Until A few years ago, Netanyahu’s replacement as finance minister, Ehud Olmert, was considered by reform-minded Israelis a worthy successor to Netanyahu.
Like Bibi, Ehud professed to be pro-market, with the courage, sometimes, to take unpopular stands.
Filed under:
reform
The acid rain the media poured on Binyamin Netanyahu when he recently resigned his post as finance minister was to be expected, of course. No matter what he does, Bibi – the leader a leftist Israeli media loves to hate – can never do right.
Except for some savvy economic commentators who, even when they sharply disagreed with Netanyahu’s political positions, still praised him as the best Israeli finance minister ever, most Israeli journalists, ignorant of economics, could not fathom the revolutionary nature of Netanyahu’s reforms. But even some of Netanyahu’s supporters felt uneasy about his resignation, especially its timing. They felt he should have stayed in office longer to see his historic
financial market reform completed to the letter; that he should not have left it in the hands of those who could now whittle it down by granting the banks such high commissions on their sale of financial products that the reform’s effort to reduce the banks’ domination of financial markets would remain a dead letter and they would inevitably regain dominance through those high fees.
Netanyahu argues that only because economic reform was such an urgent necessity did he not resign his post earlier. And Netanyahu has already paid a heavy political price both for his determined reforms and for delaying his expected resignation. With early elections a high probability, he could not afford to sit back and watch his political base totally erode.
UNTIL A few years ago, Netanyahu’s replacement as finance minister, Ehud Olmert, was considered by reform-minded Israelis a worthy successor to Netanyahu. Like Bibi, Ehud professed to be pro-market. When he served as health minister he attempted, though unsuccessfully, to privatize dysfunctional government-owned hospitals. He also had the courage, sometimes, to take unpopular stands.
Since Netanyahu was Olmert’s greatest competitor for the post of prime minister it was natural that he would join the enemies of reform by echoing their accusations that Netanyahu was deliberately harming the lower-income sector. Upon becoming finance minister Olmert continued to attack Bibi’s “extremist Thatcherite policies,” repeating the phony poverty-line statistics and the claim that poverty is enhanced in Israel by economic growth because growth increases “the income gap.” He announced that he intended to shift resources to welfare payments that discourage work.
Equally worrisome, Olmert decided to extend the tenure of Eitan Raff, the notorious Bank Leumi chairman who fought the financial markets reforms, often by very questionable means, using public funds to undermine a decision of a democratic government. Olmert even praised his banker friends as great managers, when they are really total failures as bankers, having lost most of the billions in credit they extended to cronies, and having as a result deprived Israel of productive investment for two decades. This has deepened a six-year recession and caused massive unemployment, forcing most Israeli workers to earn pitiful wages and hundreds of thousands of families to be unable to make ends meet. One wonders why Olmert wants to associate himself with such failures. It is also a puzzle why he chose to protect the monopolies that belong to Israel’s oligarchy when he attempted to cast himself as the protector of the poor.
Amazingly Olmert succeeded, it seems, in convincing his friends and supporters in the US that he was pro-market even as he supported increased government intervention and handouts. He even convinced a much more skeptical Israeli media that he was a champion of “the poor” while promoting the interests of Israel’s oligarchy.
Olmert is not only a very ambitious politician but also a very smart man, wary of failure. He was wise enough to correctly interpret the signal given by a dramatically falling stock market when Netanyahu resigned. He immediately announced that he was going to continue Netanyahu’s policies, and he might do so, just as Tony Blair continued Margaret Thatcher’s policies while condemning her.
TO SUCCEED like Netanyahu, Olmert must, paradoxically, rid himself of his obsession with Bibi and become his own man, following market policies and not merely paying them lip service while indulging in populist talk. Olmert has an excellent team to work with if he follows market policies: Stanley Fischer, the governor of the Bank of Israel, and Ariel Sharon’s chief of staff Ilan Cohen, who understands economics.
