Despite being one of the wealthiest areas in the world, the EU faces the growing problem of prolific inequality in wealth and competitiveness across the diverse group of countries. This is dramatically represented in the differences of income between Europe’s richest and poorest regions: inner London and Romania. Inner London’s per capita income is a staggering 290% of the EU’s average versus Romania with a per capita income of a meager 23% of the EU average. The European Union has recognized this problem and has taken action by implementing “Cohesion” policies intended to encourage economic convergence, competiveness and financial unity. To reach these goals the EU has allocated a significant part of the taxes levied on member nations to the “Structural Funds.” These funds are comprised of three financial instruments amounting to a total of around €308 billion: over a third of the EU budget. The Structural Funds are designed to help areas in need, generally with GPD’s of less than 75% of the EU average. They are supposed to direct the money in ways to capitalize on the economic comparative advantages of the different areas in the EU through the financing of projects ranging from: improving education to investing in infrastructure to environmental protection. Supporters of the funds define these projects as an “inherent part of the European idea and European project” (Hubner) and point to areas that have exhibited high growth, like Ireland, as proof of its success. To what extent, however, are these claims true? Looking past the glorified and falsely correlated successes in the EU, a careful observer can see the flaws in this policy and would question how much these funds actually improve the state of the European economy.
Woul...
... middle of paper ...
...l Economics and Policy. Oxford [England: Blackwell, 2000. 1-30. Print.
"Charlemagne: Drowning in a Sea of Structural Funds? Some People Are Asking Whether European Union Cash for Poor Regions Always Helps." The Economist 27 Mar. 2003. Print.
*“Delocation and European Integration—is structural spending justified?” by Karen Midelfart-Knarvik and Henry Overman, in Economic Policy, October 2002.
Friedman, Milton. An Economist's Protest: Columns in Political Economy. Glen Ridge] N.J.: T. Horton, 1972. 6-7. Print.
Hübner, Danuta. "EU Cohesion Policy 1988-2008 Investing in Europe's Future." Info Regio 26 (2008): 1-36. Print.
O’Murchu, Cynthia, and Peter Spiegel. "Europe’s Grand Vision Loses Focus." Financial Times [London] 29 Nov. 2010. Print.
Senior, Nello Susan. "Chapters:4,15." The European Union: Economics, Policies and History. London: McGraw-Hill, 2009. Print.
The European Union has been helped economically ever since World War II. Right after World War II’s end, Europe was struggling to hold on. The countries of the modern-day European Union thought it would be a good idea to come together and help each others struggling economy. To this day, this decision has had a very positive outcome on the EU’s economy. As shown in Diagram 1, the European Union combined together has the world’s highest GDP at 18.3 Trillion USD as compared to the United States’ 17.4 Trillion USD GDP and China’s 10.4 Trillion USD GDP. The idea
Brue, S. L., Flynn, S. M., & McConnell, C. R. (2011).Economics principles, problems and policies. (19 ed.). New
The European Union cooperation all started with economic integration. Since the beginning of the ECSC in 1952 until now one of the major forces but also one of the major weaknesses of the EU has been their will for a common market and a monetary union. The single market was achieved in 1992 with the entrance into function of the Maastricht treaty. This treaty greatly influenced how states would have to deal with external border control and the free movement of the people because what the Maastricht treaty did was not only opening a single market, but also allowing people, goods and services to move freely across European Union member states. Economic integration has explained by Nevin has usually 5 level which goes from he lowest o he highest level of cooperation. The first level of integration is the preferential tariff which only allows st...
Friedman a person that was raised of changing the status quo and thinking differently took the inspiration of many past economics such as Keynes, and challenged them. Most notably was Friedman’s view on the free market system and the choices we have today. Friedman was a strong supporter of riding ourselves of drafts, governmental regulation of markets, the healthcare and education industries; this list go on forever in what Milton Friedman thought was wrong for the US and many other countries. Though Friedman was a pioneer in opening up and showing the free market to those that were willing to listen, many didn’t full understand the hold that not moving to a free market can have on a
Havel, Václav, and Paul Wilson. "How Europe Could Fail." The New York Review of Books: 1993. Print.
...ifferent story of the EU that has not been focused on in other books or papers. This original, unbiased approach allows the reader to put the EU in a historical perspective that also helps understanding at least the changing forces. In addition, it seems that the author wants to make the public or his audience comfortable with the idea of uncertainty that has been affecting the EU. His second part shows how the current shape was not only the result of political or economic reasons, but also a response of a changing external environment. Moreover, the idea of purgatory as well as the philosophical references and analogies gives the book an exciting, unique demission that links politics, history, and philosophy. However, it would be interesting if the author has included technical analysis and incorporated political science theories to draw policy recommendations.
Milton Friedman, a supporter of free market, was born in 1912 in New York. 4th child to a Jewish family that had emigrated from Ukraine. Although he was interested in pursuing mathematics after graduation, the horrible stare of the national income motivated him in taking...
Peterson, J. and Shackleton, M. 2002. The institutions of the European Union. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
M., G. (2009, April 27). AP Euro Study. Retrieved May 2016, 2016, from AP European History: http://apeurostudy.blogspot.com/
Heilbroner, Robert. "The Economic Problem." The Making of the Economic Society. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1993. pp. 1-15
In March 2000, EU leaders adopt the ‘Lisbon strategy’ designed to enable the EU to compete on the global market with other major players such as the US and newly industrialised countries. The aim was to encourage modernisation and business investment, and ensure that Europe’s education systems meet the needs of the information society. Each member state would not be able to compete globally alone and therefore pooling their resources together benefits them as well as global countries, which is a huge advantage of joining the EU.
The enlargement of the European Union (EU) in 2004 and 2007 has been termed as the largest single expansion of the EU with a total of 12 new member states – bringing the number of members to 27 – and more than 77 million citizens joining the Commission (Murphy 2006, Neueder 2003, Ross 2011). A majority of the new member states in this enlargement are from the eastern part of the continent and were countries that had just emerged from communist economies (EC 2009, Ross 2011), although overall, the enlargement also saw new member states from very different economic, social and political compared to that of the old member states (EC 2009, Ross 2011). This enlargement was also a historical significance in European history, for it saw the reunification of Europe since the Cold War in a world of increasing globalization (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). For that, overall, this enlargement is considered by many to have been a great success for the EU and its citizens but it is not without its problems and challenges (EC 2009, Mulle et al. 2013, Ross 2011). This essay will thus examine the impact of the 2004/2007 enlargements from two perspectives: firstly, the impact of the enlargements on the EU as a whole, and thereafter, how the enlargements have affected the new member states that were acceded during the 2004/2007 periods. Included in the essay will be the extent of their integration into the EU and how being a part of the Commission has contributed to their development as nation states. Following that, this essay will then evaluate the overall success of the enlargement process and whether the EU or the new member states have both benefited from the accessions or whether the enlargement has only proven advantageous to one th...
O'Sullivan, A., & Sheffrin, S. (2005). Economics. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
According to Jose Manuel Barroso, the preface of “Europe 2020’s” states: “It’s about more jobs and better lives. It shows how Europe has the capacity the capacity to deliver smart, substantial and inclusive growth, to find the path to create new jobs and to offer a sense of direction to our societies” (Barroso, 2009).
Sullivan, A., & Steven M., (2003). Economics: Principles in action. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey : Pearson Prentice Hal