German Tax Payers’ Money Wasted By Federal Parliament

Trigger

The so called Enquete Kommission “Wachstum, Wohlstand, Lebensqualität - Wege zu nachhaltigem Wirtschaften und gesellschaftlichem Fortschritt in der Sozialen Marktwirtschaft” (a joint federal, parliamentary commission of elected representatives and university professors to investigate economic growth, prosperity, quality of life) just released their final report on 4/6/2013.

What Is In A Title

You would think that the title of this commission entails the research subject. However, if the title already reveals that the agenda is narrowed by bias and ideologically loaded terms, then what do you expect the result of such a commission to be like?

The title of the final report contains a series of questionable terms:

• “nachaltige[s] Wirtschaften” (sustainable economy): This is a faddish, amorphous term guided by environmentalism.
• “gesellschaftlichen Fortschritt” (societal progress): What about individual progress, freedom and responsibility?
• “Soziale Marktwirtschaft” (social market economy): One of those much abused terms of German postwar political discourse. Another name for the so called third way between socialism and free market economy. Whatever that may be?

Just A Short Excerpt

I don’t claim to have read the entire 844 page long report. So I limit myself to a very brief excerpt from this tome to give the reader a flavor. I would bet that the entire report is not much better than this excerpt.

On page 43 of the final report we read (emphasis added):

“Ludwig Erhard [father of the German Economic Miracle] hat dies treffend formuliert [an excerpt from his most famous book titled “Wohlstand fuer Alle”]:

„Wohlstand für alle und Wohlstand durch Wettbewerb gehören untrennbar zusammen; das erste Postulat kennzeichnet das Ziel, das zweite den Weg, der zu diesem Ziel führt.“9

Das zentrale Ziel der Politik ist also der Wohlstand aller Bürgerinnen und Bürger. Wirtschaftliches Wachstum dagegen ist kein politisches Ziel. Es ist vielmehr ein guter – wenn auch unvollkommener – Indikator dafür, wie sich die wirtschaftliche Situation und damit der materielle Wohlstand der Arbeitnehmerinnen und Arbeitnehmer sowie der Unternehmerinnen und Unternehmer im Durchschnitt verändert. Unberücksichtigt bleiben dabei insbesondere Verteilungsaspekte, die Entwicklung der nichtmateriellen Lebensqualität sowie die Erfordernisse der Nachhaltigkeit. So kann Wachstum auch bedeuten, dass nur wenige einen materiellen Fortschritt erfahren, während die wirtschaftliche Situation aller anderen stagniert”

For sake of brevity and lack of time I will not attempt her to translate this excerpt, but I intend to interpret it.

The great former federal minister of economics Ludwig Erhard in his seminal book clearly postulated the inseparable duality of economic growth and economic competition, but the authors of this report recognize only economic growth as an economic policy goal and explicitly deny economic competition such a role. One without the other, how foolish is that?

Sustainability like in sustainable economic growth is heralded as an essential requirement, which it is not. Notions of sustainability are born out of irrational fears.

The authors bemoan the possibility that economic growth benefits only a few individuals in their material well being. This kind of outcome is more probable if economic competition is constraint, e.g. by ever busy politicians meddling with the free market economy. This is one reason why economic competition is so fundamental to prevent such undesirable economic outcomes. How many German elected representatives or even professors understand this relationship?