« January 2006 | Main | March 2006 »
February 28, 2006
Asking the easy questions
This weekend's Rzeczpospolita carries an interview with Leszek Balcerowicz, the man who administered economic "shock therapy" to Poland, freeing the market almost overnight in 1990. To some he is a bete noire; for others an economic genius. The interrogation was carried out by Slawomir Popowski and Dariusz Rosiak.
Balcerowicz invited the reader to look at developed countries with particularly high structural unemployment, a problem which mainly concerns, he says, three countries: Italy, France and Germany. Social interventionism by the state is the cause of the great social problem there that is unemployment. Quick as a flash Popowski gave the counter example of Sweden, while Rosiak pointed out that Germany absorbed communist East Germany and that unemployment is still concentrated in post-communist Germany (as it is in post-communist Poland).
Balcerowicz also blamed high unemployment in Poland on (among other things) failure to liberalise employment law. Once again Popowski supplied a counter example: Ireland, where workers' rights are far better protected than in Poland and unemployment far lower. Displaying the mastery of detail and ability to marshal the relevant facts that places him in the forefront of Polish journalism, he pointed out that a Polish labour inspector has the power to fine a company found exploiting workers only about 250 euros. In Latvia a rank and file inspector can levy a fine of up to 1,500 euros and his superior can hit the employer for 7,500. "Surely, Professor Balcerowicz," he asked, "in such conditions there is really no need to make labour law any more 'liberal'. Why demand any more 'flexibility' from workers when they can clearly be fired virtually without sanction?"
Actually, not all of the above is true. The interruptions by the intrepid journalists I made up. In fact Balcerowicz was permitted to trot out the usual banalities about the free market and liberalisation with no hindrance. This kind of reporting does no favours to anyone. Balcerowicz has a head on his shoulders and it's more than likely he could dispose of the objections I made above (that stuff about the labour inspectors is just something I picked up in the latest number of Polityka) but he comes out of the interview (chat?) looking like just another platitude-mouthing time-server.
Posted by hgrodsk at 07:39 PM | Comments (1)
February 26, 2006
Property Rights
I gather there is some concern in America about an “Arab” company taking control of their ports. I don’t see what the fuss is: what difference does the nationality of the shareholders make? The Polish government is also worried about foreign ownership, of banks, in particular. Apologies for the why-oh-why’s but why can’t capitalists accept the consequences of private ownership and the free flow of capital? If you allow private ownership of banks, ports, military research companies, governments etc… then you have to accept that the owners may have their own plans.
See Dennis the Peasant for some research on the topic.
Posted by hgrodsk at 09:20 PM | Comments (0)
February 24, 2006
Dead Souls Don't Vote
This post is a straightforward lift from the current issue of Nie (the by-line is “MB”), but it is irresistible so here goes: in the district of Jarocin the balance of power on the 19-strong district council is held by a dead man. Until the sudden death four months ago of a councillor Mieloszyk the lefties had 10 votes to 9. For a member’s mandate to lapse – even after death – the relevant motion must be passed by the council. If you know modern Poland or Nikolai Gogol you can guess the rest: the right wing councillors have for months voted against depriving the dead councillor of his place on the council, apparently preferring this paralysis to the possibility that the left wing might regain their majority of one.
Posted by hgrodsk at 08:57 PM | Comments (0)
February 23, 2006
Who Rules Poland, Part II
Following in the footsteps of Teresa Lubi?ska (kicked out of the ministry of finance for speaking the unspeakable) comes Stanis?awa Okularczyk, until recently the deputy minister for agriculture. While down in southern Poland she had the audacity to tell her voters:
The Warsaw set is laughing at you. Minister Jurgiel [her boss] does not understand the agricultural problems of Ma?opolska. … Lobbyists and special interest groups dominate in the ministry. It’s hard to find an honest person there.It is hard to square the nearly-ruling party’s harping on about restoring decency and honesty to Polish public life with their habit of sacking people for telling the truth.
