Also arianespace group has 60% of their revenue from the development of the m51 nuclear launcher, the rocket thing is their side show and a way to subsidize our nuclear launcher development not the other way around.
Also ag studied a reusable launcher in the early 2000s and found it not viable economically, because it wasn't, to make it work space x had to have massive government subsidies in guaranteed launch AND starlink which was essentially let our own investors and the dod feed the finance of space x until it's viable. Which is a good strategy mind you, but as a result pointing the finger at ag being supported by government funding as if it was a bad sign is rather absurd.
Yes, by borrowing. Any meaningful reforms seems infeasible due to social and political reasons.
> Also arianespace group has 60% of their revenue from the development of the m51 nuclear launcher
Yes, so we agree its hardly much more than a government military contractor making its money from legacy products and not some sort of an innovative company.
For the past 18 years at least, France has been trapped in an economic stagnation driven by terrible economic policies (as if trying to outcompete eastern Europe on cost wasn't a great idea). The only thing that keeps the economist from collapsing entirely is the perpetual stimulus from public spending using foreign loans. (This also will probably stop being sufficient soon since the governing party seems to be obsessed by the idea of reducing public spending instead of fixing their economic policy).
We do have issues and for the past 3 years they've been amplified by our political standoff (parliament cut in three third and none agree to work with the others), but the core of our economic woes is from pensions.
I'd be happy to live in a timeline where the Economist criticizes the bullshit that “supply chain economics” is, but if you paid attention you'd be aware that it's not really their editorial line.
> fact for the first time France unemployment numbers have gone below the numbers they climbed to in the 90s
You should thank the boomers for retiring, not the economic policy. (By the way, employment went up in pretty much all of Europe for the 2010-2020 while the economy stagnated in most places but the east)
> We do have issues and for the past 3 years they've been amplified by our political standoff (parliament cut in three third and none agree to work with the others
Standoff caused exactly by the government dogmatic stand over their failed economic policy …
> but the core of our economic woes is from pensions.
It is not, this is government narrative. The “pension problem” is merely an economic activity problem. When the real wages go down (which is did in France since 2017) while pensions are inflation adjusted, obviously the share of income that goes through pensions increases but that's not a “pensions problem” it's a wage issue (and economy health issue).
In fact, public spending per capita is in the middle of what remwins of the EU15 (just above all other Mediterranean countries and below all the others). The reason why the spendings per capita ratio is too high is not because the spendings are too high, but because the GDP is far too low due to inept policies.
Covid induced inflation has nothing to do with the money supply and all to do with supply chain disruption.
Not even remotely close to 2020-21 though.
M2 supply increased by the same proportion between Feb and June 2020 as between 2009 and 2013.
By 2021 it had increased by same % as 2009 to 2015.
> and all to do with supply chain disruption
Not massive inflation in asset prices. All that money had to go somewhere, so stocks are now significantly overvalued and housing is unaffordable.
Yes it has, and you show it right below:
> By 2021 it had increased by same % as 2009 to 2015.
It increased faster but the money supply variation was in the same ballpark, when the CPI evolution definitely wasn't (you can compare CPI between 2009 and 2015 and 2019-2021 you'll see that there's no link between inflation and the money supply).
> Not massive inflation in asset prices. All that money had to go somewhere, so stocks are now significantly overvalued and housing is unaffordable.
This has nothing to do with “inflation” (which, by definition is the evolution of CPI).
And the solution to this problem is actually quite simple: tax the rich (who got their free central bank money from nothing in exchange).
Housing is part of the CPI. And no, the “inflation” is not be definition equivalent to CPI inflation.
> you'll see that there's no link between inflation and the money supply).
Making conclusions like that from a single datapoint is not particularly scientific.
Neither which is the same as expanding the monetary base (debasement if you want to be spicy).
An economy with a shrinking money supply can experience inflation and devaluation relative to other currencies. An economy with a growing money supply can experience deflation and a strong currency.
“debasement” proper is also something else.
> An economy with a shrinking money supply can experience inflation and devaluation relative to other currencies. An economy with a growing money supply can experience deflation and a strong currency.
Yes. And an economy with a growing money supply can experience inflation and having a strong currency at the same time (see what happened to the US and the US Dollar in the first half of 2022).
Anything about guaranteed launch is an outright lie. Not ignorance.
For those who don't know, the DOD didn't finance SpaceX or Starlink or reusability.
This claim is total nonsense that started as Russian propaganda.
You'll notice the DOD refused to finance Starlink in Ukraine when they were asked to.
So much for subsidies.
SpaceX was all customer and investor funded.
Starlink was funded by Google and Fidelity.
Reusability was funded via income.
Ariane is the provider with subsidies. In the past it was ULA.
From a European perspective, it’s impossible to look at the current situation and believe it would be the same without Ariane 6, even if Ariane 6 itself isn’t particularly competitive. Sovereign access to space is invaluable. Once you lose it, you hand an extraordinary amount of leverage to the White House. And make no mistake: that leverage will be used, whatever the color of the administration.
[1] https://curious-droid.com/323/black-arrow-lipstick-rocket-br...