Katalunian egondako bilakaera politikoari segitu diogu blog honetan.
‘Bozketaren’ azken emaitzak ez ditugu eman, ezagunegiak baitira prentsan, hala Kataluniako prentsan nola Euskal Herrikoan.
Datu esanguratsuak hemen ikus daitezke:
La participació total del 9-N: 2.305.290 vots[1].
(Hemen ere: 2,305,390 million Catalans vote on independence[2].)
Baina funtsean, Bill Mitchell-ek dioenez, Kataluniako eztabaidetan eta bozketan ‘puntua’ faltan bota da[3].
Zein da ‘puntua’?
‘Puntua’ moneta propioari dagokio.
Blog honetan ikusi dugun bezala, Eskozian antzeko ‘puntua’ faltan bota zen[4].
Ikus dezagun, gaingiroki bada ere, Mitchell-ek Kataluniaz aipatzen duena.
1. Testuingurua
Testuinguruari dagokionez, hona hemen zenbait zehaztasun:
i) Atzerapen ekonomikoa, defizit fiskala, zorra, EBZ eta eskari agregatua dira ikertu behar diren aldagaiak[5].
ii) EBZren ahalmen eskasa benetan gastu agregatua babesteko[6], hazkunde ekonomikorako iturri dena.
iii) Kataluniaren egoera ekonomikoa euroguneko parte izateari dagokio[7], hein handi batean.
iv) Egoera kezkagarri hori aldatu behar zen. Baina horretaz ez da ezer entzuten[8].
Kasurako, The Guardian delakoak mitoa aipatzen segitzen du, alegia, hazkundearen muga Europako kredituaren prezio handiari dagokiola. Ez da ezer esaten erabiltzen diren muga fiskalei buruz, ezta muga horiei segitzen dioten politika fiskal pro-ziklikoei buruz ere[9], benetan oso kezkagarriak direnak.
Hortaz, ondorioa argi dago: independentziaren esanahiak alde ekonomikoa ere kontuan izan beharko du.
2. Zenbait datu ekonomiko
Aipaturiko artikuluan Mitchell-ek Espainiako eta Kataluniako zenbat datu ekonomiko ematen ditu. Hona hemen batzuk (irudiak jatorrizko artikuluan ikus daitezke.)
a) 2000tik 2011ra doan tarteko Barne Produktu Gordin (BPG) erreala Espainiarako, Madrilerako eta Kataluniarako.
Katalunia atzerapen sakonagoa jasoz, hazkundera lehenago itzuli zen.
b) Langabezia: langabezia tasa totalak 2000tik 2013ra.
c) Gazteriaren langabezia (15-24 urtekoak).
Kataluniaren etorkizuna hortxe dago[10], gazteriarengan.
d) BPG per capita.
Katalunia eta Madril EBko bataz bestekoaren antzekoak dira 2000tik 2011ra. Geroago posizioa jaitsi da.
e) Pobreziaren arriskuan dagoen jendea, populazio osoaren portzentaian.
Azken urteko bukaerarako, %20 kataluniar egon ziren kategoria horretan, euroa martxan jarri zenetik % 17,7 igo dena.
f) Langabezia tasak
2013ko erregio desberdinetako langabezia tasen irudiak (osoa eta gazteriarena) ez dira batere politak.
3. Argudioak
Bukatzeko, Mitchell-ek ondoko argudio nagusiak azpimarratzen ditu.
1) Argudio nagusia: ‘España nos roba”[11]. Ingelesezko prentsak argudio hori errepikatu du[12].
2) Datuak, alta, ez bide dira hain argi, Mitchell-en ustez[13].
4. Faltan botatzen dena
Artikuluan dagoen zatirik garrantzitsuena ondoan aipatzen da.
(i) Katalunia eta Europa
Independentziaren kasuan, Katalunia EBtik botako ote dute?[14]
Norvegia, Suitza eta Groenlandia ongi samar daude[15].
Islandia ere[16].
(ii) Katalunia eta zor publikoa
Taktika hau[17] Eskozian erabili zen, Eskoziako populazioa izutzeko.
Sasi-argudioa ondoko linkean ikus daiteke[18].
Beherago ikusiko dugunez, eta Mitchell-ek gogoratzen duenez, “hori guztia Kataluniak sistema monetarioarekin zer egiten duenari dagokio” (“…it depends on what Catalonia does with respect to its monetary system.”)
(iii) Fondo erregionalen likidezia
Mitchell-ek berak egindako analisi baten arabera[19], “It appears that in 2014, Catalonia is to receive 7,000 million euros or around 1/3 of the total disbursements by the fund.”
Argudiorik sakonenak segidan.
