In the early nineties, various people came up with remedies to aid the harsh economic times that existed during that time. The main contributor was David.R.Cameron, who was a prime minister of the U.K government. He analyzed how the state was and came up with theories on how to create employment to aid the stagnating state of economy. Even though he worked hard to aid the economy, there has always been contradicting statements to his ideologies.
In a period that was widely known as the “national unity,” the major opposition party (ICP) Italian Communist Party, made a parliamentary coalition with six other parties to support the government. This was because, they experienced a great economic crisis and were greatly threatened by terrorisim.They made an agreement that was to solve these existing problems. However, the national unity did not last but ended in 1979 since the elections that came that year.
During this period, they came up with various solutions to counter the existing problems.Schmitter (1982) came up with a theory, which insisted that “neo-corporatism” had to be reserved. This was very advisable to labour unions because it would give a simplified analytical framework and strategies of unions would be relatively studied unlike that of the relevant actors. However, governments should put in place limits under which ‘neo-corporatism” is to be applied.
When it came to employers associations, it was decided that they had to rely on speculative analysis, which stated that any given action should be based on logic and not speculation. Moreover, recent studies by (Schmitter and Streeck, 1981) show that it is possible to apply both the logics of the trade unions and that of the employers associations. However, this raised the problem of people taking rush actions. Due to this, they had to put in place policies that would limit the public from taking rush actions. This led them to make systems of recruiting members and acquiring their at most loyalty. Not only did they put limits for rational actions, but they also came up with strategies to evaluate rush actions since some rush actions may be helpful to organizations.
These conditions prove to be relevant but for them to be applicable, the logic of action should be directed to facilitate this outcome. This was because, these ideologies would be considered as irrelevant if it was found out that they did not help in the betterment of the state of the economy.
David.R.Cameron wrote about how the state was and how he thought it could be helped. He stated that the powerful capitalist nations were experiencing harsh economic times. These were: increase in the level of unemployment, high rate of inflation and other economic hardships. Unlike the 1960s where nations had almost every one fully employed, the state was so devastating that those times seemed to be unreal. Even though the capitalist nations experienced inflation, they reacted differently to counter this state. Here, Cameron tries to show why some nations were successful than others in terms of maintaining levels of employment in a period of stagnation in the worldwide economy. Precisely, he tries to show why some countries survived during times when there was acceleration in prices after the oil shocks in 1973 and 1979, and high employment in the post second world war era. In addition, he analyses why some countries responded to this crisis with policies that had severe cost on the labor force while others opted otherwise.
He talks of why some countries like Spain, Britain, Netherlands, Denmark and Belgium put in place policies that led to the increase of unemployment by six percent and above in the period between 1960s and 80s.He also talks of how other countries like Switzerland, Japan, Austria, Sweden and Norway maintained high levels of employment in this period and limiting levels of unemployment to less than one percent of the labor force.
From the recent statistics on the level of unemployment among different nations, there is minimum difference compared to that done by David Cameron. From the study, it is evident that countries like Spain, Denmark, and Netherlands that had unemployment levels of six percent and above are still in the same state. It’s only Netherlands that has improved and has an unemployment rate of 5%.The others: Spain 24%, Britain 7 % and Denmark 7%.
On the other hand, the nations that David Cameron had stated in his article that had little percentage of unemployment are still doing relatively well. Nations like Switzerland, Austria, and Norway have struggled to maintain the high levels of employment. It is only Sweden that has increased in the number of citizens who are not employed since its unemployed percentage is 8%.Whereas those doing well are: Norway 3.0%, Austria 3.9%, Switzerland 4% and Japan which is at an average of 4.5%
From the recent study, it is clear that from the statistics that Cameron gave, the same countries are still in almost the same state they were during that time. This proves that Cameron had an idea of how countries can maintain their state of economy depending on how they react to world’s economy. Countries such as Norway are doing well with reference to the number of citizens that are employed. Since, they use different methods compared to nations like Spain. This proves that the research done by Cameron was effective and good to apply to improve a nation’s economy.
However, the table gives us the figures of how unemployment rates are, but does not give us what makes the countries which are doing well continue doing so well. This weakens the contentions on Cameron’s theory. One may argue that the same methods that Cameron said were useful are not helpful. Countries, which adopted the methods, are the ones that are experiencing hard economic times. From the research, how a country develops is dependent on the country’s reactions to international economic crisis.