Three ways

Komentāri (30)

andris 11.11.2010. 13.50

MH rakstīja- Emigration as a result of the crisis is lost labour force that cannot contribute to future GDP.

Nevaru īsti piekrist. Ārvalstīs nodarbināto naudas pārvedumi ir iespaidīgi un sasniedz jau 2,5 no IKP. Arī darbaspēks var būt eksporta produkts (ja mājās tam nav efektīva pielietojuma). Protams, tas nav ilgspējīgi, jo eksportētais darbaspēks agrāk vai vēlāk nogruntēsies mītnes zemēs, nodibinās ģimeni un uzsāks jaunu, citas valsts pilsoņa dzīvi.

Atbildēt

Dzintars > andris 11.11.2010. 17.31

I agree that they create GDP elsewhere but I also think we both agree that we don’t like to envisage this as country as a sort of “Moldova of the North”. Moldova has the highest share of remittances in Europe – some 35% of GDP.

Forgive me but I did not understand the part of 2.5 and GDP?!?

Atbildēt

andris > andris 12.11.2010. 11.33

Par Molodovu, protams, piekrītu. To neviens nevēlas. Tomēr krīzes apstākļos tas ir labāk, nekā simtiem tūkstoši neapmierinātu bezdarbnieku. Naudas pārvedumi ļauj tomēr Latvijas ekonomikai izdzīvot: cilvēkiem maksāt parādus, uzturēt kaut kādu patēriņu u.tml.

MH rakstīja: Forgive me but I did not understand the part of 2.5 and GDP?!?

Te domāts pārvedumu apjoms salīdzinājumā ar šī paša perioda IKP. 2010. gadā apjoms veido 2,5% no IKP. Šis skaitlis nav domāts, kā kontribūcija pie IKP. Tikai apjomu salīdzinājumam.

Atbildēt

daina_tabuna > andris 14.11.2010. 10.23

@lbb
Ja ar “pārvedumiem” bija domāti naudas pārskaitījumi no ārzemēm uz Latviju caur banku kontiem, tad tas nav nekāds rādītājs. Naudas pārskaitījums no privātpersonas privātpersonai ne vienmēr dalīšanās ar tur nopelnīto algu. Mēs dzīvojam atvērtā tirgū un ir ļoti plašas iespējas dažādiem saimnieciskiem darījumiem. Lielu daļu šīs plūsmas nodrošina tādi servisi kā eBay. Tāpat Latvijā ir diezgan plaša t.s. freelancers community. u.tt. Līdz ar to tie 2,5% nav gluži tādi, kas ienāk IKP grozā vienkārši tāpat “par skaistām acīm”.

Atbildēt

Una Grinberga 10.11.2010. 18.33

Morten, Scenario B could be the best option, but taking into account that pre-crisis figures were overvalued then also Scenario A looks pretty good if is based on real value. Then debates about the lost decade are worthless (if you compare real-to-real value not real-to-boost value). However, there shouldn’t be doubts that B and C are just theoretical as the current government has set their strategy which is based on very conservative (structurally balanced), but stable growth.

I like you pointed out migration and its spiral effect on growth. It should be dealt asap as other strategic solutions might not work.

Atbildēt

Andis Cēsnieks 10.11.2010. 17.05

Hi, Morten! Thank you for this note. It is true that emigration lowered labour force and so potential GDP. Actual emigration was much higher than official one implying that income convergence (GDP per capita) during 2004 – 2007 in fact was even faster than headline data suggest (and a 2008-2009 drop is not so deep in per capita terms as in total GDP terms). This point could be important if we want to link GDP growth paths before and after the crisis. Perhaps, to forecast GDP growth after the crisis we should not use GDP growth before the crisis but instead to decompose it to actual income convergence (per capita) and migration (including unofficial one).

Atbildēt

melniite 10.11.2010. 16.53

An interesting question would be when will there be an incentive for highly qualified professionals to stay in Latvia rather than emigrate favoring wages n times higher i.e. whether the labour migration is a structural break or an ongoing trend.

