Talk:Economy of Germany

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Economy of Germany article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Business High‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics High‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany Top‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

According to the CIA World Factbook [1], Germany now has the 5th largest economy worldwide

Germany has the third largest economy when based on nominal GDP.

What does it say "german's jajaja economy"? Is someone having a laugh? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frognsausage (talk • contribs) 05:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

exchange rates

Is it just me, or are the exchange rates flipped? (ie: it should be 1.69 DEM = 1 USD instead of 1.69 USD = 1 DEM)

There are no DM anymore, only € = EUR = Euro. An Euro is worth more than a USD. About 1.965 DM (forgot the exact rate) was exchanged for 1 EUR years ago. Lastdingo (talk) 10:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think historical exchange rates have a place in this article. Best to just put those in the DM article. --Lightenoughtotravel (talk) 20:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Manufacturing?

Germany has a tradition for quality manufacturing. I was told this once. Is it still true? What does germany actually produce? Anyone got a list of national statistics amd major firms which might usefully be included?Sandpiper 4 July 2005 19:05 (UTC)

No, I don't think there is such a "tradition" anymore. Germany still does a huge amount of "quality" manufacturing. Germany produces pretty much everything, but automotive stuff is normally quoted as the flagship industry. But like any modern rich country, it's primarily a service economy. The proportion of people employed in manufacturing has fallen from 40% to 20% in the last 30 years, and it will continue to fall (source: The Economist) 82.45.37.106 11:28, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

automotive, chemical and mechanical engineering industries are the big industries and the manufacturing share of the GNP is still about 36% GNP (compare: USA ~ 20% GNP). Lastdingo (talk) 10:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prostitution?

I fail to see the relevance of this section in the article. I don't believe prostitution is a major part of Germany's economy (and neither this section nor the main article provide any evidence that it is). Considering that there aren't even links to major German industries such as the automotive industry, i propose this section should be dropped. --35.11.210.158 02:18, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unemployment figure

On the German model page a Forbes article states that German unemployment is 12.6%. Here it says 10.5%. Perhaps a choice should be made for consistency with the article being added to external links if the IMF figure is chosen? --JDnCoke 01:03, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

The unemployment rate is now approx. 9.2% according to Bloomberg.com/regions/Germany.

It appears as if the current number is taken from the CIA World Factbook, which I think might not be the best choice, as it usually uses the numbers given out by the country's census bureau. It might be more helpful to take a standardized value, like the OECD publishes every year (9.8% in 2004). [2]

Germany's Federal Employment Agency compiles official unemployment figures. For December 2007 they recorded a much improved unemployment rate of 8.1%. Germany's unemployment rate hasnt been at 6.2% for years and the Wikipedia article is mistaken for listing that as the rate for July 2007. Here is the link to the latest figures on unemployment in Germany: [3]

I dont know how to fix the article so someone who knows how can fix it. 11:52, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

The latest statistics (today in the newspapers) tell about less than three million unemployed. The statistics are completely manipulated (growing manipulation since about three decades), as we have several grades of job-seeking people in no or irrelevant jobs that are not counted as unemployed (unemployed people on a training are not counted, for example). Lastdingo (talk) 10:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a manipulation, as the official statistic (generally) counts job-seeking and not un- or underemployed people. Thus, people in training are not considered unemployed. --TB42 (talk) 00:10, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The infobox now lists the unemployment rate as 5.5%, which is exceptionally low, and cites a pdf from eurostat that does not, as far as I can see, mention unemployment rate at all. 109.67.17.139 (talk) 19:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have now corrected the URL in the reference. The source appears to confirm the percentage.--Boson (talk) 21:35, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nominal vs. PPP

As with other wikipedia articles this one suffers from contradiction in GDP rank discussion because of ambiguity with regard to type of measure (nominal/PPP), so it is better to make this distinction explicit. - A.Rod (22:12 8 October 2005, (UTC))

I really think a nominal figure should be provided alongside (or instead of) the PPP figure. 202.130.159.184 (talk) 03:25, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Quality

Is it just me, or does the quality of this article quite poor? There is no structure, no sections, and the paragraph topics seem fragmented. This article could use a general clean up.