Posted by hgrodsk at 08:51 PM | Comments (0)
February 19, 2006
Absolute Nonsense
The weekend's Rzeczpospolita, a serious Polish broadsheet, has a front page story headlined "How much will the Cheap State Cost?" It is a reference to the nearly-ruling party's pre-election promise to cut costs. The paper estimates that the planned nationalisation of banks and insurers will cost 30 billion zloties, new unemployment benefits will cost 10 billion zloties and so on.* In sum, the government's policies will cost up to 68 billion zloties.
The story is followed up in the paper's economics supplement and there is also a piece on page two which is called "commentary" to distinguish it - nominally only - from the article on the front page. Now, how many readers know offhand the size of Poland's budget? None? Well, that's too bad because nowhere in the three articles on the subject of the government's spending plans is any indication given of the relative size of the increased expenditure. Only absolute figures are given. So is 68 billion zloties a lot? Is it too much? Does it represent a 2% increase in expenditure? 10%? Maybe 25%? For all a Rzeczpospolita reader knows, it might be .0005%. In the "comment" piece Krzysztof Bie? says that the budget deficit will grow but not by how much.
This is precisely the kind of intellectual dishonesty that Dean Baker's Economic Reporting Review has been railing against in the US media for years. Essentially, Rzeczpospolita is telling you to take them on trust. They are holding back the information that would allow readers to make an informed decision on the wisdom of the economic policies being pursued by the government of Poland: trust us: we know better.
There is an old joke about communist economic reporting: it consisted of inscrutable reports along the lines of "steel production increased by 20,000 tonnes". Deprived of context, the figures are meaningless. Some habits die hard.
*(An aside: the unemployment benefits are for those who are unemployed through no fault of their own. The newspaper headline writers see fit to place the words "through no fault of their own" in inverted commas. Make of that what you will.)
Posted by hgrodsk at 08:01 PM | Comments (0)
February 14, 2006
Cloakroom Communism
“Of course, before Eastern Europe can really take off a generation of workers with the communist mentality will have to die off.” This is a cliché that has been kicking around these parts for at least the last fifteen years. In general, I’ve always been suspicious of it. It sounds a bit too much like the ritualistic public-servant bashing indulged in by consumers who expect clerks to be at their beck and call like a convenience shop. Also, it’s just a variation on the idiotic “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks” theme. Tell that to the sober fifty year old Polish welders keeping the west of Ireland’s economy afloat.
In particular cases, however, it is hard not to agree. Take cloakroom attendants, for instance. Often used to disguise unemployment in communist Poland, they still linger in some institutions, like libraries. Cloakroom attendants will often refuse to hang up your coat if it does not have a hook. You will see them grasping coats and jackets by the collar and searching furrow-browed for a little loop of fabric that will enable them to hang up the garment. To save these heroes of work the rigours of this fruitless search some cloakrooms even have signs sternly announcing that “coats without hooks will not be accepted.”
What do you say to an adult human being who tells you he cannot hang up your coat because it has no hook? Do you make a fool of yourself and patronise him by attempting to show how it is done? Teach an old dog old tricks? Do you make a scene? Waiters spit in the soup – what do cloakroom attendants do? Slash your pockets? Put discrete cigarette holes in your hood?
If you are thinking of going to Poland to search in archives go in summer or sew a loop of fabric onto your collar because otherwise the library will not let you in.
Posted by hgrodsk at 11:09 AM | Comments (1)
February 01, 2006
Voices Passive and Active
Those of us misfortunate or misguided enough to have dealings with Microsoft’s word processing programme will be aware of Bill Gates’s campaign against the passive voice. (I’ll leave aside Microsoft’s cretinous insistence on commas before all relative pronouns.) But the passive voice is coming under attack from other quarters too.
Into my hands has fallen an English syllabus from an unnamed Polish university (note to grammarians: the passive voice is often used to hide the agent of the action). My astonishment can be imagined when I read that Polish students of English are being taught that the passive voice is used to keep the reader at arm’s length. It is seen as a sign of tension in the writer. Furthermore, it is apparently believed by the author of the syllabus that the passive is used by liars, ignoramuses and people who are ashamed of themselves. The use of the passive is to be stopped!
Elsewhere in the document it is stated that verbs should carry the meaning of sentences.
Oh really?
Posted by hgrodsk at 04:02 PM | Comments (0)