How is austerity doing in Europe

[Rshermr]

Same thing, different day. IQ, liberal.... Econ 101, Cornnut ologopoly.. Blah blah blah .zzzzz

And all I gotta see is "This message is hidden because EdwardBaiamonte is on your ignore list." because it's the same old same old. Boring

Ed is paid to post. He has no other job. Just a drain on the economy. He simply posts his dogma, bores the hell out of people, and kills threads he does not like. Con Troll, And he still can not name a time when cutting income taxes across the board and cutting spending ever helped a bad economy. Totally beyond him.

I'll happily post bs for a buck. How do I sign up?

You have to be a con tool. Then, get on the good side of ed, and a few others. No one out there paying for rational posts.
Got to be con dogma.

 

[itfitzme]

Ed is paid to post. He has no other job. Just a drain on the economy. He simply posts his dogma, bores the hell out of people, and kills threads he does not like. Con Troll, And he still can not name a time when cutting income taxes across the board and cutting spending ever helped a bad economy. Totally beyond him.

I'll happily post bs for a buck. How do I sign up?

You have to be a con tool. Then, get on the good side of ed, and a few others. No one out there paying for rational posts.
Got to be con dogma.

On Ed's good side? Well, that'll never happen. The first time I posted, looking for some clarification on MV=PQ, I apparently became a liberal. I'll never figure that out. But for some reason, MV=PQ is a liberal concept.

 

[Rshermr]

I'll happily post bs for a buck. How do I sign up?

You have to be a con tool. Then, get on the good side of ed, and a few others. No one out there paying for rational posts.
Got to be con dogma.

On Ed's good side? Well, that'll never happen. The first time I posted, looking for some clarification on MV=PQ, I apparently became a liberal. I'll never figure that out. But for some reason, MV=PQ is a liberal concept.

Thing is, it looked like science or math, or, or, or, well, something that he is not supposed to believe in. And, if you can not understand it, it must be liberal. Because no con believes in that whole science thing.

 

[itfitzme]

This is a paper examining fiscal multipliers. The abstract, below, makes an interesting observation. *It suggests that the multipliers are deflated at the effect goes into increasing demand for imports. *The *history of employment and imports, in the US, show a connection between employment ratio and imports. This is an interesting issue that dampens the effectiveness of fiscal policy. Globalization, without international coordination, can make national attempts at managing economies mute.


"The multipliers of taxes, and government consumption and investment expenditure for the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) are estimated using vector autoregression models with panel data. The impact and long-run multipliers are below unity, suggesting that a great extent of the intended impulse ends up expanding imported demand. The long-run multipliers of taxes and consumption expenditure are non-different from zero statistically, while public investment has a long-run multiplier of 0.6. The results suggest that countercyclical policies to stimulate growth should focus on public investment."

Fiscal Multipliers in the ECCU

I see that the author uses the term "impulse", rather matter-of-factly. This suggests, to me, that my intuition of fiscal changes as being transitory is taken as established, without question, in macro. What I have yet to findnis anything that defines the level at steady state after the impulse has died out.

 

[Rshermr]

This is a paper examining fiscal multipliers. The abstract, below, makes an interesting observation. *It suggests that the multipliers are deflated at the effect goes into increasing demand for imports. *The *history of employment and imports, in the US, show a connection between employment ratio and imports. This is an interesting issue that dampens the effectiveness of fiscal policy. Globalization, without international coordination, can make national attempts at managing economies mute.


"The multipliers of taxes, and government consumption and investment expenditure for the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) are estimated using vector autoregression models with panel data. The impact and long-run multipliers are below unity, suggesting that a great extent of the intended impulse ends up expanding imported demand. The long-run multipliers of taxes and consumption expenditure are non-different from zero statistically, while public investment has a long-run multiplier of 0.6. The results suggest that countercyclical policies to stimulate growth should focus on public investment."

Fiscal Multipliers in the ECCU

I see that the author uses the term "impulse", rather matter-of-factly. This suggests, to me, that my intuition of fiscal changes as being transitory is taken as established, without question, in macro. What I have yet to findnis anything that defines the level at steady state after the impulse has died out.