Mistakes

When you click on "social services" in this article, which refers to services offered by the government, it redirects you to the article "social work," aka, a type of volunteering. I am new so I don't know how to edit the article but maybe someone more knowledgeable could.

Poverty

The table has an entry "Pop below poverty line". It should be noted that most country use different ways to measure where that line is. Lars T. 00:23, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The statistics in Germany usually define it as relative income, the "poor" people here could be millionaires and we would still have some poverty with such statistics. Another common measurement is eligibility for or income level of social security. Lastdingo (talk) 10:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tourism

According to official numbers published by the German National Tourist Office (numbers of 2004), Germans spent 58,1 billion EUR abroad, while international visitors to Germany spent about 21 billion EUR (look here: [4]). Sorry, I was not able to find another source reporting of spendings in the magnitude of millions. In 2000, Germans hit the road about 300 million times, 97 million times they travelled to a foreign country (at least one accomodation, source: [5]). If you divide US$ 68.3 million by the number of 97 million visitors, you'll get a pretty small amount.

If you devide the 58.1 billion EUR by 97 million, you get 765 U.S. dollars. Compared to what Americans have to pay for a vacation abroad that may be small, but Germans don't have to fly 5 hours to get to another country. Lars T. 15:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the original source had the numbers in millions, but it seems like your source (I can't read German, but I'll trust you) says otherwise. Perhaps the authors of the LOC profile got the magnitude confused. I think the German National Tourist office is a more reliable source, so I agree that we should go with their figures.--Bkwillwm 22:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the first comment here (by you?) says 58,1 billion EUR. There could be a confusion by the fact that the quoted source actually says 58,1 Mrd. Euro, which means 58.1 Milliard Euro, or 58.1 billions for the US Americans. Lars T. 12:44, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

silly

( In the United States the comparitavely high imprisonment rate - between six and ten times higher than in Western Europe - and the higher rate of persons in the military forces are other reasons for the lower unemployment rate.)

haha! what a joke!--Capsela 18:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually no joke, as the U.S. has about 0.7% of its population behind bars and Germany about 0.1%. The U.S. has how much 0.5% of its population in the military and Germany only about 0.3%. That makes up one per cent of the population total difference explained. Total population, not working age population, so we can add another big chunk. Lastdingo (talk) 10:34, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extremely US-centric

Is it just me, or is this article extremely US-centric ? It reads a lot more like a "Economy_of_Germany_seen_from_USA" --Eivind 09:23, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed that...but then America is the only 'real' country in the world, right? ;) Some re-arranging would produce a more German centric article (which I will do now), but new content would help. More central for Germany would be German-EU trade. Matchrthom 18:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful article.

This reads a lot like the CIA factbook section on Germany, it's like someone just pasted it here and rephrased each paragraph...--80.227.100.62 06:12, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

History of indicators

It would be useful to have charts showing changes in key indicators like GDP, growth rate, and unemployment, over several decades. -- Beland 20:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mittelstand /Small and medium sized companies

Should a section be included on small and medium sized companies in Germany and their role on the German economy? --STTW (talk) 19:30, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, provided you can reference it. Carl.bunderson (talk) 05:44, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Electricity stuff

"Despite its considerable reserves, environmental restrictions have led[citation needed] Germany to become a net importer of coal. "

This is nonsense. They remove entire communities to mine brown coal, and the black coal is too expensive (hundreds of meters below the surface) to mine. That's why we import a lot of black coal. There is no citation yet, so I hope we can get rid of this nonsense without a contradicting source (most of which would be German).Lastdingo (talk) 10:45, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure they get a lot of power from wind and solar. More than is indicated with these statistics. --Lightenoughtotravel (talk) 20:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GDP Rankings Change?

