At the same time, the IMF provides economic growth in Spain, Ireland, Greece and Portugal at the level of 2 to 2.5 percent. The Polish economy will increase by up to 3.5 percent. Considering that all these countries belong to the European Union – and all of Poland have a common currency – differences in economic growth rate are surprising.
What connects countries with the lowest economic growth with countries of the highest growth, what could explain this difference? My friend Agnieszka Gehringer and I dealt with this issue in the analysis carried out by the Flossbach Research Institute von Stoor.
In the first stage of our analysis we combined Average growth rate of a real gross domestic product per capita of all EU countries in 2013–2024. As the beginning of the calculations, we chose 2013, because at that time the euro crisis (which took place after the financial crisis) was largely mastered.
We identified in our ranking Three groups: Countries who, apart from the financial crisis of 2008/2009, did not experience any other disturbances, countries that underwent painful adaptation programs during the euro crisis, and those that in the 1990s underwent transformation from the socialist to capitalist system.
The group with the lowest height included countries that were affected by the minimum disruptions and therefore changed little in their economic model. Among them were Germany, France and Italy. In the middle group, countries that had to be carried out by broadly extensive economic reforms, including the countries of southern Europe mentioned above during the euro crisis.
Continuation of the material under the video
Disputes about migration
A group with the highest growth rates consisted mainly of countries that switched to capitalism. Ireland was the exception. She also had to make painful adaptations during the euro crisis, but then she was at the forefront of the height league.
In the second stage of our analysis we identified Factors that released growth forces. We also wanted to find out if immigration could have a positive or negative impact on economic growth. It was not surprising that the increase in efficiency and capital equipment leads to a higher level of prosperity.
The intensity of international trade also helps, while the increase in social benefits inhibits growth. Immigration is essentially A positive impact on the gross domestic product per capita. This effect, however, is more than compensated when immigration goes to the social system, not on the labor market. Then, ultimately, migration movements reduce economic growth.
What conclusions come from this for politics? First of all, stubborn sticking to the status quo in a changing world costs prosperity. Secondly, the destruction of outdated structures brings not only pain, but also a chance for greater prosperity.
The destruction of old structures is a prerequisite for new ones. However, in order for this to lead to “creating” new prosperity, new structures must arise as a result of market forces.
I’m Ashley Davis as an editor, I’m committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and accuracy in every piece we publish. My work is driven by curiosity, a passion for truth, and a belief that journalism plays a crucial role in shaping public discourse. I strive to tell stories that not only inform but also inspire action and conversation.
