
The man who screwed an entire country - pier0
http://www.economist.com/node/18805327
======
raquo
Here's another man who screwed up a country: Russia's Putin. In power since
2000, insane amount of fraud, perpetuating corruption, no free speech, no rule
of law, police state and pretty much any other state-level deficiency you can
think of, and at a much bigger scale than you can imagine. As a result
Russia's state is much closer to Nigeria than pretty much any EU country (no,
I'm not pointing at Nigeria randomly, it's true) and the brightest people are
fleeing the country as if it's a sinking ship (and, well, it is).

~~~
JCB_K
I wouldn't say Putin is an asset to any country, but you can't blame it all on
him either. With people like Lenin, Stalin and Jeltsin as your predecessors
you don't really start off good.

~~~
RickHull
> With people like Lenin, Stalin and Jeltsin as your predecessors you don't
> really start off good.

At the same time, they did set the stage for a dramatic recovery.

~~~
lurker19
Is Jeltsin the same as Yeltsin? Was he in the same league as the other two? He
seemed OK from the news I read, not much worse than, say, Reagan, in terms of
leadership and mental stability.

------
blumentopf
It's amazing that the Economist still touts Anglo-Saxon "panaceas" for growth:
deregulate, get rid of red tape, focus the economy on services rather than
manufacturing.

When Germany entered a period of stagnation after the Euro-introduction in
2002, the Economist made exactly the same prescriptions. Look what that
ideology has done to the US and the UK: countless jobs in manufacturing have
been offshored and growth was simulated through financial "innovations".

Personally, I buy lots of organic food products from Italy (e.g. laselva-
bio.eu) as well as clothes (e.g. slowear.it), and for a simple reason: They're
the best on the market. Therein lies Italy's potential.

~~~
tptacek
You've responded to an objective assessment of Italy's economy --- it's hugely
in debt and lags the EU in job creation and GDP growth --- with subjective
claims about organic food and clothes. Everyone seems to realize that Italy's
economy is dominated by exports, including those organic foods and designer
clothes. They're still getting their credit rating downgraded. Now what?

~~~
Klinky
Which country doesn't have a downgraded credit rating? Also who is doing this
"credit rating"? Standard & Poor's? The same crooks who fluffed up the ratings
of fraudulent MBS & CDOs a few years ago helping to setup the housing crisis
in the first place?

But no, let's further deregulate & offshore jobs to countries that have poor
humane rights records so our corporate overlords can get ever richer.

~~~
tptacek
A mystifying comment. Because today's banks are loaded up with sleazy bad
actors, there's no such thing as compounding interest? Because S&P sold its
reputation for a few deals, there's no such thing as creditworthiness?

~~~
Klinky
S&P, Fitch & Moodys didn't just sell their reputation for a "few deals".
Pretty much every MBS or CDO was rated highly by these companies. Trillions of
dollars worth. A large part of this is due to the fact that they are paid by
the "bad actors" inside the investment firms & banks that they're suppose to
be "independently" rating. If we banned that form of relationship that would
be "regulation" which is "bad".

So, here we are with these same companies in charge of sovereign credit
ratings. The same companies that played a large part in creating a credit
crisis are the companies that get to set creditworthiness. Magnificent system
we have.

So in order to make these credit rating agencies happy, we must deregulate
further, lower taxes further, turn into a service level economy & freeze or
depress wages so we can hope for short-term gains in our economy. Which makes
corporations happy, banks happy & market makers happy thus our
creditworthiness goes higher. It seems rather biased for those who are on top
& those who caused the calamity in the first place. Once the economy
stabilizes those smart rich people on top can start making imaginary
investments with their friends until they create another crisis. Rinse &
repeat. Look where prosperity has come from over the last 15 years. Bubbles &
scams.

Does this look sustainable? Who really benefits from this?

~~~
tptacek
Do you believe that an international banking conspiracy is deceiving us about
Italy's debt standing at over 120% of GDP?

Do you believe that Italy's debt is that high because Italy overleveraged
itself on mortgage-backed securities?

Did you read the other comments on this thread, where Italy's central bank
director complained about Italian wage stagnation and its two-tiered
employment system, and its poor tax revenues?

~~~
Klinky
No they are not necessarily deceiving us on the outstanding debt in Italy. But
they certainly weren't sounding the sovereign credit alarm or MBS/CDOs alarm
when the money was rolling in, even though they had direct access to data &
probably knew what was coming down the line. 120% of GDP is concerning but not
end of the world. The USA has a higher ratio. Italy's credit rating has
actually been lower before. If we were extremely concerned about GDP/debt
ratio & credit ratings then perhaps we should all adopt a model like China.

Italy didn't get to where it's at entirely because of MBSs but the crisis
certainly didn't help any country's financial situation & many countries had
to shore up banks & took a credit hit.

There are definitely some issues with how Italy operates. Having a
philandering-media-monopoly-owning-billionaire tyrant in charge certainly
doesn't help.

While changes probably need to be made, the fact is that changes always need
to be made. Radically switching to a pro-corporate/anti-worker strategy
because shady rating agencies might downgrade you a point is silly.

------
jodrellblank
After a paragraph of how terribly Italy is doing in the world rankings, the
governor of the Bank of Italy is leaving ... to take the reins at the European
Central Bank?

Is this a case of being awful therefore promoted, or was he spectacularly good
at stopping Italy from getting worse?