It says on the front page that china has surpassed Germany to become the third largest economy. If this article needs to be edited because of that, will an expert please do so? 98.27.136.243 (talk) 17:42, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All projections shows that the PRC has surpassed the German economy in 2008 in terms of nominal GDP. Also, "Nevertheless, the export oriented economy is doing extremely well" is an obselete statement. Although in the past, its export-oriented economy was booming, it is its dependency on exports, at least to significant degree, to consumer nations that has dragged Germany into the current recession. 24630 (talk) 20:28, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reunification of Austria

To regain the third place in the World economy, Austria should reunified with Gemany. It would be much easier than the DDR as Austria has already a capitalist economy and thanks to Schengen, the Euro and the EU there are no borders between Austria and other länder. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.26.56.101 (talk) 2009-03-06

Please limit discussion to improvement of this article.--Boson (talk) 05:58, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Really? 194.80.193.163 (talk) 10:36, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Source of infobox figures

The quick facts and figures box at the top right of this page shows figures like the GDP, number of Exports etc.

Where are these figures from? Are they made up? Thanks Frognsausage (talk) 19:13, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Export ?

There seems to be no info to the fact that Germany is depending on export. KarlMathiessen (talk) 22:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article does have

Germany is the largest national economy in Europe, the fourth-largest by nominal GDP in the world, and fifth by GDP (PPP) in 2008. Since the age of industrialisation, the country has been a driver, innovator, and beneficiary of an ever more globalised economy. Germany is the world's second largest exporter with $1.170 trillion exported in 2009 (Eurozone countries are included). Exports account for more than one-third of national output.

--Boson (talk) 07:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Problems" section inserted

I have inserted a new section about the problems plaquing the German economy. My source for this is mostly Gabor Steingart's book "Weltkrieg um Wohlstand", although information can easily be found also in the news media.

For now, there are two points: 1) disappearance of industrial jobs due to competition from India and China, 2) low investment ratio. Why these two? Number 1 is obvious: it is hard to miss this problem being discussed in the media. I believe it is an especially dire problem for Germany due to the fact that there is still a lot of low-level factory work in our country (United Kingdom, on the other hand, already lost most of its car manufacturing plants.) Steingart believes number 2 is important. The general view in the press seems to be that the English-speaking countries (UK, USA, Australia and Ireland) as well as the Scandinavian countries and the Netherlands, have better and more dynamic economies than Germany or France (this is something that should be discussed in the article in more detail, now it seems to concentrate too much on the sunny side of Germany's economy.) The difference between investment ration in the US and Germany is one aspect of this. Therefore I believe mentioning it is justified.

I will probably expand the section in the future, but I would appreciate any suggestions of improvement more experienced editors may have. Tropical wind (talk) 21:19, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Right... "The disappearance of industrial jobs has created a lower class of unemployed, uneducated people who have little chance of ever re-entering the working world." Says who? And why does this person not realize that german unemployment is actually falling and has been for month now? How did these people get uneducated when they now have no chance of RE-entering the labour market? Where they uneducated too when they still where in their original job? This is all hyperbole.

On Steingarts book... well, its my personal opinion but I think that his personal opinion is rubish (And this book is a personal opiion, its not a study or research). Hes one of the typical "How the world will change in 50 years if everything stays as it is now." He looks at numbers and then multiplies them by a number of years. So considering the growth of any company he can easily compute in how many years 100% of all germans will work in that company. This guy has obviously slept through the most important parts of the statistics curriculum and economic course. "the asians rise is europes fall" ... yeah because we cant grow at the same time as the asians. that would mean that through trade both sides get richer which is rediculou... oh no wait. its the basis of all economical thinking.

I'm with this guy: http://blog.zeit.de/herdentrieb/2006/11/28/steingarts-weltkrieg-um-wohlstand-ein-verriss_96 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.204.160.184 (talk) 22:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the unemployment has been falling recently, but it does not remove the fact that there is large structural unemployment. Low-skilled work is moving to Asia from all over the Western World. It is not just a problem of Germany. These relatively uneducated people now have large problems re-entering the working world. Steingart's claims are not only his own, but general views voiced by many. The problems section is still just an initial version, and needs more work. Tropical wind (talk) 17:38, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sectors, order

The sectors seem to be mislabeled with "Primary" being 1% of the economy and "Tertiary" being 69%. Is this a mistake or to sastisfy some standard? TomCerul (talk) 14:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See Economy#Economic sectors Lars T. (talk) 00:30, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GDP growth table formatting

