Even this Bloomberg article rolls right through the most important point one can find in this article that explains Poland’s exemplary move from statist-era poverty toward a developed and prosperous economy:
Since the fall of the Iron Curtain, Poland has refashioned itself as a model of free-market economics. From 1989 to 2007 its economy grew 177 percent, outpacing its Central and Eastern European neighbors as it nearly tripled in size—the result of a series of aggressive measures taken by the government after the collapse of communism. Price controls were lifted, government wages were capped, trade was liberalized, and the Polish currency, the zloty, was made convertible. The policies left millions out of work but freed Poland to begin to recover from decades of mismanagement.
Bu then they throw this in:
The economy got a further boost with the country’s entry into the EU in 2004.
But if membership in the EU were to be a cause, even one of them, you have to consider Greece and Portugal and Spain, which almost got to be basket cases. And don’t forget Cyprus, that literally stole millions right out of bank accounts. Keep in mind that those bank accounts were also probably insured by the Cypriot government itself!
Then Bloomberg Businessweek shows its economic ignorance, which takes years of indoctrination in business schools that think central planning can help. Get this bit of economic nonsense:
Many of the characteristics of the Polish economy are shared by its Central and Eastern European neighbors, all of whom suffered deep if not catastrophic recessions in the early years of the crisis. Poland, though, had an additional advantage: It was the beneficiary of an almost accidental Keynesian stimulus that arrived just in time, boosting domestic consumption and saving the economy. “While other countries followed policies of austerity, government spending in Poland actually went up,” says Gavin Rae, a professor at Kozminski University in Warsaw and author of Poland’s Return to Capitalism. “At the point of the crisis, the foot was put on the pedal.”
Oh yeah?? Then why didn’t the purposeful “Keynesian stimulus” help anybody else? How can they credit Keynsian policies, without explaining how those SAME Keynesian policies did NOT work ANYWHERE else?
And if Keynesian policies elsewhere were followed by even worse stagnation, as happened in the USA and many European countries too, then it doesn’t work. In fact, the place where the Keynesian policies had been followed for decades without interruption most of all, like Greece, became the byword for basket case and failure of state fascist socialism.
So now get a better explanation than invoking Keynes, next paragraph:
A series of tax cuts, including a drop in Poland’s top rate from 40 percent to 32 percent, took effect just as the crisis’s first shock waves were sweeping the world.
They go on to give joint credit to some free money from the European Union that came in at the same time they enacted those tax cuts, from a program they describe this way:
Meanwhile, the EU budget for 2007-2013—which, among other things, distributes aid from richer countries to the union’s poorer members—made Poland the biggest beneficiary of subsidies, showering the country with some €101.5 billion ($137 billion). Although it was not labeled a stimulus package, Poland’s combination of increased spending and tax cuts was half again as large in per capita terms as the U.S.’s $800 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
Of course every other country enacting true “Keynesian” policies raises taxes rather than lower them, because they say they have to raise what they call “revenues”, as if they were a profitable business. What they mean when they talk about raising “revenues”, is that they want to increase taxes of course, which means extortion. In times past, we used to call this what it was: extortion.
Note that little mention they snuck in there, like a snake sneaking its poison into you instead of an obvious strike: “budget… …which, among other things, distributes aid from richer countries to the union’s poorer members…”.
Wow. But this is just after a very NON-Keynesian graph on the same web page:
Look at that chart! That’s not a trend in Keynesianism, although there is indeed still too much of Keynes in it. Many state governments in the U.S. have gotten out of debt completely in a few short years by throwing out the Keynes doctrines, or at least holding them somewhat in check, to the extent they can with such a context of Keynesian-damaged federal policies.
Wow. What a way to twist the effects of applying free market economics and its benefits, and torturing out of the story a way to give the poor Keynes some kind of nod.
Later in the article, they also confess that ” Poland has benefited from remaining outside the common currency.” I guess so. They go on some more, mixing truth with generous helpings of spin. Beware. Caveat emptor applies to your reading, too..
Because people, even average Joes, are learning from the truths of Austrian economics, even many that are not well versed in its detailed analysis about it. They are ever more aware that whatever governments do is harmful to the goals of prosperity, or helping the poor, anything.
Christians alas it seems are among the slowest to learn that you cannot have any morality in helping the poor if you are doing it by stealing your neighbor’s goods. Because by stealing your neighbor’s goods you are violating the second greatest commandment that tells us to “Love thy neighbor as thyself”.
In today’s world you can call it “taxation” and say it’s justified because you have “representation”, because people are conditioned to accept not just the terms as legitimate but what it is. When the Mob comes to your business and demands a percentage of your take under threat of violence, we all know this is a specific category of theft we call extortion. When your government does the same exact thing, we call it “taxes”.
Does it matter that a king does, or that a supposed majority of us can vote on which extortionist we want?
What is a vote in a “democracy”, but a simple matter of saying “My extortionist is better than your extortionist”?
“My thief is nicer than your thief.”
“My favorite neo-Mafia faction does not steal as much as your neo-Mafia faction!”
“But my favorite extortionist faction helps more of the people in the neighborhood than your favorite extortionists!”
“That’s okay, because my favorite extortionist faction only rips off your business for going to war against bad guys!”.
There’s not much they can do about it, there are too many who are aware of free market principles and their natural rights to be free from aggression.
Doing all this scaremongering is not working as well as it used to. Getting us to accept extortion and poverty by blaming the rich and scaring us is not working so well anymore.
People are starting to consider that the terrorist bogey-man might not justify police-style pat-downs in transportation hubs. Maybe they’re getting more aware that the terrorist threat probability to their person is a miniscule fraction of threats they take for granted every day on their neighborhood streets.
Maybe they’re realizing that extorted theft goes into a bottomless pit, and that the best works that help the poor the most are the private direct, and most importantly, voluntary charities.