Yup. The issue today is much different than it was 50 years ago. The changes in corporate structure and marketing targeting is quite different today, after decades of rampant mergers and acquisitions and the globalization of corporations. Adam Smith had no reason to predict the changes in corporate monopoly power as a result of mergers, nor the impact of global corporations on the market system. Which is why, to many economists (perhaps most) the concept that we have a market system is quaint. And it is why, from an employment and labor situation, the labor component of our economy is short changed.
It is also interesting that we are not able to look at other countries economic policies, and continue to want to believe that only US policies make sense. Germany, and most other countries, do not believe that unfettered imports are a good plan. And why, in fact, most all place duties on imports to protect their markets and their workers. Consider that concept with us monopolistic corporations like, say, Exxon Mobile.

 

[itfitzme]

This is a paper examining fiscal multipliers. The abstract, below, makes an interesting observation. *It suggests that the multipliers are deflated at the effect goes into increasing demand for imports. *The *history of employment and imports, in the US, show a connection between employment ratio and imports. This is an interesting issue that dampens the effectiveness of fiscal policy. Globalization, without international coordination, can make national attempts at managing economies mute.


"The multipliers of taxes, and government consumption and investment expenditure for the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) are estimated using vector autoregression models with panel data. The impact and long-run multipliers are below unity, suggesting that a great extent of the intended impulse ends up expanding imported demand. The long-run multipliers of taxes and consumption expenditure are non-different from zero statistically, while public investment has a long-run multiplier of 0.6. The results suggest that countercyclical policies to stimulate growth should focus on public investment."

Fiscal Multipliers in the ECCU

I see that the author uses the term "impulse", rather matter-of-factly. This suggests, to me, that my intuition of fiscal changes as being transitory is taken as established, without question, in macro. *What I have yet to findnis anything that defines the level at steady state after the impulse has died out.

Yup. * The issue today is much different than it was 50 years ago. *The changes in corporate structure and marketing targeting is quite different today, after decades of rampant mergers and acquisitions and the globalization of corporations. *Adam Smith had no reason to predict the changes in corporate monopoly power as a result of mergers, nor the impact of global corporations on the market system. *Which is why, to many economists (perhaps most) the concept that we have a market system is quaint. *And it is why, from an employment and labor situation, *the labor component of our economy is short changed.
It is also interesting that we are not able to look at other countries economic policies, and continue to want to believe that only US policies make sense. *Germany, and most other countries, do not believe that unfettered imports are a good plan. *And why, in fact, most all place duties on imports to protect their markets and their workers. *Consider that concept with us monopolistic corporations like, say, Exxon Mobile.

"Which is why, to many economists (perhaps most) the concept that we have a market system is quaint."

So did Smith. *It's an idealized model. *Smith knew it (that or we are claiming him to be an idiot), every econ prof knows it, every student knows it.*

Every intro econ prof I've watched, rolled his eyes repeatedly, while the class murmered... "Yeah, sure... 'perfectly competative'..."

It is exactly like thermo class when some student would say, "Yeah, I'll take two of those ideal piston and cylinders you've got there."

Did you know that, if you have a perfectly reflective glass, you can capture light in a Thermous bottle and open it up in a dark room for a flash of illumination."

The trick to science was summed up by two statements that Einstien made. *

a)*The key is to make it as simple as possible, without making it too simple.

b)*When solving a problem, it helps to know the answer ahead of time.

That's how Newton did it, that's how Smith did it, that's how Einstien did it.*

The rest is just friction. ("just friction"...yeah, right...)

 

[Rshermr]

This is a paper examining fiscal multipliers. The abstract, below, makes an interesting observation. *It suggests that the multipliers are deflated at the effect goes into increasing demand for imports. *The *history of employment and imports, in the US, show a connection between employment ratio and imports. This is an interesting issue that dampens the effectiveness of fiscal policy. Globalization, without international coordination, can make national attempts at managing economies mute.


"The multipliers of taxes, and government consumption and investment expenditure for the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union (ECCU) are estimated using vector autoregression models with panel data. The impact and long-run multipliers are below unity, suggesting that a great extent of the intended impulse ends up expanding imported demand. The long-run multipliers of taxes and consumption expenditure are non-different from zero statistically, while public investment has a long-run multiplier of 0.6. The results suggest that countercyclical policies to stimulate growth should focus on public investment."

Fiscal Multipliers in the ECCU

I see that the author uses the term "impulse", rather matter-of-factly. This suggests, to me, that my intuition of fiscal changes as being transitory is taken as established, without question, in macro. *What I have yet to findnis anything that defines the level at steady state after the impulse has died out.