I have inserted the table of GDP growth in 1992-2009, but I have been unable to format in a neat fashion. Can someone lend me a hand? Tropical wind (talk) 03:08, 28 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wirtschaftswunder

I would appreciate it, if anyone would translate this german expression into english. On my mind I would say: Wirtschaftswunder / Post war (WW II) economic miracle of West Germany. 188.110.172.74 (talk) 10:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the translation is "economic miracle". How much needs to be added to that depends on the context and purpose of the translation. If you are referring to the heading in the article, I would suggest replacing the current heading with The "Economic Miracle". I think this is one of the exceptions to the general rule about not using the definite article in headings; the heading does not need to explain that it refers only to West Germany (this is explained in the text); inverted commas should be used, at least for the first reference, because it is not a miracle in the literal sense; and it should be capitalized because it is a proper name, even in translation. In other contexts, West Germany's "economic miracle" might be appropriate. --Boson (talk) 14:07, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A section on the current crisis?

I am shocked to find that there is no mention of the economic crisis which had its impact on the German economy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.169.73.65 (talk) 12:06, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What impact? --Alex1011 (talk) 10:42, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interpreting figures (billions, trillions, etc.)

This is intended as a note to editors and a reply to anonymous feedback. Care should be taken when editing (and reading) GDP, export figures etc. because in Germany and the USA, for instance, billion, trillion etc. have different meanings and the meaning of the comma and period (full stop) as thousands separator and decimal point is reversed. This has been raised at article feedback, and sometimes changes are made incorrectly. This article uses "American" trillions, but it also uses "American" decimal points and thousands separators, so (for instance):

3.577 trillion is equal to the German

3.577 Milliarden or the American

3,577 billion

--Boson (talk) 15:41, 6 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

for billion and Billion see also Long and short scales. --Alex1011 (talk) 23:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes also: 3 577 Milliarden. --Alex1011 (talk) 23:02, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Major exports and imports

This was triggered by a comment using the new Feedback feature.

The infobox briefly lists major exports and imports, but should the body also have a section on trade, discussing (inter alia) the major imports and exports in more detail? This might also apply to other country articles. --Boson (talk) 00:40, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiecon

I would love to see a Wiki project map out the global economy. In an organized format all local/country economic data would be collected. All authors would be required to write articles according to a standardized and cited format. The model revolves around publicly released economic data: GDP, employment, industries, corporations, fiscal policy, etc. Economists and volunteers can help determine which economic data accounts are most appropriate to be required under the standardized format. There is nothing in the world that resembles this model. There is no Wiki that allows economists to add economic data under a standardized format. I have already written the article for 'Economy of the United States'. It is 7 pages long. This article contains what I believe is the most important economic data available to the public. The data is almost entirely in table format. Citations include the U.S. Census Bureau, the World Bank, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Yahoo Finance, CNN'S Money's Fortune 500 list, U.S. treasury releases, Federal Reserve websites, company SEC filings and the IMF. The article can be seen in PDF format at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Economy.pdf The Contents are: 1. States, 2. Industries, 3. Corporations, 4. Employment, 5. Fiscal Budget, 6. Monetary Policy, 7. Creditors, 8. Cities, 9. International Accounts 9. History All articles would be standardized and connected in an organized network. This model would go down to the most local level. All 196 countries would have a standardized country article to have the same exact format used in the attached file. This project would evolve as economists determine better ways to present the data.

