June 16, 2009

ANGLO, NOT EURO:

Europe: No Longer A Role Model For America (Joel Kotkin, 06.16.09, Forbes)

[O]verall the anti-E.U. vote should make it clear that Europe's overall economic system makes for a poor role model for our country. When the current economic crisis first hit, many European leaders--and their American fans, like Harvard economist Ken Rogoff--saw vindication for the E.U.'s economic policy and a much tougher road for the U.S. over the next year or two. Yet in reality, Europe already has suffered as much as we have from the downturn, and recovery there may also be even slower to emerge. In some countries, such as Greece and France, social unrest has been far more evident than here in the U.S.

Simply put, European models do not necessarily work better--and when they do, they have occurred in part due to shifts away from strict welfare-state policies. As Sweden's Nima Samadji and Robert Gindehag have argued the recent return to growth in places like Sweden came only after some modest reforms in both taxes and social benefits.

Yet at the same time, even successful European countries--as well as the whole E.U.--generally experience slower growth than the U.S. with respect to measures like gross domestic product and job growth. This makes it an example of limited utility for America, a country that needs strong economic growth in order to maintain both its quality of life and overall social sustainability.

The biggest source of divergence between the U.S. and the E.U. lies in demographic trends. For the most part, Europe is aging far more rapidly, and its workforce is shrinking. As demographer Ali Modarres notes, America's population over the second half of the 20th century grew by 130 million, essentially doubling, while the populations of France, Germany and Britain together increased by 40 million, or 25%.

As a result, there is virtually no European equivalent for cities like Houston, Phoenix, Las Vegas or Atlanta. American cities sprawl--and will likely continue to do so--because they are newer and because they are growing much faster in a country that is much vaster. Even with 100 million more people, the country will still be one-sixth as crowded as Germany.

These differences will only become more stark. Opposition to immigration--from both Muslim countries and the E.U.'s own eastern periphery--is growing even in historically tolerant places like Great Britain, Denmark and Holland. Over time, migration into Europe is destined to slow. In Barack Obama's wildly multicultural America, strong restrictionist sentiments have not gained much political ground, and, at most, efforts are directed not at reducing legal immigration but rather shifting it toward a more meritocratic model.

So we can expect America's population to continue growing at close to the highest rate in the advanced industrial world while Europe remains among the most rapidly aging places on earth. America's fertility rate is 50% higher than Russia's, Germany's and Italy's. By 2040, for example, the U.S. could have a greater population than the first 15 member nations of the European Union. Compare that prediction to 1950, when America had only half the population of Western Europe.

These numbers point toward separate destinies for the U.S. and the E.U.


Indeed, if you want to see what the model of our future is, look to Great Britain in 1775. Despite the homogenous population and culture of the various colonies, which seemingly provided no coherent reason for them to seek independence, the Empire devolved over the next two hundred and thirty-five years (inclusive), to the great advantage of all concerned. Even as the Europeans try to develop a superstate we are likely to divide into a number of smaller states. 300 million people is already too great a population for effective liberal democratic governance and adding two hundred million will only increase the sclerosis. But we could easily spin off regions (New England, the Pacific NorthWest, etc.) and free standing entities (Hawaii and Alaska) while remaining tethered together in a commonwealth. Moreover, we could at that point enter into more formal permanent relationships with our Anglospheric partners--Canada, New Zealand, Australia, Ireland, Scotland, Wales, England, etc.). Our destiny is the exact opposite of the EU.

Posted by Orrin Judd at June 16, 2009 7:59 AM
blog comments powered by Disqus
« WHEN, NOT IF: | Main | NOT ONLY DID HE JUST MAKE A CHOICE...: »