Yup. * The issue today is much different than it was 50 years ago. *The changes in corporate structure and marketing targeting is quite different today, after decades of rampant mergers and acquisitions and the globalization of corporations. *Adam Smith had no reason to predict the changes in corporate monopoly power as a result of mergers, nor the impact of global corporations on the market system. *Which is why, to many economists (perhaps most) the concept that we have a market system is quaint. *And it is why, from an employment and labor situation, *the labor component of our economy is short changed.
It is also interesting that we are not able to look at other countries economic policies, and continue to want to believe that only US policies make sense. *Germany, and most other countries, do not believe that unfettered imports are a good plan. *And why, in fact, most all place duties on imports to protect their markets and their workers. *Consider that concept with us monopolistic corporations like, say, Exxon Mobile.

"Which is why, to many economists (perhaps most) the concept that we have a market system is quaint."

So did Smith. *It's an idealized model. *Smith knew it (that or we are claiming him to be an idiot), every econ prof knows it, every student knows it.*

Every intro econ prof I've watched, rolled his eyes repeatedly, while the class murmered... "Yeah, sure... 'perfectly competative'..."

It is exactly like thermo class when some student would say, "Yeah, I'll take two of those ideal piston and cylinders you've got there."

Did you know that, if you have a perfectly reflective glass, you can capture light in a Thermous bottle and open it up in a dark room for a flash of illumination."

The trick to science was summed up by two statements that Einstien made. *

a)*The key is to make it as simple as possible, without making it too simple.

b)*When solving a problem, it helps to know the answer ahead of time.

That's how Newton did it, that's how Smith did it, that's how Einstien did it.*

The rest is just friction. ("just friction"...yeah, right...)

Even good old adam knew, and wrote, that monopoly power made the concept of competition, or a market system, impossible. Even he advocated that the gov needed to regulate monoplistic companies. And, if anyone cared to think about it, the revolution was largely about monopoly power. The East India Company WAS a monopoly.
Over the beginning years of the nation, corporations were highly regulated. They were regulated in terms of how they could do business, and in what cases where they overstepped their charters, they would be shut down. Over time, corporations bought enough politicians to change all that, of course, and it has been a continuing battle between corporate power and the people who live in the country in which they exist. A loosing battle, for the most part. Anti-trust regulation that once governed them has been ignored over the past 40 years or so.

 

[itfitzme]

I am waiting for the day that the courts accept statistical evidence of behavioral collusion in acting as an ologopoly.

Not holding my breath. But I refuse to die, just out of morbid curiosity.

 

[Rshermr]

During the time that this thread has been going on, and when the actual subject of this thread has been discussed, there has been an ongoing refrain from some conservative quarters that there HAS BEEN NO REAL AUSTERITY IN EUROPE. Funny, the populations of those countries believe that there has been austerity. Economists seem in agreement that austerity has been going on there. But, the conservative refrain was always the same. So, in looking at the argument against there being austerity in europe, it became obvious that there was a push to that concept from conservative sources, most notably Heritage. And specifically by Salim Furth, an economist with Heritage.
So, recently, Furth put forward his argument in detail, and this article discusses the analysis of Furth's "findings". It would seem obvious that Furth did not put forward an honest argument, but rather used numbers from other sources, most notably OECD numbers, which OECD completely disavow.
Yes, Europe really is in the throes of austerity

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

During the time that this thread has been going on, and when the actual subject of this thread has been discussed, there has been an ongoing refrain from some conservative quarters that there HAS BEEN NO REAL AUSTERITY IN EUROPE. Funny, the populations of those countries believe that there has been austerity. Economists seem in agreement that austerity has been going on there. But, the conservative refrain was always the same. So, in looking at the argument against there being austerity in europe, it became obvious that there was a push to that concept from conservative sources, most notably Heritage. And specifically by Salim Furth, an economist with Heritage.
So, recently, Furth put forward his argument in detail, and this article discusses the analysis of Furth's "findings". It would seem obvious that Furth did not put forward an honest argument, but rather used numbers from other sources, most notably OECD numbers, which OECD completely disavow.
Yes, Europe really is in the throes of austerity

Rushermer has a low IQ. He thinks every economic situation is a scientific experiment that demonstrates how well socialism works. Scientists like to hold all variables constant save one, Riushemer likes to hold all variables constant save 1,278.