Atbildēt

idzelme 10.11.2010. 16.10

You forgot to mention external influence on our economy that dictated processes significantly till Fall 2008. Due to the global crises influence has disappeared and we have to deal with consequences ourselves with what we have and what lend by IMF.
I believe shortly crises in the world will settle and we will see foreign money coming in again.
I hope we have learned lesson and our politicians will make tasks you mentioned priorities, if not next recession will be even harder.
I more believe to your scenario B.

-2

Atbildēt

itommy_ 10.11.2010. 15.43

Es piekrītu, ka Latvijas ražošanas potenciāls ir augsts, bet to sabojā nekompetenta valdība, politizēti procesi un ierēdņi, kuri spiesti īstenot zaglīgas shēmas. Normāls bizness bez kukuļiem ir sarežģīts. Uz bardaka fona arī paši ierēdņi ir izlaidušies, jāatzīst. Diemžēl šī pati problēma ar politiskajiem zagļiem un vāju ierēdniecību ir arī izglītībā un veselībā. Līdz ar to akcenti uz šīm nozarēm ir hipotētiski, bet ne reāli – kamēr ierēdņi ir spiesti būt politiskas prostitūtes, nevis kompetences garanti, tai skaitā izglītības pārvaldē un veselības aprūpē. Tikai caurspīdības ieviešana visā valsts pārvaldē ļaus izbeigt politisko zagšanu. Ar to vajag sākt.

-4

Atbildēt

Aleksejs Dimitrovs > itommy_ 14.11.2010. 16.57

Es gan gribētu teikt, ka ražošanas potenciāls bija augsts, bet tas bezcerīgi dilst kā jebkuras iemaņas, kas netiek izmantotas.
Jā, un krīze, manuprāt, sākās nevis 2008.gadā, bet gan tad, kad IKP un “sasniegumus” Latvijas ekonomikā sāka rēķināt no nekustamā īpašuma un kredītu burbuļa. Vai šai aritmētikai esam pāri? Šaubos, tie paši grābekļi mūs gaida priekšā.

Atbildēt

daina_tabuna 10.11.2010. 14.37

I would say- any of those scenarios is possible. Why?
100% growth for 1 is 2 only.
Try to grow 10 by 100% and you’ll probably fail. Because we have so low starting point- it’s quite possible to have good numbers %-wise. Meanwhile in absolute numbers it won’t look so pretty.

Industrial potential is very high for Latvia. And due to rather low workforce efficiency there is a space for maneuvers. I believe we can make a lot. The question is more political here- will the government let it happen? So far all good things were happening inspite of government not thanks to.

-2

Atbildēt

Dzintars > daina_tabuna 10.11.2010. 16.19

Is industrial potential for Latvia high? It is certainly not reflected in the current level of industrial production which is a rather low share of GDP (and lower than in Estonia and Lithuania).

-2

Atbildēt

Guncītis > daina_tabuna 10.11.2010. 16.55

if you talk about respectable 4% growth, then do not talk about a lost decade.
Jā, mums priekšā ir salīdzinoša stagnācija vidējā un ilgtermiņā, kas ir iekodēta ar trekno gadu valdību lēmumiem, un galvenais vaininieks galvenokārt tomēr ir kalvīšveidīgo un godmaņveidīgo nekompetence un alkatība, un nevis globālā krīzes ietekme.
Mums ir zaudētas iespējas treknajos gados, bet cerams ne zaudēta dekāde turpmāk.

Atbildēt

daina_tabuna > daina_tabuna 10.11.2010. 17.59

@Morten Hansen
There was great discussion about this topic in LinkedIn (check group “Latvian Contact Network”, topic “Skype is termed as a Baltic success story”). The main point I would take from all what has been said:
…They just produce for the sake of producing, but what’s the meaning of being a proud producer when your product never leaves the shelves? Export marketing strategy is Chinese to many companies…

I can’t agree more. If all energy spent will get its vector and won’t be wasted- potential is big enough. Of course- it needs some vision and strategy on national level… which is hardly missing. Even in such a simple industry as grain production- Latvia is missing national level agreements with other countries. Producers are doing all business on personal contacts and still- we are number 5 in Europe in grain export.

Atbildēt

Komentāri nav iespējoti šim rakstam