E-stonia success hailed by the Guardian
Estland
time by the Guardian
http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1648381,00.html
lora...@cs.com
"In a relatively short time, Estonia has developed an impressive array
of electronic public services. Last month, it used e-voting in its
local elections for the first time, allowing voters to post their
ballot forms online. "Estonia is the only country to have had
whole-country e-elections," says Laar. "The government session room is
still the only paperless government working online."
..Software is software..
There is data input and there is data output. Anything happening in
between is controlled by software that doessomething with the data
what its writer wishes it to do. I wish the EU would let me write some
of their software.
This bring to mind the recent scandal of one of Estonia's best known
software writer who was recently indicted for criminal malfeasance by
intercepting business information and profiting greatly by it. He was
intercepting and selling business information that would be released
one month later.
martin
Check is article from the Financial Times, where Estonia is hailed as
the best place to run a business in the whole of Europe:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/bcb7db16-5c8e-11da-af92-0000779e2340.html
<quote>
Peter Woolsey is a British entrepreneur who has set up businesses all
over Europe. He says the best location is Estonia, where he now runs a
software business, returning to his home near Oxford on weekends.
The Estonian tax regime - along with its infrastructure, efficiency and
"can do" spirit - helps explain his preference for Estonia over
Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, France, Denmark, the UK and Finland,
where he also owns or has owned businesses.
<unquote>
Regards,
Martin
TomiA
have recently received international praise for almost exactly opposite
reasons, Finland for being a welfare state and yet compatitive, Estonia
for econmical liberarism. Which one of the two countries has to give in,
will Estonia become a welfare state like Finland or does Finland have to
give up welfare state?
J. Anderson
"TomiA" <I...@uot.invalid> wrote in message
news:2B%hf.223$sG3...@read3.inet.fi...
> Which one of the two countries has to give in, will Estonia become a
> welfare state like Finland or does Finland have to give up welfare state?
'Yes' on both counts.
martin
Finland will give in. The Financial Times newspaper is already
predicting Finland will give up it's social model in this article:
"Estonia forces Finns to reassess social model"
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/65175a94-5c48-11da-af92-0000779e2340.html
Regards,
Martin
Estland
experiments?
vello
Estland wrote:
> where the hell could we get all the money for wellfare state
> experiments?
There is one point - despite being less effective in short-term,
welfare state will give opportunity to get good eduation for bigger
part of society, so hypothetically all bright brains will be find out,
what gives results in long term. But I think in this case brutally
trivial law will do - truth is somewhere in the middle. btw, Estonia is
extr. liberal in compare with Scandinavia, but for sure antagonist to
welfare state - former US ambassador in Estonia (forgot his name
unhappily) gives answer about biggest differences between US and
Estonian society: "no homeless folks under bridges".
J. Anderson
"vello" <vell...@hot.ee> wrote in message
news:1133091434....@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
This is what I expect will happen. The extremes will move towards each
other. When it comes to the welfare model put into practice, Finland is not
the extreme -- Sweden is. Finland has tried to avoid the worst excesses,
using Sweden both as guidance and as the warning example. (The simple truth
is, of course, that we didn't have the money to go as far and as fast as
Sweden did.)
I believe that with the growing tax revenue that automatically will ensue
from an expanding and successful economy, the Estonian state will produce
more services for its citizens. There is absolutely no more profitable
investment sector in the long run than education. And if you want to retain
a decent societal environment, you'd better provide health and old-age
services as well.
vello
Sorry for mistyping in my last message. It was supposed to be
"...Scandinavia, but for sure NOT antagonist...".
In fact there is not so much wrong with education in Estonia -
remember, country is runned by 25-35 year politicians with their kids
in schoolage. More problems are with health care and expecially with
social guarantees for elderly. Hope it will be better in 20 years when
I will retire:-)
gricer
Unfortunately, Estonia is always used as an 'example' of successful
economic transition by transitologists, free market airheads, and
assorted antlanticist neo-liberals. It was ever thus. The trail of
hagiography of this kind goes back to Mart Laar (remember him?) who
made a kind of cottage industry out of this kind of propaganda.
The truth is much more complex, however. The real transition catalyst
was the rapid growth of of an independent and entrepreneurial service
sector. This would have happened anyway, irrespective of the policies
of the administration at the time. Why? Because of Estonia's strategic
position - its closeness to Finland and its function as a transit
economy, serving Russia and the CIS.
There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
response to events, not as part of some master plan.
This is not to disparage what has been achieved. Far from it! But one
must look at areas of the economy where there is still no coherent
development strategy, and realise that one cannot persist in quoting
these free-market myths for ever....
Dr. Barry Worthington
martin
gricer wrote:
> TomiA wrote:
> > Estland wrote:
> > > Another fairy-tail story on the so called "E-stonia" phenomenon this
> > > time by the Guardian
> > > http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1648381,00.html
> > >
> > It's interesting that two naighbouring countiries, Estonia and Finland,
> > have recently received international praise for almost exactly opposite
> > reasons, Finland for being a welfare state and yet compatitive, Estonia
> > for econmical liberarism. Which one of the two countries has to give in,
> > will Estonia become a welfare state like Finland or does Finland have to
> > give up welfare state?
>
> Unfortunately, Estonia is always used as an 'example' of successful
> economic transition by transitologists, free market airheads, and
> assorted antlanticist neo-liberals. It was ever thus. The trail of
> hagiography of this kind goes back to Mart Laar (remember him?) who
> made a kind of cottage industry out of this kind of propaganda.
>
> The truth is much more complex, however. The real transition catalyst
> was the rapid growth of of an independent and entrepreneurial service
> sector. This would have happened anyway, irrespective of the policies
> of the administration at the time.
So zero corporate tax on reinvested profit and flat tax rate has no
effect at all?
> Why? Because of Estonia's strategic
> position - its closeness to Finland and its function as a transit
> economy, serving Russia and the CIS.
How is that possible, given that Russia has imposed double tariffs upon
Estonian goods and services until very recently?
>
> There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
> the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
> response to events, not as part of some master plan.
So you reckon that Estonia would have remained with the Ruble, except
for some event forcing their hand?
>
> This is not to disparage what has been achieved. Far from it! But one
> must look at areas of the economy where there is still no coherent
> development strategy, and realise that one cannot persist in quoting
> these free-market myths for ever....
Looks like the Russia and Eastern Europe was duped by this Estonian
myth, introducing their own flat rate tax. Gullible people.
Regards,
Martin
vello
Estonia have been extremely lucky place to be by me - rapid
developments, new ideas, fast decicion making. Sure there is a lot of
things to do yet, but I'm not so pessimistic about "economy with no
coherent development strategy". Don't know what you had in mind, but if
something not works, we just probably don't need it?
martin
Perhaps he had in mind a centrally planned economy?
Regards,
Martin
gricer
martin wrote:
> gricer wrote:
> > TomiA wrote:
> > > Estland wrote:
> > > > Another fairy-tail story on the so called "E-stonia" phenomenon this
> > > > time by the Guardian
> > > > http://society.guardian.co.uk/e-public/story/0,,1648381,00.html
> > > >
> > > It's interesting that two naighbouring countiries, Estonia and Finland,
> > > have recently received international praise for almost exactly opposite
> > > reasons, Finland for being a welfare state and yet compatitive, Estonia
> > > for econmical liberarism. Which one of the two countries has to give in,
> > > will Estonia become a welfare state like Finland or does Finland have to
> > > give up welfare state?