Whatever Europe has its doesn't have much capitalism and therein lies the problem. We see how well America has done thanks to the most capitalism and we see that China instantly eliminated 40% of world poverty by merely changing to capitalism.

WSJ: if borrowing money for the government to spend on growth helped Europe would not be in this mess. The Continent finds itself in a never ending slump because it has mostly failed to reform its sclerotic labor market, cut job-killing regulations, reduce the rolls of the civil service, improve its tax competitiveness, and rein in public unions. When government accounts for 50% of GDP- as it does in Italy, Portugal, France, and Greece-that's a fair indication that's what ever else is ailing Europe its not austerity.


Europe is trying to steal money from Germany that Germany has thanks to austerity!!

 

[itfitzme]

IQ, liberal, free market, Republican capitalism. *Same thing, different day.*

And all I gotta see is "This message is hidden because EdwardBaiamonte is on your ignore list." because it's the same old same old. Boring

I could write a script, in Visual Basic, to make his posts. *Computers are now smarter than him.

Polly want a conservative freedom cracker?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

IQ, liberal, free market, Republican capitalism. *Same thing, different day.*

And all I gotta see is "This message is hidden because EdwardBaiamonte is on your ignore list." because it's the same old same old. Boring

I could write a script, in Visual Basic, to make his posts. *Computers are now smarter than him.

Polly want a conservative freedom cracker?

Whatever Europe has its doesn't have much capitalism and therein lies the problem. We see how well America has done thanks to the most capitalism and we see that China instantly eliminated 40% of world poverty by merely changing to capitalism.

WSJ: if borrowing money for the government to spend on growth helped Europe would not be in this mess. The Continent finds itself in a never ending slump because it has mostly failed to reform its sclerotic labor market, cut job-killing regulations, reduce the rolls of the civil service, improve its tax competitiveness, and rein in public unions. When government accounts for 50% of GDP- as it does in Italy, Portugal, France, and Greece-that's a fair indication that's what ever else is ailing Europe its not austerity.

 

[Rshermr]

IQ, liberal, free market, Republican capitalism. *Same thing, different day.*

And all I gotta see is "This message is hidden because EdwardBaiamonte is on your ignore list." because it's the same old same old. Boring

I could write a script, in Visual Basic, to make his posts. *Computers are now smarter than him.

Polly want a conservative freedom cracker?

And the beat goes on. Ed has been trying to kill this thread for months. Hates the subject. It really has to bother him that this thread has now topped all others in terms of replies. For the history of the board. People are really interested in what is happening in the world, and why austerity seems to be producing bad results. And the con trolls want to see the discussion go away because it shows their concept of lowering gov spending and taxes does not work when the economy is bad, and unemployment is high. EVER.

Here is the latest news, from today:

Unemployment across the 17 European Union countries that use the euro has hit a record of 12.1 percent in May.

A glance at Europe's unemployment rates

That would be 12.1% unemployment!!!!!! Higher than the US has experienced at any time except during the great Republican depression of 1929. All among us except the conservative trolls can see the problem. Austerity does not work. A general statement, but generally TRUE.

 

[bripat9643]

IQ, liberal, free market, Republican capitalism. *Same thing, different day.*

And all I gotta see is "This message is hidden because EdwardBaiamonte is on your ignore list." because it's the same old same old. Boring

I could write a script, in Visual Basic, to make his posts. *Computers are now smarter than him.

Polly want a conservative freedom cracker?

And the beat goes on. Ed has been trying to kill this thread for months. Hates the subject. It really has to bother him that this thread has now topped all others in terms of replies. For the history of the board. People are really interested in what is happening in the world, and why austerity seems to be producing bad results. And the con trolls want to see the discussion go away because it shows their concept of lowering gov spending and taxes does not work when the economy is bad, and unemployment is high. EVER.

Here is the latest news, from today:

Unemployment across the 17 European Union countries that use the euro has hit a record of 12.1 percent in May.

A glance at Europe's unemployment rates

That would be 12.1% unemployment!!!!!! Higher than the US has experienced at any time except during the great Republican depression of 1929. All among us except the conservative trolls can see the problem. Austerity does not work. A general statement, but generally TRUE.

There is no "austerity" dipstick. I posted the evidence earlier in this thread. No European country has actually reduced spending.

