Financial crisis pushes Euro countries back into recession

LONDON (AP) — The 17-country eurozone has fallen back into recession for the first time in three years as the fallout from the region's financial crisis was felt from Amsterdam to Athens.
And with surveys pointing to increasingly depressed conditions across the 17-member group that uses the euro at a time of high unemployment in many countries, there are fears that the recession will deepen, and make the debt crisis — which has been calmer of late — even more difficult to handle.
Official figures Thursday showed that the eurozone contracted by 0.1 percent in the July to September period from the quarter before as economies including Germany and the Netherlands suffer from falling demand.
The decline reported by Eurostat, the EU's statistics office, was in line with market expectations and follows on from the 0.2 percent fall recorded in the second quarter. As a result, the eurozone is officially in recession, commonly defined as two straight quarters of falling output.
"The eurozone economy will continue its decline in Q4 and probably well into 2013 too — a good backdrop for another debt crisis," said Michael Taylor, an economist at Lombard Street Research.
Because of the eurozone's grueling three-year debt crisis, the region has been the major focus of concern for the world economy. The eurozone economy is worth around €9.5 trillion, or $12.1 trillion, which puts it on a par with the U.S.. The region, with its 332 million people, is the U.S.'s largest export customer, and any fall-off in demand will hit order books.
While the U.S has managed to bounce back from its own savage recession in 2008-09, albeit inconsistently, and China continues to post strong growth, Europe's economies have been on a downward spiral — and there is little sign of any improvement in the near-term.
The eurozone had managed to avoid returning to recession for the first time since the financial crisis following the collapse of U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers, mainly thanks to the strength of its largest single economy, Germany.
But even that country is now struggling as confidence wanes and exports drain in light of the economic problems afflicting large chunks of the eurozone.
Germany's economy grew 0.2 percent in the third quarter, down from a 0.3 percent increase in the previous quarter. Over the past year, Germany's annual growth rate has more than halved to 0.9 percent from 1.9 percent.
Perhaps the most dramatic decline among the eurozone's members was seen in the Netherlands, whose economy shrank 1.1 percent on the previous quarter.
Five eurozone countries are in recession — Greece, Spain, Italy, Portugal and Cyprus. Those five are also at the center of Europe's debt crisis and are imposing austerity measures, such as cuts to wages and pensions and increases to taxes, in an attempt to stay afloat.
As well as hitting workers' incomes and living standards, these measures have also led to a decline in economic output and a sharp increase in unemployment.
Spain and Greece have unemployment rates of over 25 percent. Their young people are faring even worse with every other person out of work. As well as being a cost to governments who have to pay out more for benefits, it carries a huge social and human cost.
Protests across Europe on Wednesday highlighted the scale of discontent and with economic surveys pointing to the downturn getting worse, the voices of anger may well get louder still.
"The likelihood is that this anger will continue to grow unless European leaders and policymakers start to act as if they have a clue as to how to resolve the crisis starting to unravel before their eyes," said Michael Hewson, markets analyst at CMC Markets.
Europe has no doubt made some progress this year in allaying some of the worst fears in the markets, notably through the announcement of new bond-buying program from the European Central Bank. However, with Greece still teetering on the edge and the eurozone in recession, the economic storms are never far away.
Mario Draghi, the ECB's president has been widely credited for helping foster the more optimistic tone in the markets but he admits there's still a long way to go.
"The year that is about to end will be remembered not only for the effects the European sovereign debt crisis has had on the euro and for the significant weakening of the European economy, but also for the responses to these challenges by the ECB, national governments and the European Union," he said in a speech at Univerisita Bocconi in Milan.
"Ultimately, it is up to governments to dispel once and for all the persistent uncertainties that markets perceive and citizens fear," Draghi added.
The wider 27-nation EU, which includes non-euro countries, avoided the same recession fate as the eurozone. Eurostat said the EU's output rose 0.1 percent during the third quarter, largely on the back of an Olympics-related boost in Britain.
The EU's output as a whole is greater than the U.S. It is also a major source of sales for the world's leading companies. Forty percent of McDonald's global revenue comes from Europe - more than it generates in the U.S. General Motors, meanwhile, sold 1.7 million vehicles in Europe last year, a fifth of its worldwide sales.