> >
> > Unfortunately, Estonia is always used as an 'example' of successful
> > economic transition by transitologists, free market airheads, and
> > assorted antlanticist neo-liberals. It was ever thus. The trail of
> > hagiography of this kind goes back to Mart Laar (remember him?) who
> > made a kind of cottage industry out of this kind of propaganda.
> >
> > The truth is much more complex, however. The real transition catalyst
> > was the rapid growth of of an independent and entrepreneurial service
> > sector. This would have happened anyway, irrespective of the policies
> > of the administration at the time.
>
> So zero corporate tax on reinvested profit and flat tax rate has no
> effect at all?
Not as much as you think. The policy is certainly not solely
responsible for Estonia's economic development. Flat tax rates are
easier to collect in an economy where there is a large 'black' or
'grey' sector. But, in the lonfg term, they are socially divisive....
> > Why? Because of Estonia's strategic
> > position - its closeness to Finland and its function as a transit
> > economy, serving Russia and the CIS.
>
> How is that possible, given that Russia has imposed double tariffs upon
> Estonian goods and services until very recently?
You are not looking in the right places. Chart the growth of the oil
and grain traffic, the strategic positioning of Western companies in
Estonia (a stable base from which to penetrate the CIS), and the cosy
relationships with Russian FIG's.......
> >
> > There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
> > the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
> > response to events, not as part of some master plan.
>
> So you reckon that Estonia would have remained with the Ruble, except
> for some event forcing their hand?
Well......that was the IMF advice. But the introduction of the Kroon
was an attempt to escape rouble inflation.
> >
> > This is not to disparage what has been achieved. Far from it! But one
> > must look at areas of the economy where there is still no coherent
> > development strategy, and realise that one cannot persist in quoting
> > these free-market myths for ever....
>
> Looks like the Russia and Eastern Europe was duped by this Estonian
> myth, introducing their own flat rate tax. Gullible people.
It was an Atlanticist myth, Martin. And some people are gullible.
Dr. Barry Worthington
>
> Regards,
> Martin
vello
gricer wrote:
> martin wrote:
> >
> > So zero corporate tax on reinvested profit and flat tax rate has no
> > effect at all?
>
> Not as much as you think. The policy is certainly not solely
> responsible for Estonia's economic development. Flat tax rates are
> easier to collect in an economy where there is a large 'black' or
> 'grey' sector. But, in the lonfg term, they are socially divisive....
If it will happen, it is possible to make corrections in taxing. But
they are not flat anyway - up to some amount one don't pay taxes at
all. For folks with smaller income, that "gratis part" in of higher %
then for rich ones, so we can't talk about totally flat tax. (btw, in
real life "flat" means you pay 10 times more if you earn 10 times more
despite you hardly use services of civil sector 10 times more then
other guy.)
>
> > > Why? Because of Estonia's strategic
> > > position - its closeness to Finland and its function as a transit
> > > economy, serving Russia and the CIS.
> >
> > How is that possible, given that Russia has imposed double tariffs upon
> > Estonian goods and services until very recently?
>
> You are not looking in the right places. Chart the growth of the oil
> and grain traffic, the strategic positioning of Western companies in
> Estonia (a stable base from which to penetrate the CIS), and the cosy
> relationships with Russian FIG's.......
Then show these "right places". Transit is important for railway, but
for whole economy? And here is not so much (or at all) companies
targeting Russian market. Reason was noted by Martin - double tariffs
and political climate had made economic ties with Russia an risky
effort. Being western investor I hardly put my Russian-targeted
business in Baltics coz Russia takes Baltics as "unfriendly" area.
>
> > >
> > > There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
> > > the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
> > > response to events, not as part of some master plan.
Do you read estonian? If so, go and read newspapers from 1988 - 1992.
Discussion was public and open. Works to create own currency started in
1986, immediately when "perestroika" made such discussions possible.
Decicion to tie kroon with DEM was reflection to public will to have
"hard currency", not papers falling down day-by-day. Also,
privatizations were pare of general strategy pointing (idealistically
probably) that market makes improvements in economy better and faster
then govt clerks probably keen to corruption (we must remember hughe
income gap back then. If you give and video recorder to somebody as
"gift", your gift was worth of one year salary of an estonian).
> >
> > So you reckon that Estonia would have remained with the Ruble, except
> > for some event forcing their hand?
>
> Well......that was the IMF advice. But the introduction of the Kroon
> was an attempt to escape rouble inflation.
Foolish. For a lot of years before kroon, anybody was talking about
kroon as a key element in walking out of soviet economy.
>
> > >
> > > This is not to disparage what has been achieved. Far from it! But one
> > > must look at areas of the economy where there is still no coherent
> > > development strategy, and realise that one cannot persist in quoting
> > > these free-market myths for ever....
> >
> > Looks like the Russia and Eastern Europe was duped by this Estonian
> > myth, introducing their own flat rate tax. Gullible people.
>
> It was an Atlanticist myth, Martin. And some people are gullible.
It was painted Atlantic by some left-wing politicians. As I noted in
other post, there is no homeless folks under bridges in Estonia and for
sure Estonia is not yankee-fan like Poland. Just before you can divide
something, you must own something - and back in 1992 our pockets were
really empty. Do you agree truth is somewhere in the middle:
north-european socialism is just too expencive, yankee-style liberalism
too brutal towards "middle man". I think Europe will be after 20 years
running economy less liberal then US but more liberal then today - say
something Estonia have for today.
gricer
The revenue from transit traffic to and from Russia alone accounted for
30% of GDP in 1995, a key point in the transition process.
>And here is not so much (or at all) companies
> targeting Russian market.
That isn't strictly true. It was certainly the case in the key period
of transition, and you should not believe the 'official' point of view
for post 1998. The following is from Pravda.
18:56 2002-02-21
Estonian Food Exports Take Run-around Routes to Russia
There are more foods exported to Russia from Estonia than is officially
admitted, Estonian producers using run-around routes, such as free
trade zones, to escape double taxation. According to the Tallinn
Business News newspaper, before the crisis of 1998, 40% of
Estonian-produced foods were exported to Russia, the figure later to
fall to 4%. The crisis caused many Estonian producers of foods to
reduce output or even go out of business completely.
In the meantime, the newspaper continues, Estonian food exports to
Russia gradually return to where they were previously, although this is
missed by official statistics.
>Reason was noted by Martin - double tariffs
> and political climate had made economic ties with Russia an risky
> effort. Being western investor I hardly put my Russian-targeted
> business in Baltics coz Russia takes Baltics as "unfriendly" area.
> >
> > > >
> > > > There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
> > > > the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
> > > > response to events, not as part of some master plan.
>
> Do you read estonian? If so, go and read newspapers from 1988 - 1992.
I regularly visited Estonia in the first transition period, and lived
in Tallinn (in a flat in the Writers House) for a while.
> Discussion was public and open. Works to create own currency started in
> 1986, immediately when "perestroika" made such discussions possible.
You are talking aboute the IME Programme. Although people like Siim
Kallas did do some prepatory work, the decision belonged to the post
independence period. It had more to do with a desire to escape the
inflationary pressures of the rouble zone than anything else.
> Decicion to tie kroon with DEM was reflection to public will to have
> "hard currency", not papers falling down day-by-day.
The public didn't want inflation, either.
