Stay in view of the free updates

Simply subscribe to European economy Myft Digest – it is delivered directly to your inbox.

In this rare thing, Angela Merkel’s statement is between his life Europe It represents 7 percent of the world’s population, a quarter of its economic output and half of its social spending. These numbers have somewhat modified during the subsequent 13 years, but their essence carries.

Moreover, I gained a new urgency. The reason is that Merkel wanted some luxury scratching was to maintain the “way of life” in Europe. The task now is to defend Europe’s life. How, if not through the smaller luxury state, is a better armed continent?

Borrowing? Britain and France have experienced tense moments with bond investors recently. Public debt Approach or It exceeds The national product in both countries, as in Italy. One way about this may be some European debt. Imagine an agreement, in fact, Germany borrows more to bear the costs of military accumulation in other countries, which in turn can do things-building nuclear weapons, and after the forces near Russia-which may be very taboo for Berlin to do itself. The problem is that just describing this The big deal In words, the birth makes one in a deep greeting to that, at least in the short term. (Which, given the incentive, Russia must act on its regional ambitions before the deportation of Europe is the important term).

Another option is to raise taxes. On the margins, this can happen. But a great rise? In the Undynamic continent already? It will appear that Europe has not learned any of the economic time, or from endless competitiveness reports, or from America. It is not clear that tax increases are more susceptible to voters than spending discounts. In Britain, the government that has a huge authorization has not been completely recovered from the tax lifting budget, although its weight often fell on business. Twice, Emmanuel Macron incurred protests that shook the French state. The first was against high taxes.

Any person under the age of 80 who spent his life in Europe can be exempted in terms of a giant luxury as a natural way of things. In fact, the result of strange historical conditions, which prevailed in the second half of the twentieth century and no longer did. One of them was the implicit American support through NATO, which allowed European governments to spend a certain amount over the butter that might have gone on weapons. (Although many have spent both.) Another is the fact that during the Welfarist, Europe had only a few competition from China or even India, which did not really reach the global economy until the nineties. The “Social Market” was sponsored in Sharka.

However, there was a third useful worker who was a young population – 13 percent of the British More than 65 In 1972, now about five. numbers France Similar, and Germany A higher boy, with all three countries expected to be much older than taking into account the century. These pension obligations and health care will be difficult enough until the working population meets even before the current defense shock. Now, they are barely reasonable, to say something about the moral scene of young people who are asked to carry the weapon and Preserving the old in a specific style. This is more than Lord Ketchner request. Governments will have to be calm with the old. Or, if this cannot be imagined due to the weigh of voting, the blade will have to fall into more productive areas of spending.

In both cases, the state of luxury must be declined as we have known to some extent: it is not even enough that we will not call it this name, but enough to harm. He was never designed for a world where living to 100 is unnatural. It was never assumed to enable things like the current business benefits bill in Britain. the Rise In social spending over the past century, it was unreasonable global – includes Japan, the United States, Australia and Canada – but the absolute levels are the highest in Europe. As the most introductory of these places is exposed, this is not applicable.

The question is whether the audience agrees. I came to doubt whether rich democratic societies can make difficult reforms – except in a crisis. Chronic discomfort is not enough. The true fear element should come as now. Another reason for the belief that spending discounts is easier to sell on behalf of the defense more than on behalf of a generalized idea of ​​efficiency. The defense itself has the properties of Welfarist. The American army is doubled as a professional coach, a university degree and above all, often in less sectarian states such as Kansas and Kentucky, which hosts the army’s bases. If the European defense budgets are heading about 4 percent of GDP, the possibility of its social function with it does not wander.

However, this is not the purpose of defense, and politicians must insist on this point. The purpose is to survive. Europe should not find itself again in a position where Vice President JD Vance has the necessity of life and death. All other secondary priorities.

Currently, the quick readers will think about recording what the most obvious and lower military continent will raise: the great power from which it turns. As a result of their geopolitical mixing, it may end in Europe and America until they resemble each other more than ever as a coherent “West” of the “West”. Whether this is a paradox, paradox, or anything else, this will be sufficient to raise half of the smile, whether the conditions are less desperate.

Janan.ganesh@ft.com