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press.
The U.S will be joining the Euro countries in recession with our own recession on 01/01/13, and will be going into a deep depression, no matter what happens in Europe, on 01/01/14. The stock market has tanked 4% since obozo was reelected. The weekly unemployment numbers are starting to go back up. The only good thing is that obozo can no longer blame Bush for his failures.
as most are focused on the P.I.G.S, how come no one talks about the Nordic countries and their abilities to grow while maintaining substantial social welfare?
 @diddy_bop The same Nordic countries who have substantially less population than the US? Those guys?
Kind of peculiar that Israel comes under attack just as soon as our Muslim loving President is re-seated.
The Euro trash version of socialism really has no were to go to improve anything economically. A very very hard lesson (hopefully) learned. Unfortunately we are headed in the same (blind) direction.
bandaids rarely heal giant wounds
Bottom line.... the Eurozone is in bad shape basically due to deficit spending.....
Â
and our country just re-elected the biggest deficit spender in our countries history.... it won't be long before we are in the same pickle.......  we are so screwed.
DAMN IT ITS IS CALLED A DEPRESSION you Knuckleheads
Â
@lee986321 Just because you don't know the difference between a depression and a recession it doesn't follow that you are correct.
Conservatives, if spending is causing this crisis, then why is the UK also in recession? It's not on the Euro, but, more importantly, under David Cameron, it has slashed spending on bleeding-heart social programs. And, concurrently, its economy has gone from recovering to recession.
Also, why is Germany the strongest economy in the Eurozone? Outside of Scandinavia, it's the most socialist country in Europe.
 @Max Quinn Germany, unlike most other countries, has not outsourced the majority of their companies. They manufacture all products inside the country so that they are relatively self-reliant and do not need to base their economic stability on the economy of other countries. German companies provide German citizens with jobs. It really has very little, if anything, to do with what you perceive as socialism.
I don't deny that Germany has the policies you describe. The point many people on this site make is that spending on social programs is the root cause of this crisis. If that were true, Germany would be suffering, too, because it has a strong social safety net (and stringent environmental laws). Instead, it is the strongest economy in the group.
Â
Here is the UK Budget info for 2011. http://cdn.hm-treasury.gov.uk/2011budget_complete.pdf
They point to "unsustainable public spending".  Specifically they point to Revenues of 589 B (pounds) and spending of 671 B (pounds).
Â
 @NorthernBlackBear Sure they do. The budget was prepared by the people who wanted to cut that spending.
My argument isn't that budgets should be more balanced in the long term. I'm saying that slashing them in the short term is not a solution - it's an obstacle. As evidence, I point to the UK economy which has gone into recession since the spending cuts were imposed.
 @TimBurr  @Max Quinn  @NorthernBlackBearÂ
because a 'siphon up' economy has been working so well?
@Max Quinn@NorthernBlackBear
****Who the F do you think buys the bonds..... individuals, companies, ***
Â
The effing companies and individuals do it by choice. They view it as an investment. If it were a bad investment when compared to anything in the private sector, they would lend the money to the private sector. No one is forced the buy government bonds.
Â
***** FDR showed that government spending does mitigate economic disasters. [and other distortions]*****
Â
He mitigated it by increasing employment primarily. Then in 1937 he gave into to conservatives and his own inclination and balanced the budget to soon - the economy was better but not recovered full from the Depression.
Â
*****Blah blah blah rant Obama BLAH four years RANTcough debt *****
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/adding-to-the-deficit-bush-vs-obama/2012/01/31/gIQAQ0kFgQ_graphic.html
Â
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/06/07/238602/chart-debt-without-bush-tax-cuts/?mobile=nc
Â
@Max Quinn @Altazi @NorthernBlackBear """"Nice try rewriting history. FDR showed that government spending does mitigate economic disasters.""""
FDR took office in 1933 IN THE MIDST of the depression..... he spent all kinds of money and nearly SIX YEARS LATER the UE rate was pretty much the same. If govt spending worked in reviving the economy..... we would have had the roaring thrities.... but we didn't  FDR's spending failed to better the economy.
Â
"""""Bush v Obama: A large part of Obama's debt comes from Bush policies (tax cuts and wars). Another part from the fallout from Bush policies. And then the debt was spent on stimulus and relief.""""""