(iv) Estatu federalari dagozkionak
Financial Times berak aipatzen du estatu federalaren kasua, Kataluniaren fondoak aipatzerakoan[20].
Mitchell ados dago aurreko linkean aipatutako bi puntu horiekin, alegia, edozein estatu federaletan azaltzen diren puntuekin.
Afera da, eta hauxe da garrantzitsuena, ‘funtsezko puntua’ faltan botatzen dela, sezesionista gehienek ere galtzen dutena.
Zein da puntu hori?
Espainiar estatu ez da estatu federal bat, eta espainiar gobernuak ezin ditu bermatu lehen mailako zerbitzu publikoak zeren bere moneta propioa erabiltzeari uko egin baitzion eurogunean sartu zenean.
(v) Kataluniaren gaixotasun ekonomikoa: euroa
Katalunia jasaten duen gaixotasun ekonomikoa, beste kausa guztien gainetik eta batez ere, euroguneko parte izateari dagokio[21].
Baina Kataluniako politikariek ez dute nahi euroa uztea[22].
(vi) Moneta propioa
Moneta propiorik gabe Katalunia bono merkatuen biktima bilakatuko da, jaitsiera ekonomikoetan. Erosten egongo da Egonkortasun eta Hazkunde Akordioaren barruan (Stability and Growth Pact), zeinak EBko estatu kideei birtualki ezinezko egiten baitie oparotasun sostengatua lortzea.
Italian orain dela gutxi gertatu den moduan[23], Kataluniak amore emango du Bruselak austeritatea eskatuko dioenean.
Ondorioa
Bill Mitchell-ek dioen moduan,
Catalonia should develop its own independent nation and use its own currency to build on its prosperity. It certainly has the economic structure in which to prosper materially.
(Zabaldu arren)
[1] Ikus http://www.vilaweb.cat/noticia/4218762/20141110/participacio-total-9-n-2305290-vots.html.
[2] Ikus http://english.vilaweb.cat/politics/2305390-million-catalans-vote-on-independence.
[3] Ikus Catalonia’s vote largely misses the point: http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=29454.
[4] Ikus, besteak beste, ondoko linkak: https://www.unibertsitatea.net/blogak/heterodoxia/2012/10/08/bill-mitchell-ek-eskoziaz/ eta https://www.unibertsitatea.net/blogak/heterodoxia/2013/10/31/eskozia-independentziaranzko-bidean/.
[5] Mitchell-en hitzez, ingelesez: “The bets are on at the moment that the Eurozone will dip back into recession for the third time since 2008 such is the incompetence of the policy makers and the policy framework they have erected to operate within. There is constant talk that the ECB will once again step in to save the day but all they can do is stop a nation going broke by guaranteeing their fiscal deficits and/or buying their debt.”
[6] Ingelesez: “The central bank has very limited capacity to actually stimulate aggregate spending, which is the source of economic growth when there is massive idle productive capacity. In this context, the vote on Sunday by Catalonians (well around 33 per cent of them), which was overwhelmingly yes (81 per cent), is interesting although I doubt it will lead to anything constructive – like the Community exiting the Eurozone and really becoming independent.”
[7] Ingelesez: “…the economic circumstances the Community finds itself in are a direct consequence of being part of the Eurozone. That would have to change for there to be any meaning to the calls for secession. I don’t hear those arguments coming out strongly at all.”
[8] Ingelesez: “That would have to change for there to be any meaning to the calls for secession. I don’t hear those arguments coming out strongly at all.”
[9] Ingelesez: “In terms of the likelihood of the triple-dip recession, the UK Guardian article (November 10, 2014) – Stagnant growth raises spectre of recession across eurozone – continued to spread the myth that the constraint on growth was the high price of credit in Europe.
It claimed that “the eurozone risked slipping into a self-fulfilling period of stagnation without further efforts to cut the cost of credit”.
No mention of the fiscal constraints that are being imposed throughout and the pro-cyclical fiscal policies that follow those constraints.”
[10] Ingelesez: “Catalonia’s future is right there! Being undermined by its association with Spain and its use of the euro. Youth unemployment rates of this magnitude are a disaster and would normally require immediate attention using job creation programs.”
[11] Ingelesez: “They claim that their economic output (regional income) is siphoned off in the form of taxes by the central government to support the provision of public services elsewhere in Spain.
It is an interesting argument.”
[12] Ingelesez: “The English media has also supported the argument that Catalonia is being ripped off – for example, the Financial Timesarticle (May 5, 2014) – Time to tackle the Catalonia crisis – claimed that secession was not a good idea given the uncertainty about EU and euro membership but that the region should gain more independence.