~~~
radu_floricica
Central Bank governors are strangely resilient and separate from day to day
politics. I'm Romanian and we've had a string of our own Berlusconis here, but
since '99 we've had just one Bank Governor, and a very capable one. He even
left his position to work as a Prime Minister for a about a year, and then
returned to the Central Bank. He's completely uncharacteristic of everything
else in Romanian politics.

------
the_gws
I am Italian and I dislike Berlusconi. That said it must be recognized that
all of Italy's issues were already there before him. We can't really say that
Italy has worsened with him but we can surely say that it hasn't got any
better. There were a lot of expectations in 1994 that he was going to change
Italy and bring the liberal revolution it sorely needs. Alas, none of them
were met.

------
chriserin
Italy's economy is a hard economy to judge because of an out-sized black
market (to the tune of 30% - 40% gdp), any article of Italian economic
statistics needs to a least mention this.

[http://italianthro.blogspot.com/2010/09/southern-italys-
econ...](http://italianthro.blogspot.com/2010/09/southern-italys-economy-
underestimated.html)

------
Jd
The title implies that Italy would have done better with a different prime
minister, but I have no reason to believe this would be the case. Lots of
European economies have done worse and Italians are, well, Italians.

~~~
acangiano
> Italians are, well, Italians

Care to elaborate on this? "Blacks are, well, blacks" would sound racist. I'm
not sure this highly upvoted comment of yours is much nobler in spirit.

~~~
Jd
"Racism" is a somewhat vague term for which I believe the current usage is
primarily born out of the American civil rights movement. Europeans on the
other hand have been comfortable with labeling various national
characteristics for centuries -- various national characteristics that are
undoubtedly true. These come in negative, positive, and contested categories.
For instance, the British are known for their "stiff upper lip," Germans
(traditionally, not contemporarily) for their warlike sentiment, etc.

In America we have the sense that these things are mutable, and this is
partially true, but it is unreasonable to expect people to change overnight,
and it is especially unreasonable to expect that some external force (e.g.
purely economic forces) will produce the massive changes that might be
perceived as necessary for a society to adapt to modernity as the Economist
writers perceive as necessary and laudable.

In any case, I think it is unacceptable to focus only on the negative aspects
of a people. "Blacks are, well, blacks" would generally be racist since
virtually no one would use that in a positive sense. Italians often self-
perceive that their resistance to the way things are done in a capitalist
world is based on some inner nobility -- and although I generally disagree, I
think there is still a grain of truth there. Besides, Italians are among the
most openly racist peoples in Europe -- people from Northern Italy are even
comfortable calling Southern Italy part of Africa (not meant in a positive
sense!).

~~~
Perceval
Germans were traditionally known for beer, singing, and culture. It was the
Prussians who were known for their militarism.

~~~
Jd
Not exactly. See, for example, Tacitus (c. 98 CE):

 _Repose is unwelcome to their race, and toils and perils afford them a better
opportunity of distinguishing themselves; they are unable, without war and
violence, to maintain a large train of followers. The companion requires from
the liberality of his chief, the warlike steed, the bloody and conquering
spear: and in place of pay, he expects to be supplied with a table, homely
indeed, but plentiful. The funds for this munificence must be found in war and
rapine; nor are they so easily persuaded to cultivate the earth, and await the
produce of the seasons, as to challenge the foe, and expose themselves to
wounds; nay, they even think it base and spiritless to earn by sweat what they
might purchase with blood._

------
gnufied
Whatever happened to 'No politics' here?

~~~
tokenadult
_Whatever happened to 'No politics' here?_

The rule has never been absolute, but a strong preference. The HN Guidelines
that appear as a bottom-of-the-page link on most HN pages

<http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html>

say, "Off-Topic: Most stories about politics, or crime, or sports, unless
they're evidence of some interesting new phenomenon."

The welcome message that briefly appears as a top-of-the-page link to newly
registered users

<http://ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html>

(but appears not to be mandatory to read for anyone) says, "Essentially there
are two rules here: don't post or upvote crap links, and don't be rude or dumb
in comment threads."

By the way, the rest of the welcome message is a good reminder to everyone
here about how to make Hacker News a better community.

I thought it was (barely) interesting to discuss why Italy, which is evidently
full of smart industrialists, is not thriving better as a national economy. If
a politics story doesn't have an angle like that related to the environment
for forming new companies for hackers, I usually just ignore it, and I try to
silently downvote purely partisan political comments in threads wherever I
find them.

------
iwwr
What is the particularly damning thing about this guy, moreso than a typical
politician?