Spin it however you want, but the undeniable fact is BÂ HO's deficits in ONLY FOUR YEARS HAVE EXCEEDEDÂ bush's eight years of deficits.
Â
"""""And the money is not taken from the private sector."""""
Who the F do you think buys the bonds..... individuals, companies, etc
Â
""""""Â FDR showed that government spending does mitigate economic disasters."""""
exactly how did FDR mitigate disasters???? the depression was already in place when he took office.Â
 @diddy_bop  @Max Quinn  @NorthernBlackBear Trickle up poverty never works......for long.
 @Max Quinn  @NorthernBlackBearÂ
are you saying that 'supply side' economics doesn't work?
 @Altazi   "So please explain the long-term benefits of unsustainable government spending?"
Â
That's exactly right . . . . there are none.
 @NorthernBlackBear Sorry. I meant ease out. Doing too many things at once.
Â
Yea, I don't have an iPhone 5 either. If everyone makes that decision, then Apple goes under. Which is fine - if people don't want the products, the companies fail.
Â
Not so much with countries. If everyone holds onto their money, then you don't have an economy. I don't know what you do for a living, but if all of your customers stop spending, so do you. And not just on iPhones. Until the economy fully recovers - best measured by the unemployment rate - government has a role increasing spending, especially on things that have lasting value like roads, schools, bridges, etc.
@Max Quinn @AltaziÂ
Â
I am a fiscal conservative.  Absolutely.  And we need to balance the books.  There are 2 parts to that equation.  Income and expenses.   Both need to play a part.
Â
We need to reform the taxes.   Really reform them.  Maybe a VAT.  Mabe a flat stepped flat.   [Stepped - as in - threshold income - income goes up - rate goes up.] Â
Â
Everyone wants a tax cut.  But in my opinion we can't afford it.
See it is not always safe to profile people.
"When the economy recovers, the government should easy out of this role."
Â
That was the promise.  They declared the recession ended.  They haven't 'easy outed'.  Â
Â
They are continuing to step in - ** example - tax cut to encourage spending.  ** example the Feds holding interest rates down to "create the feeling of wealth" and prod the stock market (Ben actually gave that as a reason). Â
Â
I never said there was a problem with supply.  I would say there is a problem with basing your economy on people letting go of their money.   That is exactly been our economy for the last 25 plus years.   How many times have has AP written that 70% of our economy is based on just that.  Â
Â
There has to be a fundamental change in the economy.    Another-me-too-iphone doesn't add value to me, so I won't be buying one.   See how simple that is.  Â
 @Altazi  @NorthernBlackBear It's more like pouring water on a fire. Once the fire is out, you stop. And the money is not taken from the private sector. The bond market buys the government bonds or it doesn't. If the private sector offers a better option for the money, the money will go there.
Â
Bush v Obama: A large part of Obama's debt comes from Bush policies (tax cuts and wars). Another part from the fallout from Bush policies. And then the debt was spent on stimulus and relief.
Â
Nice try rewriting history. FDR showed that government spending does mitigate economic disasters. Japan didn't try it. BHO's stimulus did save jobs, but it wasn't large enough and had too many tax cuts - conservatives wouldn't do it without those.
@Max Quinn @Altazi @NorthernBlackBear  """""When GW started running up the debt (it increased 72% under his watch) to fund tax cuts and wars, that was bad."""""
Â
How can you possible blame bush and not add Bronco Bamma to that list as his  deficits HAVE ALREADY EXCEEDED W's eight years of deficits.
@Max Quinn @NorthernBlackBear  """"" the government steps in to be the customer of last resort. When the economy recovers, the government should easy out of this role.""""
Â
that is rather flawed logic..... its like trying to take the water out of the deep end of the pool and put it in the shallow end in an effort to raise the level of the water. Taking money from the private sector (which is how the govt. gets their money) and then putting that money back in the private sector is a zero sum gain.
Â
FDR proved that logic flawed in the thirties, Japan proved it did NOT work again in the nineties..... and B HO own stimulus was an epic flop.
 @Altazi  @NorthernBlackBear There aren't any.
When GW started running up the debt (it increased 72% under his watch) to fund tax cuts and wars, that was bad.
