German Reunification - 25 years later

[Michael Hardner]

...and the bill continues to climb.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/german-reunification-has-had-a-big-price-tag-1415362635

It required restructuring Europes postwar political order to allow for the annexation of a bankrupt state and a collapsing economy, an audacious undertaking that left economists wondering if it could even be done. The policies rushed into play to restore the unified nation are largely seen as a success, if an expensive one, that paved the way for Germany to take the stage as Europes political and economic centerpiece.[/size]

The process opened up a running tab that 25 years later had reached between $1.5 trillion and $2.5 trillion and was still climbing, according to varying accounts.

Change costs money - both reunifying and breaking up a country costs money. It comes down to political will.

Further exploration of the economic angle is here:

http://freakonomics.com/2014/11/06/should-the-u-s-merge-with-mexico-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/

This podcast explores whether the US could take over Mexico, and the costs and benefits. I believe the world will have to rationalize its laws between countries, ease immigration rules, standardize environmental rules... but gradually.

[cybercoma]

I'm not going to listen to the podcast, but why on earth would the US take over Mexico? Wouldn't it be more hassle than it's worth? What does the US gain in return?

[Michael Hardner]

I'm not going to listen to the podcast, but why on earth would the US take over Mexico? Wouldn't it be more hassle than it's worth? What does the US gain in return?

It's really an academic exercise in examining questions of this scale. There are benefits, including a young labour force, lots of resources and so on...

[cybercoma]

I would think the problems with crime, pollution, education, and poverty would far outweigh the benefits.

[Topaz]

I was watching senate hearing with the Ambassador of Mexico as a guest. He says that in the near future, China, USA and Mexico will be the top economics and when asked about the NAU, they are all for it for security, and trading. The only problem they could have is that they are close trading partners with Spain and Brazil and that could cause problems if the NAU have differences with those two countries. He also see Mexico a huge manufacturer of auto, airplane etc.

[Moonlight Graham]

I was watching senate hearing with the Ambassador of Mexico as a guest. He says that in the near future, China, USA and Mexico will be the top economics and when asked about the NAU, they are all for it for security, and trading.

Of course the Ambassador of Mexico would say that, even though he's wrong. Mexico has a decent economy but not among the top.

[-TSS-]

German reunification 25 years later? Gosh, is it already October 2015? I know that time flies but this fast!

[August1991]

I was watching senate hearing with the Ambassador of Mexico as a guest. He says that in the near future, China, USA and Mexico will be the top...

Topaz, there is no such thing as "Mexico" or "China". There are Chinese and Mexicans, like there are Canadians. We are all individuals in this world.

[August1991]

...and the bill continues to climb.

And what was the cost of the Cold War? (Wasted/lost lives behind an Iron Curtain.... )

=====

The collapse of the Berlin Wall made the world a richer place.

Ronald Reagan was right when he said: "Tear down this wall."

Edited November 18, 2014 by August1991

[Michael Hardner]

And what was the cost of the Cold War? (Wasted/lost lives behind an Iron Curtain.... )

It was massive, but it includes the cost of reunification.

The collapse of the Berlin Wall made the world a richer place.

Ronald Reagan was right when he said: "Tear down this wall."

There's also a psychological shift in that we no longer have two competing economic philosophies, but many flavours of one philosophy.

[-TSS-]

The recent celebrations of the 25th anniversary of the fall of the wall of Berlin which included Gorbachev as an honorary guest portrayed clearly how far apart the west of Europe is from Russia; In Russia Gorbachev nowadays is considered nothing more than a grumpy old man who destroyed the Soviet empire.

[Michael Hardner]

In Russia Gorbachev nowadays is considered nothing more than a grumpy old man who destroyed the Soviet empire.

I have read this many times before, but it leaves one to wonder:

Is there no 'hero' in the Russian version of the fall of the USSR ? Is it the people themselves for enduring Communism ?

If not, then why don't they need one ?

[August1991]

I have read this many times before, but it leaves one to wonder:

Is there no 'hero' in the Russian version of the fall of the USSR ?

...

For nationalist, ethnic Russians, the collapse of the Soviet Union was a failure. (If Canada separated into two countries, some English-Canadian nationalists may react the same way.)

On a flight from Frankfurt to Moscow, I once met Mikhael Gorbachev (and his daughter) and they both struck me as clueless. He more than her.

I maintain that the reaction to Putin will not come from a populist, "anti-Kremlin/anti-Wall Street", broad-based movement endearable to the western Left. Instead, the opposition to Putin will be people around Medvedev, an elite, who believe that Putin is taking Russia in the wrong direction.

Indeed, Putin is taking Russia in a direction of benefit to Putin's ego - but not Moscovites.

Edited November 26, 2014 by August1991

[eyeball]

It was massive, but it includes the cost of reunification.

The bills are still rolling in when you include the cost of the lingering effect of the Cold War i.e. much of the conflict raging away in ME region.

The bills will be rolling in for generations, something the Russians seem to have rather deftly gotten out from under.

Edited December 2, 2014 by eyeball