Osservata da un altro punto di vista, la conseguenza è che solo politiche imprevedibili o shock inattesi possono determinare variazioni delle variabili reali e portare temporaneamente il sistema in squilibrio, con la produzione e l’occupazione al di sopra dei loro valori naturali. Dovrebbe però essere chiaro che ciò esclude qualsiasi ruolo per le politiche di intervento pubblico a fini di stabilizzazione.
L’impianto teorico dei nuovi classici ha prodotto, quindi, conseguenze non trascurabili sulla efficacia degli strumenti di politica economica.
Ma ora lasciamo spazio all'interessantissima (e tragicamente divertente) ricostruzione di Francesco:
In molti casi infatti, a fianco alla privatizzazione non è stato realizzato un vero e proprio processo di liberalizzazione, e questo non ha migliorato (a volte addirittura peggiorato) l’efficienza nel meccanismo di formazione dei prezzi, sostanzialmente spostando dalla mano pubblica i profitti (o le perdite) che son diventati privati.
- Angela Merkel, intervento al Parlamento Europeo, 27 giugno 2007
SPAGNA. “We have not let a single substantial point of the Constitutional Treaty go… It is, without a doubt, much more than a treaty. This is a project of foundational character, a treaty for a new Europe.”
IRLANDA.“90 per cent of it is still there... these changes haven't made any dramatic change to the substance of what was agreed back in 2004.”
"The difference between the original Constitution and the present Lisbon Treaty is one of approach, rather than content ... The proposals in the original constitutional treaty are practically unchanged. They have simply been dispersed through the old treaties in the form of amendments. Why this subtle change? Above all, to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary ... But lift the lid and look in the toolbox: all the same innovative and effective tools are there, just as they were carefully crafted by the European Convention."
"They decided that the document should be unreadable. If it is unreadable, it is not constitutional, that was the sort of perception. Where they got this perception from is a mystery to me. In order to make our citizens happy, to produce a document that they will never understand! But, there is some truth [in it]. Because if this is the kind of document that the IGC will produce, any Prime Minister - imagine the UK Prime Minister - can go to the Commons and say 'Look, you see, it's absolutely unreadable, it's the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum.' Should you succeed in understanding it at first sight there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new."G. Amato, The Centre for European Reform, London, 12 July 2007 (file audio)
"Sometimes I like to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empires. We have the dimension of empire but there is a great difference. Empires were usually made with force with a centre imposing diktat, a will on the others. Now what we have is the first non-imperial empire."
"Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly ... All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way."
" The most striklng change (between the EU Constitution in its older and newer version ) is perhaps that in order to enable some governments to reassure their electorates that the changes will have no constitutional implications, the idea of a new and simpler treaty containing all the provisions governing the Union has now been dropped in favour of a huge series of individual amendments to two existing treaties. Virtual incomprehensibilty has thus replaced simplicity as the key approach to EU reform. As for the changes now proposed to be made to the constitutional treaty, most are presentational changes that have no practical effect. They have simply been designed to enable certain heads of government to sell to their people the idea of ratification by parliamentary action rather than by referendum."
Dr Garret FitzGerald
"The good thing about not calling it a Constltution is that no one can ask for a referendum on it."G. Amato, speech at London School of Econmics, 21 February 2007
“Britain is different. Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?”