The FT rehearsed the usual arguments:
For years a healthy chunk of its tax revenues has in effect been given away to help fund the rest of the country’s public services. The sense that Catalonia is bailing out the poorer Spanish regions has become increasingly painful for its people.”
[13] Mitchell-ek dioenez, ingelesez: “It appears that the difference between what Catalonia pays in taxes from its regional income and what it receives back from the state is equal to around 8.5 per cent of its regional income per year.
If regional income was unchanged that amount reinvested back in the Community would be very beneficial. True enough. But perhaps that discrepancy is illusory once the Community would be responsible for the provision of all its infrastructure (significant amounts currently provided by the central government).
Apparently, that component is equal to around 2.7 per cent of Catalonia’s regional income at least.” (Ikus http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/22/economics-catalan-independence-dont-add-up)
[14] Ingelesez: “Then the question arises whether the regional income would endure as an independent nation. The claim by those opposing the secession is that Catalonia would be expelled from the EU and would suffer constraints on its trade and businesses would abandon the new nation.
I don’t believe that argument.”
[15] Ingelesez: “Nations such as Norway, Switzerland and Greenland do not seem to suffer from being outside the EU. Norway and Switzerland have never been members, but Greenland was part of the EEC, courtesy of Denmark’s membership.
Once it attained self-rule in 1979, strong domestic opposition against the EEC (particularly over fishing rights) led to Greenland formally leaving the EEC in 1985.
Nothing obviously bad has happened to them as a consequence. Interestingly, as part of its exit, Greenland negotiated the so-called ‘Greenland Treaty’, which allowed the nation to remain subject to some of the provisions of the European Treaties by dint of its status under the ‘Overseas Countries and Territories’ provision within the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.
Therefore it seems possible that any EU nation could abandon the euro unilaterally, negotiate to leave the EU, but on exit, sign a special ‘Catalonia Treaty’ (for example), which could, if there was the political will and the sense of mutual benefit, leave the nation within the EU scope.”
[16] Ingelesez: “It can also be argued that Iceland, another non-EU nation, has recovered from its financial collapse much more quickly and robustly as a result of exercising its own sovereignty.
It is highly unlikely that had it been part of the Eurozone, it would have navigated through the crisis as well as it did. The Troika would have surely imposed draconian austerity on it, forced it to prop up the zombie banks and carry the resulting financial burden, and demanded it to pay the spurious claims made by the British and Dutch governments for recompense for the losses their citizens incurred during the bank collapses.”
[17] Ikus http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/22/economics-catalan-independence-dont-add-up.
[18] Ingelesez: “…the current Catalan public debt – the biggest in Spain by far – would have to be added the share of Spanish debt attributable to Catalonia in the division of assets according to international law. All that would produce an economic crisis that would last for many years, and the region that emerges from that crisis would not be the one we know now, but a much poorer Catalonia.”(Ikus http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/nov/22/economics-catalan-independence-dont-add-up)
[19] Ingelesez: “I did some further exploration to analyse the distribution of funds under the – Fondo de Liquidez Autonómica – (Regional Liquidity Fund) or FLA, which was set up by the Spanish government in July 2012, to assist the regional communities that were unable to borrow in private bond markets to keep their local governments operating.
The FLA was endowed with 23,000 million euros from the central government funds. It then instructed the so-called – Instituto de Crédito Oficial – to manage the funds and make loans to the communities. In 2013, loans were provided to Andalusia, Catalonia, Asturias, Cantabria, Castilla-La Mancha, Valencia, Canary Islands, Murcia and the Balearic Islands.”
[20] Ingelesez: “Even the FT said that “any federal state, however loosely constituted, there are bound to be transfers from rich regions to poor” although it urged the transfers to be reduced so that Catalonia’s “public services should not be underfunded when compared with those in other parts of Spain”.”
[21] Mitchell-en hitzez: “I support the democratic rights of all citizens to determine their own fortunes. The introduction of the euro and the policy conduct since has not reflected that sort of process.
The citizenship had little idea of what their political leaders were taking them into (the leaders had little idea too).
The whole monetary system was imposed on the population and has since been justified with lies and fudged data.
But the reality is clear – it doesn’t work.”
[22] Ingelesez: “The Catalan News Agency report (September 19, 2013) – The Catalan President guarantees that Catalonia “will have the euro as its currency whatever happens” – tells you what that the independence move is unlikely to help the Community much.
Yes, Catalonia accounts for about 18 per cent of Spain’s real GDP and is home to many multi-national firms. It has a sophisticated regional economy.”
[23] Ikus http://moslereconomics.com/2014/10/29/italy-surrenders/.