When faced with economic catastrophe, though, the government cutting spending along with the private sector worsens the economy - call it the Herbert Hoover approach. The short term benefit of government spending in such a situation is economic stability.
 @Max Quinn  @NorthernBlackBear So please explain the long-term benefits of unsustainable government spending?
Â
 @NorthernBlackBear Moving out of metaphors...
We and the rest of the world are in a slump caused by lack of demand, not supply. Corporations are sitting on cash reserves. Raw materials (including oil) are there in adequate supply.
What is not in supply are customers. Without enough customers, businesses will not invest, they don't hire people, and the result is fewer customers. This is the reasoning behind deficit financing in response to a crisis - the government steps in to be the customer of last resort. When the economy recovers, the government should easy out of this role.
Austerity dictates that you balance the books no matter what and that doing so will improve the economy. This is true at the household level, but not the state level. By pursuing austerity, these governments are actually shrinking the cookie jar because they are undermining growth, as is made clear by their return to recession.
There is no long term benefit to this policy.
Â
Yes, (and parapharasing) "saving for a rainy day".  And the problem is we didn't. Â
Â
There is a point where 2 trains traveling towards each other at full speed can not stop no matter how hard they apply the brakes.  Â
 @NorthernBlackBear 'And the point is that they are tanked because they are still spending more than they have.'
Â
If that were true, then shouldn't the situation have improved once they started cutting? It didn't. It became worse.
Â
To paraphrase a late great economist, the boom is the time for austerity, not the slump.
Â
And the point is that they are tanked because they are still spending more than they have. Â
Â
I agree this is a long term situation.  We (the US) has had a balance of trade problem since days when we started our moon adventure.   Flirting back and forth early and flirting with neutral (yearly) again under Clinton.  We can't keep adding to it.  We've been applying band-aids for the last xx years.Â
Â
The cookie jar does run out.
Ever been to the UK?  They are the epitome of the entitlement era with people getting 7 thousand a month to live on welfare. And Germany is on strong because of all our military bases there, take those out and they would crumble.
 @MrAchilles Yea, not quite. Germany is not hanging by the thread of our military spending. And like I said, the slump in the UK is concurrent with the slashing of the very entitlements you refer to.
I have been to germany - with the US military . The "best jobs" might be related to the US military, however that is a real real small percentage of the GDP of that country. There are very few US military bases left compared to what existed even 10 year ago. US military and civilian related dollars pumped into the German economy is not insignificant - it is a small percentage.
 @MrAchilles The German GDP (2011) was $3.57 trillion. Good jobs aside, we don't spend enough on military bases in Germany to keep an economy that large afloat.And again, if slashing social spending leads to prosperity, why has the UK economy tanked? They've been slashing that spending for over two years.
@Max Quinn  My daughter in-law in from Germany and you are very wrong. The best jobs there are all related to our military bases. Sorry. And the UK, pick a paper and read, people are prospering from welfare right now.Â
I think one thing we can say is that we need to look at our deficit.
Â
It is true that economic theory tells us that whether a deficit is good or bad depends on the factors giving rise to that deficit, but economic theory also tells us what to look for in assessing the desirability of a deficit.
Â
Without knowing which of these is at play, it makes little sense to talk of a deficit being âgoodâ or âbad.â
Â
It could indicative of competitiveness problems; that is surely in play here.
Â
It could also indicate an excess of investment over savings; which would be 'good'; but not in this case.
Â
It could also point to a highly productive, growing economy; which would be 'good'; but again not in this case.
Â
If could also reflect low savings rather than high investment; that in turn points to reckless fiscal policy or a consumption binge.  Both are in play here. Â
Â
Since Clinton's expansion of Trade Agreements we have been accelerating investments abroad; we have been buying Lexus, Toyota's, BMW's, WalMart clothes made in China.  This fits our situation quite well.
Â
Clearly classic economics point to our deficit and balance of trade as "bad".  Furthermore they point to the solution. Â
Â
We can not spend what we don't have.
Yes, yes yes. I love it when reality comes home to roost. Governments cannot keep spending beyond revenues.
Â
Financial discipline is something that will be learned, either through education or through the school of hard knocks. Finances are now driving the EU and it is not a fun ride.