 

[Rshermr]

IQ, liberal, free market, Republican capitalism. *Same thing, different day.*

And all I gotta see is "This message is hidden because EdwardBaiamonte is on your ignore list." because it's the same old same old. Boring

I could write a script, in Visual Basic, to make his posts. *Computers are now smarter than him.

Polly want a conservative freedom cracker?

And the beat goes on. Ed has been trying to kill this thread for months. Hates the subject. It really has to bother him that this thread has now topped all others in terms of replies. For the history of the board. People are really interested in what is happening in the world, and why austerity seems to be producing bad results. And the con trolls want to see the discussion go away because it shows their concept of lowering gov spending and taxes does not work when the economy is bad, and unemployment is high. EVER.

Here is the latest news, from today:

Unemployment across the 17 European Union countries that use the euro has hit a record of 12.1 percent in May.

A glance at Europe's unemployment rates

That would be 12.1% unemployment!!!!!! Higher than the US has experienced at any time except during the great Republican depression of 1929. All among us except the conservative trolls can see the problem. Austerity does not work. A general statement, but generally TRUE.

There is no "austerity" dipstick. I posted the evidence earlier in this thread. No European country has actually reduced spending.

Wow. What a surprise. Another con posting personal insults and a lie. Perfect.
Problem is, there is austerity in europe. And no, there are NUMEROUS countries that have implemented it.
Here is the post, again, explaining why you are, technically speaking:
1. Full of shit.
2. Incapable of reading and the use of cognitive processes.

Yes, Europe really is in the throes of austerity

Just continuing to post conservative lies does not change reality. Except, of course, in your tiny little mind. Now, try actually considering something. Thought, you see, can be really useful.

 

[bripat9643]

And the beat goes on. Ed has been trying to kill this thread for months. Hates the subject. It really has to bother him that this thread has now topped all others in terms of replies. For the history of the board. People are really interested in what is happening in the world, and why austerity seems to be producing bad results. And the con trolls want to see the discussion go away because it shows their concept of lowering gov spending and taxes does not work when the economy is bad, and unemployment is high. EVER.

Here is the latest news, from today:

A glance at Europe's unemployment rates

That would be 12.1% unemployment!!!!!! Higher than the US has experienced at any time except during the great Republican depression of 1929. All among us except the conservative trolls can see the problem. Austerity does not work. A general statement, but generally TRUE.

There is no "austerity" dipstick. I posted the evidence earlier in this thread. No European country has actually reduced spending.

Wow. What a surprise. Another con posting personal insults and a lie. Perfect.
Problem is, there is austerity in europe. And no, there are NUMEROUS countries that have implemented it.
Here is the post, again, explaining why you are, technically speaking:
1. Full of shit.
2. Incapable of reading and the use of cognitive processes.

Yes, Europe really is in the throes of austerity

Just continuing to post conservative lies does not change reality. Except, of course, in your tiny little mind. Now, try actually considering something. Thought, you see, can be really useful.

Tax hikes are not "austerity." No conservative has every endorsed tax hikes or ever called it "austerity."

Your article is just left-wing propaganda. "Austerity," according to the way libturds like you use the term, means actual cuts in government spending. No European government has done such a thing.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2013/05/26/austerity-to-blame-but-wheres-the-austerity/

The official Keynesian story is that the PIIGS of Europe (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain) have been devastated by cutbacks in public spending. Austerity has made things worse rather than better – clear proof that Keynesian stimulus is the answer. Keynesians claim the lack of stimulus (of course paid for by someone else) has spawned costly recessions which threaten to spread. In other words, watch out Germany and Scandinavia: If you don’t pony up, you’ll be next.

Erber finds fault with this Keynesian narrative. The official figures show that PIIGS governments embarked on massive spending sprees between 2000 and 2008. During this period, their combined general government expenditures rose from 775 billion Euros to 1.3 trillion – a 75 percent increase. Ireland had the largest percentage increase (130 percent), and Italy the smallest (40 percent). These spending binges gave public sector workers generous salaries and benefits, paid for bridges to nowhere, and financed a gold-plated transfer state. What the state gave has proven hard to take away as the riots in Southern Europe show.

Then in 2008, the financial crisis hit. No one wanted to lend to the insolvent PIIGS, and, according to the Keynesian narrative, the PIIGS were forced into extreme austerity by their miserly neighbors to the north. Instead of the stimulus they desperately needed, the PIIGS economies were wrecked by austerity.