The 'Economy of ______' pages would be a very educational collection of economic data. I think that these articles would be greatly improved if they were modified to become uniform. This would allow for greater comparability. I believe that these pages would be improved with a standardized and simplified format. This would allow for greater comparability and public understanding of the economy and fiscal budgets. Below are the Wikipedia Contents of the four biggest economy articles. As you can see, the Contents are inconsistent between them. I believe this can be fixed with my Wiki project proposal. 1. Economy of the United States 1 History 2 Overview 3 Employment 4 Research, development, and entrepreneurship 5 Income and wealth 6 Financial position 7 Industry Sectors 8 Notable companies and markets 9 Energy, transportation, and telecommunications 10 Finance 11 Health care 12 International trade 13 Currency and central bank 14 Law and government 15 See also 16 References 17 External links 2. Economy of China 1 History 2 Government role 3 Regional economies 4 Development 5 Macroeconomic trends 6 Financial and banking system 7 Industry Sectors 8 Labor and welfare 9 External trade 10 Foreign investment 11 Demographics 12 Transportation and infrastructure 13 Science and technology 14 See also 15 References 16 External links 3. Economy of Japan 1 Economic history 2 Infrastructure 3 Macro-economic trend 4 Services 5 Industry 6 Mining and petroleum exploration 7 Agriculture 8 Labor force 9 Law and government 10 Culture 11 Other economic indicators 12 See also 13 Notes 14 External links 4. Economy of Germany 1 History 2 Macroeconomic data 3 Economic region 4 Natural resources 5 Sectors 6 Infrastructure 7 Technology 8 See also 9 References 10 External links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcnabber091 (talk • contribs) 19:31, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OECD figures for gross and net salaries

The new, changed figures for gross and net salary need explanation, discussion, and better citation of sources. Wikipedia articles are not valid reliable sources for verification of data; so we need a footnote, with sources, explaining how the figures are arrived at, also explaining use of PPP, conversion etc. Since the basis is being completely chamged, it would be appropriate to discuss the issue on this talk page. Has there been any discussion of consistent use of comparable figures for different countries, e.g. at WikiProject countries ? Boson (talk) 19:31, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, nothing was donein true Wikipedia fashion. It doesn't even bother anyone that the GDP of the major Economy in EU is given in USD! Crock81 (talk) 06:13, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recent criticism for Trade surplus

Since widespread criticism has been voiced by the IMF, the US and the EU commission regarding the harmful effects on the European economy and global trade, those views should be reflected in the article. Philipp Wendelin (talk) 23:56, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

EUR or USD

I can't understand why a country whose currency is EUR, being EUR somehow a hegemonic currency, many financial values appear in USD. Would be a problem if I change the values to EUR? João Pimentel Ferreira 19:13, 18 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joao.pimentel.ferreira (talk • contribs)

External links

Hello everyone, I am working for the International Trade Centre (ITC), a UN/WTO agency that aims to promote sustainable economic development through trade promotion. I would like to propose the addition of an external link (http://www.macmap.org/QuickSearch/FindTariff/FindTariff.aspx?subsite=open_access&country=SCC276%7CGermany&source=1%7CITC) that leads directly to our online database of customs tariffs applied by Germany. Visitors can easily look up market access information for Germany by selecting the product and partner of their interest. I would like you to consider this link under the WP:ELYES #3 prescriptions. Moreover, the reliability and the pertinence of this link can be supported by the following facts 1) ITC is part of the United Nations, and aims to share trade and market access data on by country and product as a global public good 2) No registration is required to access this information 3) Market access data (Tariffs and non-tariff measures) are regularly updated

Thank you, Divoc (talk) 13:57, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Economy of Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150430152829/http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/GermanEconomicMiracle.html to http://www.econlib.org/library/enc/GermanEconomicMiracle.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Economy of Germany/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The biggest problem with this article is that it is to a large degree written from a US POV as opposed to a neutral POV. It is sily, for example, to start the section on foreign investments by pointing out that the US is the *second* largest foreign investor, and then going on to point out that France is Nr. 1 --Eivind 09:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 09:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 14:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Dr. Schnabel's comment on this article

Dr. Schnabel has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

The part on East Germany is too short (even if there exists a main article on this topic) and a little bit confusing (exports compared to West Germany); the sentence on GDP growth in 1976 should be dropped.
The fact that Germany easily overcame the Great Recession in 2008/09 was not only due to the economic stimulus plan but also due to wage restraint, short-term work and cooperative behavior by trade unions and employers.
At several places in the articles unemployment rates are mentioned, but they refer to very different years, ranging from 2010 to 2015.
Wealth: it is peculiar to measure the wealth of a country by the number of high wealth households. Using other measures such as GDP per capita Germany is clearly not the second richest country in the world.
Problems: in addition to the low birth rate the aging of the society and the ensuring problems for the pay-as-you-go pension scheme should be mentioned