Â
It's just a matter of time before it hits the US. Maybe sooner that I anticipated with 0bama back in the saddle.
Back? They never left the recession.
Does this mean that you can not TAX your way to prosperity? Does it mean that government will eventually run out of other peoples money to spend? Pay attention Obama. This is our future if we keep following your ideology. Why do these countries have to crash before they learn that you can't pay people to not work? America is next to fall under Obama's 'leadership' . Watch the stock market, down nearly 700 points since Obama was reelected.
@last boyscout  I agree. The socialist agenda of the European countries is what Obama would like to implement here and those same policies are failing there. Why cant we use that as an example of what NOT to follow?
 @scared_citizen  @last It wasn't socialism that caused this crisis. It was capitalism in the greedy pursuit by unregulated banks for unearned profit through derivatives (Spain and Italy), real estate speculation (Ireland), tax evasion by millionaires (Greece and Italy in particular), and governmental lies and budget manipulation (Greece). I know that doesn't fit with your dogma, but that's the real cause and it's the truth. And it's exactly what caused our own recession.
 @last boyscout That doesn't alter the facts in today's debate.Â
 @Old29 If you are in fact 'old', then you know that Capitalism BUILT this country into the leader that it 'used' to be. Not socialism.Â
 @scared_citizen Simple. Conservatives 'think' and Liberals 'feel'. It's all about ideology, liberals say that if their ideology didn't work, it wasn't implemented correctly.
 @last boyscout  @scared_citizen ok, that was freaking weird on the reply
hmm how about fiscal irresponsibility on our governments part? well that and the inability to keep there pants Zipped up costing us in Lawusits.@last boyscout  @scared_citizenÂ
It's hard to take candy away from a baby. You're more likely to win an election if you give them more candy.
The headline ought to read "Austerity pushes Euro countries back into recession".
Â
Having a single currency without coordinated financial policies was really bad idea, but insisting that countries with damaged economies slash spending as a remedy is worse.
 @Max QuinnÂ
They have no choice but to slash spending. They have used every other trick in the book to avoid the rather obvious conclusion.
Â
Keynesian economics will only work if the government has no debt and can afford to borrow money for a period of time to boost the economy. None, NONE of the EU has that kind of debt structure. ALL of them owe a lot of money and can no longer borrow money because it will increase the amount of tax revenues going to pay off interest and will compete with private enterprises when it comes to borrow money.
Â
Banks would rather loan to a country than to a business. Countries don't often go bankrupt and are a much better credit risk.
Â
When government competes with businesses in borrowing a finite amount of money the rates go us and businesses lose out.
 @RalphCramden Not true. Even within the EU, countries with debt that are not on the Euro can borrow money a reasonable rates. The problem has nothing to do with social spending (otherwise Germany would have gone down a long time ago). It's a problem, generally, of countries on the Euro having no flexibility to adjust the value of their currency to make exports more competitive.
 @RalphCramden And yet, as Argentina shows, it can be won.
 @Max Quinn Â
Currency manipulation just invites more currency manipulation from the competition to stay ahead of the game. It's a no win game.
 @RalphCramden German banks made loans to those countries before the crisis. The notion that they should be part of the solution follows as logical.
Â
There's a difference between currency manipulation in times of crisis and as permanent policy. Yes, what China is doing is wrong. But, look at what Argentina did about 7 years ago in response to a similar crisis - it unpegged its currency from the dollar. As the peso declined, exports rose, and Argentina recovered.
 @Max QuinnÂ
Manipulating currency is why China is doing so well against the US and why the US is always complaining.
Â
I am against currency manipulation just like I am against government subsidies. It creates a false economy that will climb or fall depending on the subsidies.
Â
Just like the wind energy subsides that may go away on the near future. There will be thousands of jobs lost as the subsidies go away. Once again the government created a false economy that will hurt a lot of people.
Â
We have been though this before. Germany is tired of supporting all the other loser countries in the EU and Merkel has to deal with a lot of pressure for her to stop supporting those countries that can't manage their money.
 @MrAchilles If that's true, then why is the German economy the strongest in the Eurozone?
Please educate yourself. The people of Germany pay 60% of their wages to the government. I know this as a fact! Â