>Also,
> privatizations were pare of general strategy pointing (idealistically
> probably) that market makes improvements in economy better and faster
> then govt clerks probably keen to corruption (we must remember hughe
> income gap back then. If you give and video recorder to somebody as
> "gift", your gift was worth of one year salary of an estonian).
There was no general strategy. Privatisation depended upon the policies
and aims of whoever owned the assets. Some of it was simple to
accomplish. Other parts were more problematic (the saga of Estonian
Air, for example). It was a hotch potch of policies and motives.
Actually, a large part of the early entrepreneurial succees had nothing
to do with privatisation, involving leasing of assets or partnerships -
such as the Tallinn Municipality and FINEST Hotels.
> > > So you reckon that Estonia would have remained with the Ruble, except
> > > for some event forcing their hand?
> >
> > Well......that was the IMF advice. But the introduction of the Kroon
> > was an attempt to escape rouble inflation.
> Foolish. For a lot of years before kroon, anybody was talking about
> kroon as a key element in walking out of soviet economy.
But not the IMF.
> >
> > > >
> > > > This is not to disparage what has been achieved. Far from it! But one
> > > > must look at areas of the economy where there is still no coherent
> > > > development strategy, and realise that one cannot persist in quoting
> > > > these free-market myths for ever....
> > >
> > > Looks like the Russia and Eastern Europe was duped by this Estonian
> > > myth, introducing their own flat rate tax. Gullible people.
> >
> > It was an Atlanticist myth, Martin. And some people are gullible.
>
> It was painted Atlantic by some left-wing politicians.
Who happened to be?
Mart Laar said he had two heroes - Mrs. Thatcher and the lead singer of
Guns N' Roses (whose name escapes me).
>As I noted in
> other post, there is no homeless folks under bridges in Estonia
There are still plenty of poor people, though.
>and for
> sure Estonia is not yankee-fan like Poland.
Estonians do not go in for such gestures. But there are plenty of
Harvard airheads left amongst the political elite.
J>ust before you can divide
> something, you must own something - and back in 1992 our pockets were
> really empty. Do you agree truth is somewhere in the middle:
> north-european socialism is just too expencive, yankee-style liberalism
> too brutal towards "middle man". I think Europe will be after 20 years
> running economy less liberal then US but more liberal then today - say
> something Estonia have for today.
No. I think that Estonia will eventually be influenced by the
'Scandinavian Model'. The growth of 'Tallsinki' will see to that.
Dr. Barry Worthington
martin
Cite? The figures I have seen, published by the Bank of Estonia, show
that income from the total transport/storage sector has never exceeded
15% of GDP between 1992 to 2004. The proportion of the
transport/storage sector dedicated to transit traffic is certainly less
that 15%.
>
>
> >And here is not so much (or at all) companies
> > targeting Russian market.
>
> That isn't strictly true. It was certainly the case in the key period
> of transition, and you should not believe the 'official' point of view
> for post 1998. The following is from Pravda.
Dr. Worthington, are you really claiming that figures published by the
tabloid "Pravda" are more credible than the official figures published,
say, by the Bank of Estonia?
Regards,
Martin
vello
> vello wrote:
> > gricer wrote:
Seems too much by far for me - can you show your sources?
>
>
> >And here is not so much (or at all) companies
> > targeting Russian market.
>
> That isn't strictly true. It was certainly the case in the key period
> of transition, and you should not believe the 'official' point of view
> for post 1998. The following is from Pravda.
>
> 18:56 2002-02-21
>
> Estonian Food Exports Take Run-around Routes to Russia
>
> There are more foods exported to Russia from Estonia than is officially
> admitted, Estonian producers using run-around routes, such as free
> trade zones, to escape double taxation. According to the Tallinn
> Business News newspaper, before the crisis of 1998, 40% of
> Estonian-produced foods were exported to Russia, the figure later to
> fall to 4%. The crisis caused many Estonian producers of foods to
> reduce output or even go out of business completely.
>
> In the meantime, the newspaper continues, Estonian food exports to
> Russia gradually return to where they were previously, although this is
> missed by official statistics.
Estonian "collective Farms" (colkhozes) remaining from soviet time are
hardly "western companies in Estonia, targeted to Russian market". I
read a lot of things about Estonia in Pravda and from hearth I don't
advise to take that paper too seriously.
About Estonian agriculture -it is not so important branch in our
economy. You can't compete with Spain our South France under Stella
Polaris.
>
>
>
> >Reason was noted by Martin - double tariffs
> > and political climate had made economic ties with Russia an risky
> > effort. Being western investor I hardly put my Russian-targeted
> > business in Baltics coz Russia takes Baltics as "unfriendly" area.
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
> > > > > the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
> > > > > response to events, not as part of some master plan.
> >
> > Do you read estonian? If so, go and read newspapers from 1988 - 1992.
>
> I regularly visited Estonia in the first transition period, and lived
> in Tallinn (in a flat in the Writers House) for a while
And read russian newspapers here?:-)
>
> > Discussion was public and open. Works to create own currency started in
> > 1986, immediately when "perestroika" made such discussions possible.
>
> You are talking aboute the IME Programme. Although people like Siim
> Kallas did do some prepatory work, the decision belonged to the post
> independence period. It had more to do with a desire to escape the
> inflationary pressures of the rouble zone than anything else.
Self-confidence is a good thing indeed, but this time you are totally
wrong. Idea to cut economy out from SU rotten one is as old as
possibility not only think but also speak this way. Not Siim Kallas
made prepatory work but Rein Otsasson, first president of Estonian Bank
- Kallas come in later. Buyt if you was in Estonia 1988-1992 and you
talk about inflation -beating as key motive behind kroon - then you
just don't understand nothing what happens around you.
Key motive for that period was to build independence by any reasonable
way possible. For "people from street" own money was step towards
independence, for decicion-makers - door to western investments, way to
show credibility of Estonia, risky but unavoidable step to cut ties
with soviet economy. Decicions were made public in moment it was
politically possible/profitable, but master plan for sure exists. I was
close to decition-making this period as Rein Otsasson was close friend
of my father (author of Estonian import-export law) and some
strategical discussions take often place in our home - and Siim Kallas
works 10 meters from my room in "Newspapers House". So I see and hear
much more back then then some foreign journalist may had discover.
>
> > Decicion to tie kroon with DEM was reflection to public will to have
> > "hard currency", not papers falling down day-by-day.
>
> The public didn't want inflation, either.
Again you show that you can't get close to dominant feelings in
Estonian society back then. Economy and personal welfare was of little
importance these says - popular slogan was "we can live on potato peels
- but we want to live free". (Strange today nobody want to remember
about potato peels:-)). 1988-1992 was period of real chance that our
kids will grow in freedom and economy was not the first priority.
>
> >Also,
> > privatizations were pare of general strategy pointing (idealistically
> > probably) that market makes improvements in economy better and faster
> > then govt clerks probably keen to corruption (we must remember hughe
> > income gap back then. If you give and video recorder to somebody as
> > "gift", your gift was worth of one year salary of an estonian).
>
> There was no general strategy. Privatisation depended upon the policies
> and aims of whoever owned the assets. Some of it was simple to
> accomplish. Other parts were more problematic (the saga of Estonian
> Air, for example). It was a hotch potch of policies and motives.
>
> Actually, a large part of the early entrepreneurial succees had nothing
> to do with privatisation, involving leasing of assets or partnerships -
> such as the Tallinn Municipality and FINEST Hotels.
>
> > > > So you reckon that Estonia would have remained with the Ruble, except
> > > > for some event forcing their hand?
