Passage 1
Finland’s finance minister recently made a bold promise to Europe’s 16m unemployed. His country’s presidency of the EU, which starts on July 1st, will be almost unique: it will be marked by no new job-creation schemes.
Europe’s unemployment, the central bankers declare, is nothing do with macroeconomic policy: it is solely a “structural” problem. This is nonsense. Some of Europe’s unemployment is cyclical, meaning that it could be cut by faster economic growth without sparking inflation. For example, Germany’s unemployment rate is 10.6%. The IMF estimates its structural rate at 8.9%. Faster growth could reduce the gap. Even so the bulk of Europe’s unemployment is structural. So is the European Central Bank right to say that macroeconomic policy cannot affect it?
Well actually, no. Europe’s high structural unemployment cannot be blamed on labor-market rigidities(僵化) alone. Its labor markets were as just as ossified 20 years ago, yet joblessness was then far lower. However, there is a danger that, when labor markets are gummed up, a cyclical rise in unemployment can turn into a structural one——making it impervious(不受影响的) to an economic upturn. For example, strict employment-protection laws make it hard for workers who lose their jobs to find new ones. The longer they stayed unemployed, the more their skill rust and the less employers are likely to hire them. Unable to compete effectively for jobs, they no longer help retrain pay demands: They have become “structurally” unemployed.
45.The employment-protection laws make it easier for workers to find new jobs.