Not so according to the official European statistics. Between the onset of the crisis in 2008 and 2011, PIIGS government spending increased by six percent from an already high plateau. Eurostat’s projections (which make the unlikely assumption that the PIIGS will honor the fiscal discipline promised their creditors) still show the PIIGS spending more in 2014 than at the end of their spending binge in 2008.

 

[Oldstyle]

Rshermr is STILL here pretending to know something about economics? Gotta hand it to the little guy...he's not very believable...but he is persistent.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

yes-europe-really-is-in-the-throes-of-austerity/]

actually the article argues that there is some austerity in some countries and little in others. On balance there is little if any austerity to speak of, not to mention it is not a well defined term anyway.

Far more importantly, conservatives don't claim austerity is capitalism or that a little austerity, if there was some , is enough capitalism to stimulate an economy.

Rushermer love the austerity debate becuase he thinks every situation presents a scientific experiment that proves liberalism works. The man is a 100% fool.

 

[Rshermr]

Rshermr is STILL here pretending to know something about economics? Gotta hand it to the little guy...he's not very believable...but he is persistent.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ

And oldstyle, as usual, is incapable of arguing economics. He just makes personal attacks. That it the best poor oldstyle can do. Which is why he is so easy to ignore.

 

[Rshermr]

There is no "austerity" dipstick. I posted the evidence earlier in this thread. No European country has actually reduced spending.

Wow. What a surprise. Another con posting personal insults and a lie. Perfect.
Problem is, there is austerity in europe. And no, there are NUMEROUS countries that have implemented it.
Here is the post, again, explaining why you are, technically speaking:
1. Full of shit.
2. Incapable of reading and the use of cognitive processes.

Yes, Europe really is in the throes of austerity

Just continuing to post conservative lies does not change reality. Except, of course, in your tiny little mind. Now, try actually considering something. Thought, you see, can be really useful.

Tax hikes are not "austerity." No conservative has every endorsed tax hikes or ever called it "austerity."

Your article is just left-wing propaganda. "Austerity," according to the way libturds like you use the term, means actual cuts in government spending. No European government has done such a thing.

'Austerity' To Blame? But Where's The Austerity? - Forbes

The official Keynesian story is that the PIIGS of Europe (Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece and Spain) have been devastated by cutbacks in public spending. Austerity has made things worse rather than better – clear proof that Keynesian stimulus is the answer. Keynesians claim the lack of stimulus (of course paid for by someone else) has spawned costly recessions which threaten to spread. In other words, watch out Germany and Scandinavia: If you don’t pony up, you’ll be next.

Erber finds fault with this Keynesian narrative. The official figures show that PIIGS governments embarked on massive spending sprees between 2000 and 2008. During this period, their combined general government expenditures rose from 775 billion Euros to 1.3 trillion – a 75 percent increase. Ireland had the largest percentage increase (130 percent), and Italy the smallest (40 percent). These spending binges gave public sector workers generous salaries and benefits, paid for bridges to nowhere, and financed a gold-plated transfer state. What the state gave has proven hard to take away as the riots in Southern Europe show.

Then in 2008, the financial crisis hit. No one wanted to lend to the insolvent PIIGS, and, according to the Keynesian narrative, the PIIGS were forced into extreme austerity by their miserly neighbors to the north. Instead of the stimulus they desperately needed, the PIIGS economies were wrecked by austerity.

Not so according to the official European statistics. Between the onset of the crisis in 2008 and 2011, PIIGS government spending increased by six percent from an already high plateau. Eurostat’s projections (which make the unlikely assumption that the PIIGS will honor the fiscal discipline promised their creditors) still show the PIIGS spending more in 2014 than at the end of their spending binge in 2008.

Uh, thanks for proving my point. You quote an opinion piece from Forbes, written by a far, far, far right wing nut case by the name of Paul Roderick Gregory.
So, you are unable to find a single impartial source that believes the nut case statement that austerity in europe does not exist. As I said. What a surprise.

Relative to your statement that tax increases "are not austerity":
Technically, you are again full of shit. Again.
The economic definition of austerity follows:
In economics, austerity describes policies used by governments to reduce budget deficits during adverse economic conditions. These policies may include spending cuts, tax increases, or a mixture of the two.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austerity

I know it is difficult for you, but if you would simply take your head out of your ass and research just a little tiny bit, you would not need to look like such an idiot.