> > >
> > > Well......that was the IMF advice. But the introduction of the Kroon
> > > was an attempt to escape rouble inflation.
> > Foolish. For a lot of years before kroon, anybody was talking about
> > kroon as a key element in walking out of soviet economy.
>
> But not the IMF.
IMF was talking in way most decicion-makers in West: their main goal
was keep developments in SU/Russia under control, fate of small border
countries was not so important for them. Also, fr West Estonia was this
time just a piece of Soviet Union and IMF looks for solutions for us as
for a piece of SU - something that was anthagonistic for our own
targets to show Estonia as part of West just spending some period under
Soviet occupation. By no means we don't want to see our future in
folder "post-SU economical space"and this way we can't just eat IMF
ideas (there were officcials from IMF having good ties in Estonia and
understanding well what really happens here, but general IMF policy was
planned on principle of one post-soviet economical space).
>
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > This is not to disparage what has been achieved. Far from it! But one
> > > > > must look at areas of the economy where there is still no coherent
> > > > > development strategy, and realise that one cannot persist in quoting
> > > > > these free-market myths for ever....
> > > >
> > > > Looks like the Russia and Eastern Europe was duped by this Estonian
> > > > myth, introducing their own flat rate tax. Gullible people.
> > >
> > > It was an Atlanticist myth, Martin. And some people are gullible.
> >
> > It was painted Atlantic by some left-wing politicians.
>
> Who happened to be?
In Finland they are mostly fat trade union leaders dreaming about
monopoly and fighting free competition in labour markets.
>
> Mart Laar said he had two heroes - Mrs. Thatcher and the lead singer of
> Guns N' Roses (whose name escapes me).
Mart Laar was fantastic prime fby me - without tandem Meri-Laar,
Estonia would have done nothing probably. If you want to search real
basis of Estonian success - it is our self-esteem. It was not so easy
to have self-esteem having ten bucks in pocket. But effective, risky
(and showy:-)) way they used to run country brings rapidly stories
about our "tiger economy" - and helps us to get our self-esteem back.
>
>
> >As I noted in
> > other post, there is no homeless folks under bridges in Estonia
>
> There are still plenty of poor people, though.
There are still plenty of poor people in any country. Estonia is
relatively poor in compare with Scandinavia - and relatively rich if to
compare with all other world exept Europe and North America. 15 years
ago our incomes were 3-4 times lower then in Bulgaria-Romania, 6-8
times less then in Poland or hungary. Today things are a bit different,
so in general noone can seriouslt talk that we have not bees
successful. We do have problems with incomes of retired people - but
anyway they get more then in countries what have the same living
standard 15 years ago.
>
>
> >and for
> > sure Estonia is not yankee-fan like Poland.
>
> Estonians do not go in for such gestures. But there are plenty of
> Harvard airheads left amongst the political elite.
There are no ideal models of society in the world. Estonian model is a
bit right from Scandinavia, a bit left from US. If to look at GDP
growth that solution have been good for Estonia at the moment - if
situation will change, we a open to make adjustments immediately.
>
>
> J>ust before you can divide
> > something, you must own something - and back in 1992 our pockets were
> > really empty. Do you agree truth is somewhere in the middle:
> > north-european socialism is just too expencive, yankee-style liberalism
> > too brutal towards "middle man". I think Europe will be after 20 years
> > running economy less liberal then US but more liberal then today - say
> > something Estonia have for today.
>
> No. I think that Estonia will eventually be influenced by the
> 'Scandinavian Model'. The growth of 'Tallsinki' will see to that.
Scandinavian model is admired by 90% of Estonians - but with worsening
demographical situation will Europe afford it in years to come? Some
European nations have granted few more years of welfare to own citizens
with importing cheap labour force from third world - but as you know it
bring new problems - we see it in France now. I vote with both hands
for as much welfare state as possible - but how much is possible after,
say, 20 years?
gricer
When they accord with my personal experience and other sources, yes.
I have long experience with the problems of Estonian 'official'
statistics.
gricer
Sorry, I missed this in the last posting. Try The Baltic Times, 18 -24
April, 1996, p.12.
Dr. Barry Worthington
vello
gricer wrote:
>
> When they accord with my personal experience and other sources, yes.
> I have long experience with the problems of Estonian 'official'
> statistics.
>
> Dr. Barry Worthington
>
Poor man,
do you have even small idea about how Estonian society works? There is
no "official Estonia" trying to whitewash statistics etc. Why? Coz due
we don't have stabile majority force among parties, political battle
about votes is alvays hot. So it is not imaginable that party at power
at the moment will put "wrong" statistics for open sources - it would
be political suicide coz all other political forces would use it as
clear show that there are bunch of liars sitting in Toompea, no matter
is it statistics about traffic casualities, egg production or transit
incomes. What they sometimes try to hide are their own expences as high
rank officials - but results are mostly miserable as opposition have
"his guys" in govt accounting department also.
With knowledge just russian and no local language it is quite hopeless
to have some real picture about developments here. You use
automatically stereotypes you got with SU for this part of World - Old
Brother sitting somewhere behind democratic uppet facade and talking
just what is profitable to him. It's not case for Estonia what is
extremely open society (hm, not thanks to high political culture but
probably thanks to lack of it). I work for Finnish-owned company and
almost all my partners on northern shore of the gulf are sure that
Estonia is more open then Finland. You may ask the same about your
friends starting with Eugene.
gricer
vello wrote:
> gricer wrote:
>
> >
> > When they accord with my personal experience and other sources, yes.
> > I have long experience with the problems of Estonian 'official'
> > statistics.
> >
> > Dr. Barry Worthington
> >
> Poor man,
> do you have even small idea about how Estonian society works? There is
> no "official Estonia" trying to whitewash statistics etc. Why? Coz due
> we don't have stabile majority force among parties, political battle
> about votes is alvays hot. So it is not imaginable that party at power
> at the moment will put "wrong" statistics for open sources - it would
> be political suicide coz all other political forces would use it as
> clear show that there are bunch of liars sitting in Toompea, no matter
> is it statistics about traffic casualities, egg production or transit
> incomes.
I am not talking about that at all. So I'll give you an eaxample. When
I was researching in Tallinn (in the 1990s), I had a lot of
converstions with people at the Estonian Tourist Board. (I later did
some work for them, but that's another story.) One of their problems
was a lack of accuracy in tourism statistics. This was because they
came from a variety of sources, and each had their own categories and
method of counting. The result was a dog's dinner - they were unusable.
(At one point the ETB and the Border Administration "agreed to
differ".Oddly enough, the people with the best data was the Parnu
Development Council.)
>What they sometimes try to hide are their own expences as high
> rank officials - but results are mostly miserable as opposition have
> "his guys" in govt accounting department also.
Yes, but a great deal of economic activity in the 'black' sector
doubtless goes unrecorded.
> With knowledge just russian and no local language it is quite hopeless
> to have some real picture about developments here.
Don't be silly. My knowledge of Estonian is rudimentory, and is used
for the sake of politeness. Everyone who is involved in international
business activity speaks English - they have to!
> You use
> automatically stereotypes you got with SU for this part of World - Old
> Brother sitting somewhere behind democratic uppet facade and talking
> just what is profitable to him.
And where did I say that?
>It's not case for Estonia what is
> extremely open society
Of course it is! But what does that have to do with my critique of
transition?