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

Dr. Schnabel has published scholarly research which seems to be relevant to this Wikipedia article:

Reference : Hirsch, Boris & Merkl, Christian & Muller, Steffen & Schnabel, Claus, 2014. "Centralized vs. Decentralized Wage Formation: The Role of Firms' Production Technology," IZA Discussion Papers 8242, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Zwick's comment on this article

Dr. Zwick has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

Last sentence: From a low birth rate and an ageing society you cannot deduct a reduced capacity for innovation (the relation between innovative capacity and ageing of a society is not so clear). You however may conclude that it will get ever more costly to sustain the old age pension system or that pension claims will further fall.

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Zwick has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:

Reference : Hirsch, Boris & Zwick, Thomas, 2013. "How selective are real wage cuts? A micro-analysis using linked employer-employee data," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-086, ZEW - Zentrum fur Europaische Wirtschaftsforschung / Center for European Economic Research.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 20:31, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Percentage of GDP Change does not reflect GDP Change

Hi, a quick glance at the table shows that the listed percentages are not fitting the the absolute GDP numbers posted. From 1992 to 1993 the GDP nominally rose in EUR but was said to be shrinking by 1%. From 2002 to 2003 the GDP was said to be shrinking by 0.4% but the absolute numbers rise. Could someone explaine or link to an explanation why the seasonally adjusted GDP change numbers differ from the absolute changes? It makes the whole table confusing. Regards

--193.251.31.151 (talk) 23:05, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Gartner's comment on this article

Dr. Gartner has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

The article contains a lot of statistics and is largely descriptive. The text is somewhat selective.
The section Technology discuss 'green tech', a Topic that is popular, but not the most important strength. The german Technology sector is strong for example in regulation and sensory technics and robotic.
The section 'Problems' discuss demographical developments. Comments from IMF or OECD sees also Problems in the education System, for example a weak preschool education or a low number of academics. Another Problem is a low rate of public and provat Investment rate. (http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2016/cr16202.pdf)

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Gartner has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:

Reference : Gartner, Hermann & Schank, Thorsten & Schnabel, Claus, 2010. "Wage Cyclicality under Different Regimes of Industrial Relations," IZA Discussion Papers 5228, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 16:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Economy of Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:08, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Economy of Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:53, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Economy of Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:48, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Economy of Germany. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:18, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Minimum wage effects

7 Oct 2021: Reallocation effects of the minimum wage. "In January 2015, Germany introduced a uniform minimum wage of €8.50 [$10 an hour today]. ... boosted wages of low-wage workers, did not lower employment, and induced a reallocation toward more productive establishments."

Maybe someone with more time can integrate some of this, and other related articles. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:49, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pankys Family?

Section "Wealth", top ten billionaires: "1. $27.9 billion Pankys Family" is probably a hoax. Not in the forbes list linked as a source.83.236.31.174 (talk) 09:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Germany Product Exports (2019).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:55, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism of GDP figures

There has been serial vandalism of the economy pages for Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Japan, Malaysia and Morocco. The vandalism has involved repeated reversions of correct GDP data from the IMF 2023 GDP (nominal and PPP) estimates^[1]--the citations are never changed, just the figures and the denomination. For example, Germany's IMF 2023 nominal GDP estimate is USD$4.308 trillion; the edits changed it to EUR and increased it to €5.011 trillion. I have reverted these changes, all made by the same unregistered user (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2A00:23C5:980:B601:991F:665A:31CA:ECA4). Pierrot Delecto (talk) 05:28, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ "Report for Selected Countries and Subjects: April 2023". imf.org. International Monetary Fund.

Wrong picture of Frankfurt

Instead of Frankfurt the picture shows the old flag of the 3rd Reich Nazi Germany 87.52.110.245 (talk) 10:21, 6 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Arbeitsamt" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Arbeitsamt has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 18 § Arbeitsamt until a consensus is reached. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 23:15, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[IMFWEODE-1] "Report for Selected Countries and Subjects: April 2023". imf.org. International Monetary Fund.

[1]