The test of whether Olmert will seize this great opportunity to be his own man rather than serve others’ interests will be soon. While he promised to keep the framework of the budget intact, he could do a lot of good or harm by the way he deploys its resources, whether toward growth or more damaging welfare. Olmert also repeatedly indicated that he might recommend next year increasing the budget deficit above 3% in contravention of an agreement with the US.
Olmert has also decided to open the question of what commission the banks will receive for their sale of the products of the funds they will have to disgorge. Should he bow to their pressure and grant them too high a commission he will nullify the benefits of the banking reform and establish the banks again as dominant players in the markets, with all the terrible consequences this has had so far.
Log in or Register
Farewell Bibi, hello Ehud
The Jerusalem Post
21 Aug ’05
Until A few years ago, Netanyahu’s replacement as finance minister, Ehud Olmert, was considered by reform-minded Israelis a worthy successor to Netanyahu.
Like Bibi, Ehud professed to be pro-market, with the courage, sometimes, to take unpopular stands.
Filed under:
reform
The acid rain the media poured on Binyamin Netanyahu when he recently resigned his post as finance minister was to be expected, of course. No matter what he does, Bibi – the leader a leftist Israeli media loves to hate – can never do right.
Except for some savvy economic commentators who, even when they sharply disagreed with Netanyahu’s political positions, still praised him as the best Israeli finance minister ever, most Israeli journalists, ignorant of economics, could not fathom the revolutionary nature of Netanyahu’s reforms. But even some of Netanyahu’s supporters felt uneasy about his resignation, especially its timing. They felt he should have stayed in office longer to see his historic
financial market reform completed to the letter; that he should not have left it in the hands of those who could now whittle it down by granting the banks such high commissions on their sale of financial products that the reform’s effort to reduce the banks’ domination of financial markets would remain a dead letter and they would inevitably regain dominance through those high fees.
Netanyahu argues that only because economic reform was such an urgent necessity did he not resign his post earlier. And Netanyahu has already paid a heavy political price both for his determined reforms and for delaying his expected resignation. With early elections a high probability, he could not afford to sit back and watch his political base totally erode.
UNTIL A few years ago, Netanyahu’s replacement as finance minister, Ehud Olmert, was considered by reform-minded Israelis a worthy successor to Netanyahu. Like Bibi, Ehud professed to be pro-market. When he served as health minister he attempted, though unsuccessfully, to privatize dysfunctional government-owned hospitals. He also had the courage, sometimes, to take unpopular stands.
Since Netanyahu was Olmert’s greatest competitor for the post of prime minister it was natural that he would join the enemies of reform by echoing their accusations that Netanyahu was deliberately harming the lower-income sector. Upon becoming finance minister Olmert continued to attack Bibi’s “extremist Thatcherite policies,” repeating the phony poverty-line statistics and the claim that poverty is enhanced in Israel by economic growth because growth increases “the income gap.” He announced that he intended to shift resources to welfare payments that discourage work.
Equally worrisome, Olmert decided to extend the tenure of Eitan Raff, the notorious Bank Leumi chairman who fought the financial markets reforms, often by very questionable means, using public funds to undermine a decision of a democratic government. Olmert even praised his banker friends as great managers, when they are really total failures as bankers, having lost most of the billions in credit they extended to cronies, and having as a result deprived Israel of productive investment for two decades. This has deepened a six-year recession and caused massive unemployment, forcing most Israeli workers to earn pitiful wages and hundreds of thousands of families to be unable to make ends meet. One wonders why Olmert wants to associate himself with such failures. It is also a puzzle why he chose to protect the monopolies that belong to Israel’s oligarchy when he attempted to cast himself as the protector of the poor.
Amazingly Olmert succeeded, it seems, in convincing his friends and supporters in the US that he was pro-market even as he supported increased government intervention and handouts. He even convinced a much more skeptical Israeli media that he was a champion of “the poor” while promoting the interests of Israel’s oligarchy.