>(hm, not thanks to high political culture but
> probably thanks to lack of it). I work for Finnish-owned company and
> almost all my partners on northern shore of the gulf are sure that
> Estonia is more open then Finland. You may ask the same about your
> friends starting with Eugene.
I don't think anyone would disagree! But what is the point that you are
trying to make?
Dr. Barry Worthington
gricer
I've done that in another posting.
> >
> >
> > >And here is not so much (or at all) companies
> > > targeting Russian market.
> >
> > That isn't strictly true. It was certainly the case in the key period
> > of transition, and you should not believe the 'official' point of view
> > for post 1998. The following is from Pravda.
> >
> > 18:56 2002-02-21
> >
> > Estonian Food Exports Take Run-around Routes to Russia
> >
> > There are more foods exported to Russia from Estonia than is officially
> > admitted, Estonian producers using run-around routes, such as free
> > trade zones, to escape double taxation. According to the Tallinn
> > Business News newspaper, before the crisis of 1998, 40% of
> > Estonian-produced foods were exported to Russia, the figure later to
> > fall to 4%. The crisis caused many Estonian producers of foods to
> > reduce output or even go out of business completely.
> >
> > In the meantime, the newspaper continues, Estonian food exports to
> > Russia gradually return to where they were previously, although this is
> > missed by official statistics.
>
> Estonian "collective Farms" (colkhozes) remaining from soviet time are
> hardly "western companies in Estonia, targeted to Russian market". I
> read a lot of things about Estonia in Pravda and from hearth I don't
> advise to take that paper too seriously.
> About Estonian agriculture -it is not so important branch in our
> economy. You can't compete with Spain our South France under Stella
> Polaris.
The piece wasn't talking about agriculture, but food processing,
wholesale, and districution.
> >
> >
> > >Reason was noted by Martin - double tariffs
> > > and political climate had made economic ties with Russia an risky
> > > effort. Being western investor I hardly put my Russian-targeted
> > > business in Baltics coz Russia takes Baltics as "unfriendly" area.
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
> > > > > > the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
> > > > > > response to events, not as part of some master plan.
> > >
> > > Do you read estonian? If so, go and read newspapers from 1988 - 1992.
> >
> > I regularly visited Estonia in the first transition period, and lived
> > in Tallinn (in a flat in the Writers House) for a while
>
> And read russian newspapers here?:-)
Why should I do that when I could interview Estonians?
> >
> > > Discussion was public and open. Works to create own currency started in
> > > 1986, immediately when "perestroika" made such discussions possible.
> >
> > You are talking aboute the IME Programme. Although people like Siim
> > Kallas did do some prepatory work, the decision belonged to the post
> > independence period. It had more to do with a desire to escape the
> > inflationary pressures of the rouble zone than anything else.
>
> Self-confidence is a good thing indeed, but this time you are totally
> wrong. Idea to cut economy out from SU rotten one is as old as
> possibility not only think but also speak this way. Not Siim Kallas
> made prepatory work but Rein Otsasson, first president of Estonian Bank
> - Kallas come in later. Buyt if you was in Estonia 1988-1992 and you
> talk about inflation -beating as key motive behind kroon - then you
> just don't understand nothing what happens around you.
Why?
>
> Key motive for that period was to build independence by any reasonable
> way possible. For "people from street" own money was step towards
> independence, for decicion-makers - door to western investments, way to
> show credibility of Estonia, risky but unavoidable step to cut ties
> with soviet economy.
Of course, but the thing that tipped the balance was rouble inflation.
(And the timely return of the former gold reserve.) Most economists
acknowledge that.
>Decicions were made public in moment it was
> politically possible/profitable, but master plan for sure exists. I was
> close to decition-making this period as Rein Otsasson was close friend
> of my father (author of Estonian import-export law) and some
> strategical discussions take often place in our home - and Siim Kallas
> works 10 meters from my room in "Newspapers House". So I see and hear
> much more back then then some foreign journalist may had discover.
Fine, but I don't think that this nullifies my original point.
> >
> > > Decicion to tie kroon with DEM was reflection to public will to have
> > > "hard currency", not papers falling down day-by-day.
> >
> > The public didn't want inflation, either.
>
> Again you show that you can't get close to dominant feelings in
> Estonian society back then. Economy and personal welfare was of little
> importance these says - popular slogan was "we can live on potato peels
> - but we want to live free". (Strange today nobody want to remember
> about potato peels:-)). 1988-1992 was period of real chance that our
> kids will grow in freedom and economy was not the first priority.
I remember volunteers mounting card at checkpoints to try and stop the
shop shelves being stripped by panicking Russians....
> >
> > >Also,
> > > privatizations were pare of general strategy pointing (idealistically
> > > probably) that market makes improvements in economy better and faster
> > > then govt clerks probably keen to corruption (we must remember hughe
> > > income gap back then. If you give and video recorder to somebody as
> > > "gift", your gift was worth of one year salary of an estonian).
> >
> > There was no general strategy. Privatisation depended upon the policies
> > and aims of whoever owned the assets. Some of it was simple to
> > accomplish. Other parts were more problematic (the saga of Estonian
> > Air, for example). It was a hotch potch of policies and motives.
> >
> > Actually, a large part of the early entrepreneurial succees had nothing
> > to do with privatisation, involving leasing of assets or partnerships -
> > such as the Tallinn Municipality and FINEST Hotels.
> >
> > > > > So you reckon that Estonia would have remained with the Ruble, except
> > > > > for some event forcing their hand?
No I don't. I'm just annoyed that people want to make the decision part
of a mythology.
> > > >
> > > > Well......that was the IMF advice. But the introduction of the Kroon
> > > > was an attempt to escape rouble inflation.
> > > Foolish. For a lot of years before kroon, anybody was talking about
> > > kroon as a key element in walking out of soviet economy.
> >
> > But not the IMF.
>
> IMF was talking in way most decicion-makers in West: their main goal
> was keep developments in SU/Russia under control, fate of small border
> countries was not so important for them.
The IMF tends to be dominated by neo-classical freaks....
>Also, fr West Estonia was this
> time just a piece of Soviet Union and IMF looks for solutions for us as
> for a piece of SU - something that was anthagonistic for our own
> targets to show Estonia as part of West just spending some period under
> Soviet occupation.
Helmut Kohl didn't think that. Nor the Swedes or the Finns. The
Americans played the role of bumbling idiots in 1991....
>By no means we don't want to see our future in
> folder "post-SU economical space"and this way we can't just eat IMF
> ideas (there were officcials from IMF having good ties in Estonia and
> understanding well what really happens here, but general IMF policy was
> planned on principle of one post-soviet economical space).
> >
> > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This is not to disparage what has been achieved. Far from it! But one
> > > > > > must look at areas of the economy where there is still no coherent
> > > > > > development strategy, and realise that one cannot persist in quoting
> > > > > > these free-market myths for ever....
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks like the Russia and Eastern Europe was duped by this Estonian
> > > > > myth, introducing their own flat rate tax. Gullible people.
> > > >
> > > > It was an Atlanticist myth, Martin. And some people are gullible.
> > >
> > > It was painted Atlantic by some left-wing politicians.
> >
> > Who happened to be?
> In Finland they are mostly fat trade union leaders dreaming about
> monopoly and fighting free competition in labour markets.
Oh dear! Your slip is showing......
> >
> > Mart Laar said he had two heroes - Mrs. Thatcher and the lead singer of
> > Guns N' Roses (whose name escapes me).