~~~
ptbello
It's the scale, man. The sheer scale of it. Average corrupt politicians have a
mistress, or two, or three; he has a harem of a couple dozen, several of which
minors. The average corrupt politician casts his shadow on the media; he owns
the media. He has brought the concept of "conflict of interest" to a whole new
level.

~~~
jodrellblank
_The sheer scale of it. Average corrupt politicians have a mistress, or two,
or three; he has a harem of a couple dozen, several of which minors._

The allegation that some are minors is distasteful, but the fact that he
sleeps with more women than you feel comfortable with is neither here nor
there when talking about how he "ruined a country".

It's depressing to see The Economist's article open by talking about his sex
life. It's utterly immaterial.

His grip on the media, his lack of reforms, his policies on this that and the
other, his changing the law to avoid prosecution for fraud allegation - those
things matter to the story of how he "ruined Italy"; how many people he sleeps
with and how righteously outraged Americans are by it? Doesn't matter.

~~~
chadgeidel
Multiple sexual partners aren't the issue. When one uses the term "harem" it
paints a different picture - the casual disregard for half the human race.
Perhaps that contributes to "The female-participation rate in the workforce is
46%, the lowest in western Europe."

I'm loathe to use "litmus test" type analogies, but I believe this behavior is
telling.

------
aufreak3
Individuals are easy targets for finger pointing when it comes to "who screwed
up X". In the case of something as large as a country ... what were the rest
of the gazillion folks doing? Supporting the screwups?

------
stretchwithme
I remember him grab a meter maid's ass from behind on the street in front of
other officials and cameras. il douche.

------
known
I think all politicians suffer from Narcissism.

~~~
chopsueyar
[http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://static3.businessi...](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4de76b9fccd1d52920160000/anthony-
weiner-crotch-shot.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.businessinsider.com/oh-please-of-
course-anthony-weiner-sent-that-picture-2011-6&usg=__WnkANvGHPIV4C8BaLVD8bk_-
hyE=&h=319&w=570&sz=61&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=BL0tzenbS6qKAM:&tbnh=106&tbnw=189&ei=f9XyTeboI8iutwfPg8mSBw&prev=/search%3Fq%3Danthony%2Bweiner%2Bcrotch%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-
US:official%26biw%3D1276%26bih%3D591%26tbm%3Disch&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=283&vpy=102&dur=3388&hovh=168&hovw=300&tx=152&ty=128&page=1&ndsp=17&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0&biw=1276&bih=591)

What good is karma if you can't use it?

------
chopsueyar
At least Italy can put a name on their guy.

------
phlux
He is their George Bush.

Seriously, in the last decade we have seen more direct, deliberate corruption
and out right political douchebaggery than I would have thought possible. And
in all of these scandals, not a single politician has paid.

Just like I said when Inside Job came out, if there was any doubt that we are
living in a oligarchy, let all doubts now be cast aside.

~~~
sigzero
Sorry, it isn't George Bush's fault. He is a nice scape goat. Congress has the
purse strings. It's their fault and it is still their fault. They could have
stopped him at any time they wanted. No balls on either side.

~~~
antidaily
Only if you don't count Bush taking us into the trillion dollar Iraq war
without a congressional war declaration.

not that i want to debate the merits of congress.

~~~
anamax
> Only if you don't count Bush taking us into the trillion dollar Iraq war
> without a congressional war declaration.

Congress approved, via explicit votes, the Iraq war at multiple points.

There has never been a requirement for legislation that says "we declare war".

~~~
jbooth
So who was that on TV constantly boosting the idea and bringing it into the
State of the Union address, etc?

Are you making the case that the Bush admin doesn't 1,000,000% own the Iraq
war? Really?

(FWIW, they were pushing tax cuts simultaneously). Just cause Congress got
bullied into approving these things doesn't mean they weren't Bush
initiatives.

~~~
anamax
> So who was that on TV constantly boosting the idea and bringing it into the
> State of the Union address, etc?

Huh? The claim was that congress didn't approve the Iraq war. It did, several
times. The above has nothing to do with that fact.

> Are you making the case that the Bush admin doesn't 1,000,000% own the Iraq
> war? Really?

Do you really think that Congress bears no responsibility for the votes that
it takes?

> Just cause Congress got bullied into approving these things doesn't mean
> they weren't Bush initiatives.

Poor little congresscritters, can't stand up to that mean old moron Bush.

Obama hasn't varied from Bush's Iraq timetable at all. Is he also "bullied"?
(As candidate Obama pointed out, President Obama could start withdrawing
troops from Iraq and Afghanistan with 10 minutes after taking office. PO
didn't.)

------
cadalac
When I went to the page, I thought that was Gary Bettman.

------
hugh3
Blah blah politics blah blah blah. Flagged.

------
javad123
Unfortunately when it comes to Berlusconi, the Economist has no credibility.
They simply hate him.

~~~
thadeus_venture
That's actually true, the Economist has always been very critical of Italy. I
have a couple Italian friends who cut their subscriptions a while back because
of one article or another. I wouldn't go so far as to say they have no
credibility, but they do have a sizable history of negative articles about
Italy. Their criticisms may have been justified, but I think that's still a
useful piece of knowledge.

