shock, while the aggressive US trade policy is a self-inflicted wound. If we look at effective lifetime income, Germany, France and the United States are on an equal footing. This is due in part to the lag in life expectancy in the US and the much higher health care costs - relative to GDP - in the American system. A transatlantic dialogue on reform would be worthwhile after the corona shock of 2020.

The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) epidemic represents a major challenge for the world economy. While a detailed longer-term diffusion path of the new virus cannot be anticipated for individual countries, one may anticipate international supply shocks and declining GDP growth in many OECD countries and China in 2020; and one should expect falling asset prices in Asia, the United States and the European Union plus the United Kingdom – except for the price of risk-free government bonds. In the course of 2020/21 the US, the EU and the UK, as well as other countries, will face both an increasing number of infected patients as well as a higher case fatality ratio. Health care expenditures in the US could increase more than in the Eurozone and the EU in the medium term, a development that undermines the international competitiveness of the United States. The analysis suggests that per capita income is a positive function of the effective trade openness and of the new Global Health Security Index indicator from the NTI/Johns Hopkins University. A rising health care-GDP ratio in the US is equivalent to a rising US export tariff. As regards the coronavirus challenge, the ratio of acute care beds to the elderly in OECD countries shows considerable variation. Due to international tourism contraction alone, output growth in the Eurozone, the US and China can be expected to fall by about 1.6% in 2020. The COVID-19 challenge for the US Trump Administration is a serious one, since the lack of experts in the Administration will become more apparent in such a systemic stress situation – and this might well affect the November 2020 US presidential election which, in turn, would itself have considerable impacts on the UK and the EU27 as well as EU-UK trade negotiations. Integrating the health care sector into macroeconomics, which should include growth analysis, is an important task. The role of health quality - and health insurance coverage - for endogenous time horizons and economic welfare, respectively, is emphasized.

The United States is characterised by a structural populism problem that persists even without Trump as president. Its economic policy is fundamentally contradictory. The US fiscal and deficit policy under Trump was considered risky even before the corona shock, while the aggressive US trade policy is a self-inflicted wound. If we look at effective lifetime income, Germany, France and the United States are on an equal footing. This is due in part to the lag in life expectancy in the US and the much higher health care costs - relative to GDP - in the American system. A transatlantic dialogue on reform would be worthwhile after the corona shock of 2020.

Since 1991 there has been a reinforcement of the World Market Economy, not least since China and the, then new Russian Federation have joined the World Trade Organization and because of EU Eastern enlargement and ASEAN integration deepening, while the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations seemed to indicate stronger regional integration dynamics. With the Trump Administration, the situation has changed dramatically as President Trump is supportive of neither multilateralism in general nor of the EU, which is weakened through BREXIT, in particular. Trump's focus on the US merchandise trade balance deficit is ill-placed and import tariffs imposed on China seem to be excessive as the optimum tariff rate is miscalculated on the basis of the traditional formula – while a new adequate formula would include the role of sectoral US outward FDI stocks. Asia, the EU and the US could define fighting the Corona World Recession as a global public good, but the United States is weakened in the corona pandemic crisis; the EU is facing serious problems in avoiding a Euro Crisis 2 problem and the €750 billion EU loan package could undermine the Eurozone's stability while being inadequate to minimize the risk of a Euro Crisis 2. At the same time, the prospects for EU cooperation are declining due to political disappointment concerning the national corona pandemic policy in some member countries. An effective anti-corona pandemic policy would mean to organize a consistent EU-ASEAN cooperation or a G20 cooperation with a later extension to UN Organizations, including the IMF, the World Bank and the WHO. Post-corona, global governance could change strongly because of the long-term political scarring effects of the pandemic shock which could undermine EU and Western stability. Networked international leadership in support of multilateralism is an innovative – but difficult - option for EU-ASEAN-Mercosur.

Brexit is not only a historical chapter of the British - EU relationship, but it also carries immense challenges for fi nancial market stability in the short and medium run for the 28 member states of the European Union. The scale of these challenges depends heavily on the outcome of EU-UK negotiations. The European Systemic Risk Board plays a critical role in macroprudential supervision, a crucial policy challenge for the EU. However, there are doubts as to whether it will fulfill its mandate. The EU27 faces major problems in terms of prudential supervision after Brexit since a very large part of their wholesale banking markets are in the UK and thus will not be regulated by the EU after 29 March 2019. Indications point to a considerable risk of a new transatlantic banking crisis in the future.