The US Airbus deal that possibly backfires against Europe

[Skybird]

Airbus since onger is flirting with the idea to shift production to America, due to the weak dollar increasingly causing havoc on european industries. But the deal to equip the US Airforce with new tankers may be the first step to make that consideration a reality. The result of the competition may show to what massive degree US economy has lost competitiveness in several key areas, nevertheless the deal could be a benefit for america, and a desaster for Europe - by shutting down thousands of jobs on the old contient, and reestablishing them in the New World. And once established, it is hard to imagine that after the tankers Airbus would not use it's American enterprises to keep production there - of other civilian planes currently manufactured in Europe.

To run the world economy by dollars more and more becomes unaffordable for the non-American world. This is not the first but just the latest in already a series of signals. I wonder how much longer European governments keep pon dreaming - and if they have any means to influence this trend anyway. Ironically, today'S TV news showed a report on tourism in New York - where the first shops of different branches have put up signs saying they exclusively accept Euro as currency, no Dollars anymore (yes, true!), and many shops being very much in favour of accepting euros before dollars.


The story:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/0,1518,druck-540485,00.html

[August]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Ironically, today'S TV news showed a report on tourism in New York - where the first shops of different branches have put up signs saying they exclusively accept Euro as currency, no Dollars anymore (yes, true!), and many shops being very much in favour of accepting euros before dollars.

Don't lie Skybird. No place of business in the US can refuse to accept legal US tender.

[bookworm_020]

With the blacklog in order for both Airbus and Boeing, it could be a good thing. IF they are able to shift production of the A330 to the US, and the possible shift of some production to China, it would free up production space for Airbus to be able to deliver their product quicker than Boeing.

This could mean that get more orders from airline seeking to expand rapidly due to growth and demand, not just because they have a better offer / plane.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by bookworm_020

With the blacklog in order for both Airbus and Boeing, it could be a good thing. IF they are able to shift production of the A330 to the US, and the possible shift of some production to China, it would free up production space for Airbus to be able to deliver their product quicker than Boeing.

This could mean that get more orders from airline seeking to expand rapidly due to growth and demand, not just because they have a better offer / plane.

That does not help European workers who got fired. And we talk about many thousands. This also causes according fallout on the taxpayers in the affected countries who will copmpensate these worker'S fall, it also affects the tax income of the state (two folded effect), and the regional structure of local societies in areas that heavily depend on Airbus factories (consummerism, unemployment, raising social costs, etc. The big disease today is that economical success today is defined by short-termed stockmarket sucess which also becomes the only and almost imperial criterion by which economy is driven, and that healthy economical structures that are enduring and help to finance the national structures that raised and financed them more and more loose in importance. This does not boost economies - it erodes them.

But jobs that moved from Western europe to Eastern europe or America - as quick as they moved there can (and often will) move from there to Asia and low wage countries again, so... The problem is not a system being abused. The problem is this very system itself. Unmonitored, no liberalism will not ease this porblem, but give it the room to erode our nations and societies even more aggressively. All-controlled and all-planned economies are bad, and are an extreme that does not work. But uncorrected, totally unleashed liberalism in economy is not any smaller an extreme - and it is as destructive. the reasonable course to set is somewhere between both, probably. Competition and free enterprise yes - but not beyond all limits where it becomes competition and selfishness at the threatening cost of social communities and nations's existential structures. Early thinkers after WW2 seemed to have think the same - at least they did not call the rebuilding europe a "market economy", but a "social market economy", attaching the importance of responsibility to business.

Not that too much is left of that.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

thanks federal reserve act of 1913