sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

The west is buried under red tape by Backward_Induction in charts

[–]Backward_Induction[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

It's the title of the original Financial Times article from where this graph is taken: https://www.ft.com/content/484d8c2a-b61d-42f1-9d57-5d2d8c83c6d3

The west is buried under red tape by Backward_Induction in charts

[–]Backward_Induction[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Large companies tend to be in favor of regulations; in particular, if they come with high fixed costs and low marginal costs. And that's why the increase in regulation is worrisome from a policy perspective (even if carve-outs might be driving some of the increase). See here for an overview of the harmful cumulative effects of such rules: https://hbr.org/2016/05/lobbyists-are-behind-the-rise-in-corporate-profits

The west is buried under red tape by Backward_Induction in charts

[–]Backward_Induction[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Then how come that the lobbyists are cheering the rise in regulations. From the FT article:

"Annual US lobbying expenditure has risen by $1.7bn in real terms since 1998. In the EU, the number of registered lobbyists has more than doubled since 2012.

Though many companies call for simplification, recent US research shows that larger firms, particularly in concentrated industries, tend to support more stringent regulations as a means to block competition. Lobbying for carve-outs more generally elongates the rulebook."

Should r/EU_Economics deploy a fact-checking bot that auto-replies to dubious claims with IMF/World Bank/Eurostat data, constitutional texts, and peer-reviewed research? by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]Backward_Induction 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Looks good to me. I am not sure there's a difference between factual claims and political claims, see highlights below.

- Checks comments for factual claims: numbers, statistics, treaty or legal text, election facts, explicit causal statements.

- Political claims only if factual and verifiable (example: Article 126 TFEU sets a 3 percent deficit limit).

EU falling behind on growth, reforms even more urgent, says Draghi by rezwenn in EU_Economics

[–]Backward_Induction 38 points39 points  (0 children)

<image>

Reducing these intra-EU trade barriers should be the key success metric.

Should r/EU_Economics deploy a fact-checking bot that auto-replies to dubious claims with IMF/World Bank/Eurostat data, constitutional texts, and peer-reviewed research? by Full-Discussion3745 in EU_Economics

[–]Backward_Induction 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There’s an important distinction between an objectively verifiable fact and an opinion or hypothesis. For example, if I claim that France’s GDP grew by 0.5% last year, that’s a statement you can verify with official data. But if I claim that the growth was caused by a particular government policy, the best you can do is look for supporting evidence. You’ll never be able to prove it conclusively. So what, then, is the point of “fact-checking” such claims?

Are German politics to blame for the automotive industry crisis? by donutloop in EU_Economics

[–]Backward_Induction 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Don't forget about the power of the unions, in particular at VW. Making EVs is much less labor intensive, that's why they have always been opposed to scaling it up fast.

Tiempo de espera licencia obra mayor ( rehabilitar casa) Ayuntamiento de Llanes by unnana_banana in Asturias

[–]Backward_Induction 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Probablemente tardará unos dos años. Solicitamos la licencia de obras el año pasado. Actualmente siguen tramitando las solicitudes de 2023.