>
> Mart Laar was fantastic prime fby me - without tandem Meri-Laar,
> Estonia would have done nothing probably.
So the work of the other political leaders is to be ignored?
>If you want to search real
> basis of Estonian success - it is our self-esteem. It was not so easy
> to have self-esteem having ten bucks in pocket. But effective, risky
> (and showy:-)) way they used to run country brings rapidly stories
> about our "tiger economy" - and helps us to get our self-esteem back.
Hmmm.....
> >
> >
> > >As I noted in
> > > other post, there is no homeless folks under bridges in Estonia
> >
> > There are still plenty of poor people, though.
> There are still plenty of poor people in any country. Estonia is
> relatively poor in compare with Scandinavia - and relatively rich if to
> compare with all other world exept Europe and North America. 15 years
> ago our incomes were 3-4 times lower then in Bulgaria-Romania, 6-8
> times less then in Poland or hungary. Today things are a bit different,
> so in general noone can seriouslt talk that we have not bees
> successful. We do have problems with incomes of retired people - but
> anyway they get more then in countries what have the same living
> standard 15 years ago.
I don't doubt it. But the economic dislocation after 1991 did cause a
lot of hardship - some of it, in my opinion, self inflicted.
> >
> >
> > >and for
> > > sure Estonia is not yankee-fan like Poland.
> >
> > Estonians do not go in for such gestures. But there are plenty of
> > Harvard airheads left amongst the political elite.
>
> There are no ideal models of society in the world. Estonian model is a
> bit right from Scandinavia, a bit left from US. If to look at GDP
> growth that solution have been good for Estonia at the moment - if
> situation will change, we a open to make adjustments immediately.
> >
> >
> > J>ust before you can divide
> > > something, you must own something - and back in 1992 our pockets were
> > > really empty. Do you agree truth is somewhere in the middle:
> > > north-european socialism is just too expencive, yankee-style liberalism
> > > too brutal towards "middle man". I think Europe will be after 20 years
> > > running economy less liberal then US but more liberal then today - say
> > > something Estonia have for today.
> >
> > No. I think that Estonia will eventually be influenced by the
> > 'Scandinavian Model'. The growth of 'Tallsinki' will see to that.
>
> Scandinavian model is admired by 90% of Estonians - but with worsening
> demographical situation will Europe afford it in years to come?
Oh, I think so....
>Some
> European nations have granted few more years of welfare to own citizens
> with importing cheap labour force from third world - but as you know it
> bring new problems - we see it in France now. I vote with both hands
> for as much welfare state as possible - but how much is possible after,
> say, 20 years?
I think that there is a great deal of economic potential in the E.U. It
will surpass the United States some time this century. the real
challenge lies in Asia.
J. Anderson
"gricer" <sh...@abertay.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:1133363409.1...@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> When
> I was researching in Tallinn (in the 1990s), I had a lot of
> converstions with people at the Estonian Tourist Board. (I later did
> some work for them, but that's another story.)
I met Silvi at the WTM just a few days ago.
Regards,
John
vello
Barry, we must keep in mind Estonia develops much-much faster then
Finland, so with any postulate it is better to notice with what period
it is tied. for today, gray sector is not a problem, bigger probably
then in Finland but for sure much smaller then in Italy, Spain,
Portugal or Greece. do you look for Pravda to have idea about, say,
Greek economy?
>
> > With knowledge just russian and no local language it is quite hopeless
> > to have some real picture about developments here.
>
> Don't be silly. My knowledge of Estonian is rudimentory, and is used
> for the sake of politeness. Everyone who is involved in international
> business activity speaks English - they have to!
For sure. With english you can communicate here - but to say something
about developments in society, you must be able to follow discussions
in local media, to talk with ordinary people, to read historical
documents etc. Without that you can write "travel story" talking about
national food & drinks, public holidays and best pubs, but it is better
not to pretend to go for deeper things. I know a lot about Swedish
politics and history but it would be childish from my side to speak
seriously about was welfare state in Sweden just happen thing or was it
result result of planned movements.
>
>
> > You use
> > automatically stereotypes you got with SU for this part of World - Old
> > Brother sitting somewhere behind democratic uppet facade and talking
> > just what is profitable to him.
>
> And where did I say that?
With words about "official statistics". Thanks you correct it now
showing it was for just-after-soviets mess period you talk about.
>
>
> >It's not case for Estonia what is
> > extremely open society
>
> Of course it is! But what does that have to do with my critique of
> transition?
Same problem with "official statistics". Don't blame me, first rule
one writer must realize sounds this way: it's you fault if readers
misunderstand you:-)
>
>
> >(hm, not thanks to high political culture but
> > probably thanks to lack of it). I work for Finnish-owned company and
> > almost all my partners on northern shore of the gulf are sure that
> > Estonia is more open then Finland. You may ask the same about your
> > friends starting with Eugene.
>
> I don't think anyone would disagree! But what is the point that you are
> trying to make?
I'm just answering to your remark about "official statistics":-)!
>
> Dr. Barry Worthington
martin
Okay, given the problems that government departments, with all the
resources of the state, may have had in gathering accurate statistics,
should we give more weight to a report compiled by some individual from
such a source as reputable as Pravda?
Regards,
Martin
martin
I was hoping you would post a cite to a primary source. As I don't have
access to back issues of the Baltic Times, does the article provide a
reference to the source of that figure?
Regards,
Martin
vello
gricer wrote:
> vello wrote:
> > gricer wrote:
> >
> > Estonian "collective Farms" (colkhozes) remaining from soviet time are
> > hardly "western companies in Estonia, targeted to Russian market". I
> > read a lot of things about Estonia in Pravda and from hearth I don't
> > advise to take that paper too seriously.
> > About Estonian agriculture -it is not so important branch in our
> > economy. You can't compete with Spain our South France under Stella
> > Polaris.
>
> The piece wasn't talking about agriculture, but food processing,
> wholesale, and districution.
It was about ways "old economy" in food sector makes attempt to survive
- not more.
>
> > >
> > > You are talking aboute the IME Programme. Although people like Siim
> > > Kallas did do some prepatory work, the decision belonged to the post
> > > independence period. It had more to do with a desire to escape the
> > > inflationary pressures of the rouble zone than anything else.
> >
> > Self-confidence is a good thing indeed, but this time you are totally
> > wrong. Idea to cut economy out from SU rotten one is as old as
> > possibility not only think but also speak this way. Not Siim Kallas
> > made prepatory work but Rein Otsasson, first president of Estonian Bank
> > - Kallas come in later. Buyt if you was in Estonia 1988-1992 and you
> > talk about inflation -beating as key motive behind kroon - then you
> > just don't understand nothing what happens around you.
>
> Why?
Answer was in my last post:
>
> >
> > Key motive for that period was to build independence by any reasonable
> > way possible. For "people from street" own money was step towards
> > independence, for decicion-makers - door to western investments, way to
> > show credibility of Estonia, risky but unavoidable step to cut ties
> > with soviet economy.
>
> Of course, but the thing that tipped the balance was rouble inflation.
> (And the timely return of the former gold reserve.) Most economists
> acknowledge that.
Having personal ties with two most prominent "kroon-makers" I just
wonder who are that "most economists". But it may be true that they
talk this way now: it is hard to make clear to one foreigner, how
emotionally influenced was all that period. Easier is just to point to
some economical factor.
