Your meta comment is probably the most informed one I've read in this discussion.
One aspect worth considering is _why_ the article is representing such a different perspective to the perspective USA readers would consider "sensible".
A reasonable answer on the growth side is that Germany's perspective is not solely focused on GDP, other factors such as employment and wage growth are important. On the stimulus side the German central banking system has always been hawkish (possibly due to their history) and this has continued to a large degree with the ECB.
That happened 25 years ago. I was only meaning to reference growth since 2008. it's not clear why recent growth should be impacted by an ancient supply shock.
The same country's economy grew at double digit rates while recovering from their entire country being leveled to the ground. [1] It's not clear that supply shocks [necessarily] suppress growth at all.
25 years is a very short time to rebuild a collapsed economy. We still pay for the East. Unemployment in the East is still high. We pay for pensions. There is payment between the German states, called 'Länderfinanzausgleich'. Not one eastern state in Germany ever has paid any money into it. There is some improvement in their financial situation, but it is far from self-sufficient.
Exactly, the effects of reunification are still being felt. Not to mention battling a low birth rate for quite some time, although this is partially offset by immigration from other parts of the EU.
