Skip to main content

Masu takes a back seat

In Estonia they are so familiar with the economic crisis, they have given it a nick-name: "Masu", which comes from Majandus Krisis- Economic Crisis. Headlines are full of the latest doings of this wayward creature: the latest fall in retail sales, the steady slowing of lending, the gradual deceleration of the economy. The Masu is developing its own personality: rather like a bear, damaging and clumsy though, rather than rapacious.

Today, however, the Masu is off the front pages and there is some better economic news: Estonia has joined the OECD, the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development.

"So what?" many will ask, not knowing what the OECD actually is.

The -now thirty-five member- body is essentially the club of wealthy and democratic states, committed to open government and open economies. For Estonia to be accepted as a member reflects a vote of confidence in the stability and prospects for the country. It also promotes them into a fairly exclusive club of Western markets that are automatically regarded as sound investments.

Mind you, several Estonian friends have said that they don't think it is such a great thing: after all, Greece was a founder member of the club. Certainly the Greek "Masu" seems to have much stronger claws than in Estonia. Nevertheless, even after a fall in numbers of about one third, there are still more Euro millionaires in Estonia than in Greece, which is ten times the population. Of course, that is simply according to the tax statistics.

I think that probably explains why Estonia's trajectory is so much more positive than that of Greece: there is simply a greater culture of honesty here. The Masu is beginning to look ever less threatening from the perspective of Tallinn- even with early Euro entry a prospect for next January.

In Athens, on the other hand...

Comments

Anonymous said…
Hi,

MaSu is MAjandus SUrutis, Economic Depression.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and ...

The Will of the People

Many of the most criminal political minds of the past generations have claimed to be an expression of the "will of the people"... The will of the people, that is, as interpreted by themselves. Most authoritarian rulers: Napoleon III, Mussolini, Hitler, have called referendums in order to claim some spurious popular support for the actions they had already determined upon. The problem with the June 2016 European Union was that the question was actually insufficiently clear. To leave the EU was actually a vast set of choices, not one specific choice. Danial Hannan, once of faces of Vote Leave was quite clear that leaving the EU did NOT mean leaving the Single Market:    “There is a free trade zone stretching all the way from Iceland to the Russian border. We will still be part of it after we Vote Leave.” He declared: “Absolutely nobody is talking about threatening our place in the single market.” The problem was that this relatively moderate position was almost immediately ...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...