Outraged European Citizens are angered by how EU funds are spent

They come from all walks of life; they crowd the central streets and alleys of major South European towns; they protest silently; they are the movement of the "outraged citizens." But why they are outraged?



As is the case with every social movement at its birth, the voices are many and the direction is unclear, but one message is loud and clear: citizens who take part in the movement are angered by the unfair austere policies that seek to save Europe’s political and economic system yet divides Europe into a tale of two worlds. One world that has access to EU money and the other one that does not! Europe isn’t a land of opportunity for all, but a world of opportunity for the few in power: the nepotist government bureaucrats and politicians, union activists and their respective members.



For years Europe was caught in a sharp separation between two disparate movements: a "right wing" which embraced the prevailing a Keynesian-style liberal capitalist system, and a "left wing" which embraced a socialist system to replace Keynesian liberalism. With the aftermath of Soviet communism, Europeans are no longer separated along the left and right wings. Instead, they are now divided among those who have access to EU funds and those who don’t. The rift between these two groups is opportunity. Those on the losing side of the equation lack access to EU-financed infrastructure projects, R&D and training funds, EU subsidies, and even privileged employment in government and unionized sectors.



The new European divide is supported a semi-Soviet model of "supply-side entrepreneurship" whereby Brussels and member-nation governments continue to accumulate economic resources and act as entrepreneurs and managers, appropriating those resources by political fiat rather than by market forces. Ultimately, money goes to bad welfare, declining industries and outdated technologies rather than sectors that can lead to advancement and economic improvement.



Derelict buildings and desolate factories constitute a form of bad welfare; they were constructed for the purpose of providing "employment opportunities" for certain niches—the clientele of the local politicians that handled the EU funds—rather than true business enterprises pursuing genuine business opportunities. Unfortunately failed socialism is leading to nepotism.



Common to every welfare program, EU welfare programs have a temporary stimulative effect on the economy (multiplier effect). They create incomes and employment only as long as they last, and only for the politically connected rather than the needy. Instead, if the monetary funds that financed said projects went towards productive projects that have a sustainable effect on the economy (accelerator effect), the vicious cycle of stagnation, soaring government deficits, and debt crises may stop.



Continue reading this economic article