>
>
> >Decicions were made public in moment it was
> > politically possible/profitable, but master plan for sure exists. I was
> > close to decition-making this period as Rein Otsasson was close friend
> > of my father (author of Estonian import-export law) and some
> > strategical discussions take often place in our home - and Siim Kallas
> > works 10 meters from my room in "Newspapers House". So I see and hear
> > much more back then then some foreign journalist may had discover.
>
> Fine, but I don't think that this nullifies my original point.
Yes it does, if your original point is still that key motive behind
kroon was rouble inflation and that there was no master plan for
economy.
>
> > >
> > > > Decicion to tie kroon with DEM was reflection to public will to have
> > > > "hard currency", not papers falling down day-by-day.
> > >
> > > The public didn't want inflation, either.
> >
> > Again you show that you can't get close to dominant feelings in
> > Estonian society back then. Economy and personal welfare was of little
> > importance these says - popular slogan was "we can live on potato peels
> > - but we want to live free". (Strange today nobody want to remember
> > about potato peels:-)). 1988-1992 was period of real chance that our
> > kids will grow in freedom and economy was not the first priority.
>
> I remember volunteers mounting card at checkpoints to try and stop the
> shop shelves being stripped by panicking Russians....
It was not about dam goods itself, it was to keep OUR to OWN. First
time in 50 years we feel we probably own something, that something like
WE really exists.
>
>
> > > > >
> > > > > Well......that was the IMF advice. But the introduction of the Kroon
> > > > > was an attempt to escape rouble inflation.
> > > > Foolish. For a lot of years before kroon, anybody was talking about
> > > > kroon as a key element in walking out of soviet economy.
> > >
> > > But not the IMF.
> >
> > IMF was talking in way most decicion-makers in West: their main goal
> > was keep developments in SU/Russia under control, fate of small border
> > countries was not so important for them.
>
> The IMF tends to be dominated by neo-classical freaks....
>
>
> >Also, fr West Estonia was this
> > time just a piece of Soviet Union and IMF looks for solutions for us as
> > for a piece of SU - something that was anthagonistic for our own
> > targets to show Estonia as part of West just spending some period under
> > Soviet occupation.
>
> Helmut Kohl didn't think that. Nor the Swedes or the Finns. The
> Americans played the role of bumbling idiots in 1991....
And nor Danesand Norwegians. They had idea what Estonia really is. But
for folks from more remote places it was just piece of post-soviet
land.
>
>
> >By no means we don't want to see our future in
> > folder "post-SU economical space"and this way we can't just eat IMF
> > ideas (there were officcials from IMF having good ties in Estonia and
> > understanding well what really happens here, but general IMF policy was
> > planned on principle of one post-soviet economical space).
>
> > >
> > > Mart Laar said he had two heroes - Mrs. Thatcher and the lead singer of
> > > Guns N' Roses (whose name escapes me).
> >
> > Mart Laar was fantastic prime fby me - without tandem Meri-Laar,
> > Estonia would have done nothing probably.
>
> So the work of the other political leaders is to be ignored? No - there have been no big differences in approaches of different Estonian governments. Just Laar puts the basics on place (or was lucky to be a prime in time most crucial things happened)
>
>
> >If you want to search real
> > basis of Estonian success - it is our self-esteem. It was not so easy
> > to have self-esteem having ten bucks in pocket. But effective, risky
> > (and showy:-)) way they used to run country brings rapidly stories
> > about our "tiger economy" - and helps us to get our self-esteem back.
>
>
> Hmmm.....
It was this way. To achieve something, you must be sure you can do it.
A lot of estonians had hesitations about future of Estonia back then.
>
> > >
> > >
> > > >As I noted in
> > > > other post, there is no homeless folks under bridges in Estonia
> > >
> > > There are still plenty of poor people, though.
> > There are still plenty of poor people in any country. Estonia is
> > relatively poor in compare with Scandinavia - and relatively rich if to
> > compare with all other world exept Europe and North America. 15 years
> > ago our incomes were 3-4 times lower then in Bulgaria-Romania, 6-8
> > times less then in Poland or hungary. Today things are a bit different,
> > so in general noone can seriouslt talk that we have not bees
> > successful. We do have problems with incomes of retired people - but
> > anyway they get more then in countries what have the same living
> > standard 15 years ago.
>
> I don't doubt it. But the economic dislocation after 1991 did cause a
> lot of hardship - some of it, in my opinion, self inflicted.
A girl can't get everything:-) It is easy to look back and think what
would be done better. There are probably things in Finnish society I
don't admire. But we must face the facts: Finland is often praized as
best economy in the world - and Estonia as best economy in the post-red
world. So, let there be some differences, both countries have done
extremely well.
>
> > >
> > >
> > > >and for
> > > > sure Estonia is not yankee-fan like Poland.
> > >
> > > Estonians do not go in for such gestures. But there are plenty of
> > > Harvard airheads left amongst the political elite.
> >
> > There are no ideal models of society in the world. Estonian model is a
> > bit right from Scandinavia, a bit left from US. If to look at GDP
> > growth that solution have been good for Estonia at the moment - if
> > situation will change, we a open to make adjustments immediately.
> > >
> > >
> > > J>ust before you can divide
> > > > something, you must own something - and back in 1992 our pockets were
> > > > really empty. Do you agree truth is somewhere in the middle:
> > > > north-european socialism is just too expencive, yankee-style liberalism
> > > > too brutal towards "middle man". I think Europe will be after 20 years
> > > > running economy less liberal then US but more liberal then today - say
> > > > something Estonia have for today.
> > >
> > > No. I think that Estonia will eventually be influenced by the
> > > 'Scandinavian Model'. The growth of 'Tallsinki' will see to that.
> >
> > Scandinavian model is admired by 90% of Estonians - but with worsening
> > demographical situation will Europe afford it in years to come?
>
> Oh, I think so....
Unhappily it helps not so much. If you want to fight for future of old
good Europe, stop posting here and start to make new small europeans:-)
>
> >Some
> > European nations have granted few more years of welfare to own citizens
> > with importing cheap labour force from third world - but as you know it
> > bring new problems - we see it in France now. I vote with both hands
> > for as much welfare state as possible - but how much is possible after,
> > say, 20 years?
>
> I think that there is a great deal of economic potential in the E.U. It
> will surpass the United States some time this century. the real
> challenge lies in Asia.
What is the basis for your thinking? For sure real challenge is Asia,
much more brutal economy then US with no social guarantees at all.
People need welfare, not just money - but in real world: most brutal,
asian economy is most successful, US is second and only then we. There
is little help if we keep "thinking" we will surpass US and stay
against Asia - we seed some ideas by what means we will achieve that
goal. Do you have one?
>
Best,
Vello
EZ
> >Some
> > European nations have granted few more years of welfare to own citizens
> > with importing cheap labour force from third world - but as you know it
> > bring new problems - we see it in France now. I vote with both hands
> > for as much welfare state as possible - but how much is possible after,
> > say, 20 years?
I think the US and the anglophone world in general has been doing this
for decades. In the US context, (1) consider universities that in a
sense are magnets for 'brain drain' or (2) temporary work visas for
labourers from Mexico. I think there is not so much difference betwixt
the US and the EU as far as labour force import goes. Is it
sustainable?
I think in the US there were race riots in the 60s and 70s (perhaps
Eugene could provide an exhaustive if biased view?) Then the problem
was with the designated neighbourhoods - poor people were settled in
one neighbourhood, and the medium income in another. The authorities
tended to neglect the poor neighbourhoods.
Even today -say in the high income Washington, DC, many residents are
oblivious of the South East quadrant of the city. Many believe that you
are "really" out of luck if your car breaks down out there. I believe
now the thinking is to intersperse poor population within medium-income
population areas.
I think France did the same mistakes the US once did - there are
homogeneous areas of poor population that share religion, race or
whatever that might be, that freqeuently neglected by the authorities.
The frustration builds up, and it has to find a way to be released.
I believe many countries are importing young people in order to keep
their social models going. I think the Baltic states will have to
start considering it. The trick is to do this properly.
>
> I think that there is a great deal of economic potential in the E.U. It
> will surpass the United States some time this century. the real
> challenge lies in Asia.
>
I agree with you on that. The EU presently has a bigger population than
the US and potentially excellent prospects for growth.
However, many challenges remain:
1. EU has to get its act together e.g. in avoiding double standards in
dealing with Russia and some other countries;
2. it has to figure a way to cope with the aging population - the US
and Asia are in a much better shape - former because of high growth of
the Latino population, and the latter because of its inherently high
birth rate;
3. it needs time to integrate all of its people into one common space -
so that the 'glass ceiling' for non-locals is not such an issue any
more (today's FT stated that a very high percentage the European
companies esp. France, Italy do not have international CEOs and upper
management) - i.e. they are more inward looking than their counterparts
elsewhere?
Best regards,
Evaldas
gricer
I understand that she is no longer with the ETB, and now works for a
private company. I also frequented the Estonian stand this year, but
didn't recognise anybody except Maila Saar.
Regards,
Barry
J. Anderson
>
> J. Anderson wrote:
>> I met Silvi at the WTM just a few days ago.
>>
>> Regards,
>> John
>
> I understand that she is no longer with the ETB, and now works for a
> private company. I also frequented the Estonian stand this year, but
> didn't recognise anybody except Maila Saar.
Silvi left the ETB (now: Enterprise Estonia) many years ago and is working
for Baltic Silver Tours (http://www.balticsilver.ee/en_index.html) as
Product Director. Her successor at the ETB was Riina Lõhmus, whom you also
might recall. Silvi shared a desk with a hotel group, so she wasn't there
all the time.
lora...@cs.com
Oh yeah? Well I'm pretty sure so did I at the laundromat.
gricer
You don't know what we are talking about, do you? But that doesn't stop
you, it seems.....
Dr. Barry Worthington
gricer
No, but the journalists at Pravda (whatever you might think of them) do
write about Estonia, and do quote statistics from a variety of sources.
I wouldn't use this publication as my only source, but I just happened
to quote it because the information agreed with my own personal
observations....
> >
> > > With knowledge just russian and no local language it is quite hopeless
> > > to have some real picture about developments here.
> >
> > Don't be silly. My knowledge of Estonian is rudimentory, and is used
> > for the sake of politeness. Everyone who is involved in international
> > business activity speaks English - they have to!
>
> For sure. With english you can communicate here - but to say something
> about developments in society, you must be able to follow discussions
> in local media, to talk with ordinary people, to read historical
> documents etc.
Well, I did conduct a large number of in depth interviews in the course
of a few years research, and did work with Estonians from time to time.
I did also make use of a variety of internal documentation and
consultancy reports.
>Without that you can write "travel story" talking about
> national food & drinks, public holidays and best pubs, but it is better
> not to pretend to go for deeper things.
I don't pretend, I think. I was awarded a Doctorate on the basis of my
researches.
>I know a lot about Swedish
> politics and history but it would be childish from my side to speak
> seriously about was welfare state in Sweden just happen thing or was it
> result result of planned movements.
> >
> >
> > > You use
> > > automatically stereotypes you got with SU for this part of World - Old
> > > Brother sitting somewhere behind democratic uppet facade and talking
> > > just what is profitable to him.
> >
> > And where did I say that?
>
> With words about "official statistics". Thanks you correct it now
> showing it was for just-after-soviets mess period you talk about.
I was talking about a key transition period - in the 1990s - when the
statistics were in a mess or were not available....
> >
> >
> > >It's not case for Estonia what is
> > > extremely open society
> >
> > Of course it is! But what does that have to do with my critique of
> > transition?
>
> Same problem with "official statistics". Don't blame me, first rule
> one writer must realize sounds this way: it's you fault if readers
> misunderstand you:-)
Hmmmm........
> >
> >
> > >(hm, not thanks to high political culture but
> > > probably thanks to lack of it). I work for Finnish-owned company and
> > > almost all my partners on northern shore of the gulf are sure that
> > > Estonia is more open then Finland. You may ask the same about your
> > > friends starting with Eugene.
> >
> > I don't think anyone would disagree! But what is the point that you are
> > trying to make?
>
> I'm just answering to your remark about "official statistics":-)!
Why are you so obsessed with this? I've already explained my problem
with the statistics for the period in question.
vello
I'm not obsessed, don't you see smiley in my post? It was clear for me
from your last post, that we are talking about a bit different things
in different timeframe. But don't hmmmmmmmm: it IS writer's fault if
folks don't understand you. Coz success both in writing and science
depends not so much on what you achieve, but on how world will take
your work - will they buy it or not:-)
Friends?
Vello
gricer
Of course!
Regards,
Dr. Barry Worthington
Estland
> The revenue from transit traffic to and from Russia alone accounted for
> 30% of GDP in 1995, a key point in the transition process.
I am afraid you have been mislead by some Russian propaganda. Refer to
more precise terms in
http://tume.blogspot.com/2005/11/blog-post_113326249794031919.html
> >And here is not so much (or at all) companies
> > targeting Russian market.
>
> That isn't strictly true. It was certainly the case in the key period
> of transition, and you should not believe the 'official' point of view
> for post 1998. The following is from Pravda.
Ha! This one was really funny, thanks.
According to the Tallinn
> Business News newspaper, before the crisis of 1998, 40% of
> Estonian-produced foods were exported to Russia, the figure later to
> fall to 4%. The crisis caused many Estonian producers of foods to
> reduce output or even go out of business completely.
>
> In the meantime, the newspaper continues, Estonian food exports to
> Russia gradually return to where they were previously, although this is
> missed by official statistics.
I am sorry, but all food production has been estimated to give up to 5%
of Estonia's GDP and, I am sorry, share of Russia has never returned
nowhere close to pre-1998 years.
> > > > > There was no real free-market transition strategy. Decisions, such as
> > > > > the introduction of the kroon and several privatisations, were taken in
> > > > > response to events, not as part of some master plan.
I think the key here is not the decisions but the quality of their
performace. After all, one can hardly name any Eastern European country
where no considerable privatizations were launched sometime 1990+. In
Estonia this was just better done. For example around 1993-1995 the
real head (chief advisor at Erastamisagentuur) responsible for selling
stuff was one German economist. Very unpleasant person by all accounts.
But he kept this thing transparent. Yes, I meant exactly what I meant -
if the decision making were given to Estonians, who knows, "we" could
just steal cash and bankrupt the assets.
> You are talking aboute the IME Programme. Although people like Siim
> Kallas did do some prepatory work, the decision belonged to the post
> independence period. It had more to do with a desire to escape the
> inflationary pressures of the rouble zone than anything else.
Again, compared to the other Baltic states an obvious decision of
escaping that nightmare was with a little better quality performance.
This means direct introduction of own currency instead of using
transitional currency and then doing it again in introducing the "real"
national money.
> But not the IMF.
One thing that we did not listen to the IMF. Worked out well.