Olmert is not only a very ambitious politician but also a very smart man, wary of failure. He was wise enough to correctly interpret the signal given by a dramatically falling stock market when Netanyahu resigned. He immediately announced that he was going to continue Netanyahu’s policies, and he might do so, just as Tony Blair continued Margaret Thatcher’s policies while condemning her.
TO SUCCEED like Netanyahu, Olmert must, paradoxically, rid himself of his obsession with Bibi and become his own man, following market policies and not merely paying them lip service while indulging in populist talk. Olmert has an excellent team to work with if he follows market policies: Stanley Fischer, the governor of the Bank of Israel, and Ariel Sharon’s chief of staff Ilan Cohen, who understands economics.
The test of whether Olmert will seize this great opportunity to be his own man rather than serve others’ interests will be soon. While he promised to keep the framework of the budget intact, he could do a lot of good or harm by the way he deploys its resources, whether toward growth or more damaging welfare. Olmert also repeatedly indicated that he might recommend next year increasing the budget deficit above 3% in contravention of an agreement with the US.
Olmert has also decided to open the question of what commission the banks will receive for their sale of the products of the funds they will have to disgorge. Should he bow to their pressure and grant them too high a commission he will nullify the benefits of the banking reform and establish the banks again as dominant players in the markets, with all the terrible consequences this has had so far.
More recent commentary
The New Republic
19 May ’11
Economic Miracle
A Middle East peace strategy that could actually work.
The Jerusalem Post
15 Mar ’11
The government-tycoons-media triangle
Israel needs to slash its state budget by as much as possible if it wants a chance at fighting waste and corruption.
The Jerusalem Post
9 Mar ’11
Welfare and rebellion: The economic factor in the Arab uprisings
Too little attention has been paid to how Egypt’s socialist past and welfare-state present shaped the current rebellion.
The Jerusalem Post
7 Feb ’11
Is all quiet on the economic front?
The Herzliya Conference has become an important international event, but one central issue is absent: Israel’s debilitating economic concentration.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Jan ’11
Teaching an elephant to dance
It’s highly unlikely that government can ever learn to make long-term plans and execute them efficiently.
The Jerusalem Post
23 Dec ’10
Hellenization and Enlightenment: Post-Hanukka ruminations
How can one dare compare narrow-minded religion with the all-embracing faith of universality and equality that is socialism?
The Jerusalem Post
1 Dec ’10
Would Milton Friedman have approved?
Many of the social and economic troubles we are experiencing are due to the public’s lack of understanding of the need for economic literacy.
The Jerusalem Post
17 Oct ’10
Perverting public discourse
The PM’s courageous decision to tackle economic concentration was misrepresented by several of our media publications—owned of course by tycoons.
The Wall Street Journal
8 Oct ’10
Breaking Israel’s monopolies
Economic concentration hurts the country’s viability and the chances for peace.
The Jerusalem Post
4 Oct ’10
Israel’s progress undermined
A damaging ethos of ‘welfarism’ and distributive politics has come to dominate not only academia but our cultural, military and even our business elites.
The Jerusalem Post
19 Aug ’10
Unable to decide
The reformers must know the importance of the reform’s success both for Israel and for their careers, and what damage they will incur if it fails.
The Jerusalem Post
13 Jul ’10
Elana Kagan, terrorism and the law
Kagan’s admiration for Justice Aharon Barak’s philosophy may have revealed her own predilection for radical judicial activism.
The Jerusalem Post
30 May ’10
Yes, break them up
We must dismantle the oligarch-owned monopolies that impoverish the Israeli consumer and choke our economy.
The Wall Street Journal
18 May ’10
Land of silicon and money
The OECD’s invitation to Israel is a “seal of approval” but the country still needs more reforms.
The Jerusalem Post
10 Feb ’10
The surprise of it all
The world’s astonishment at Israel’s response to the Haiti disaster is insulting. What we saw there was Israel’s true face.
The Jerusalem Post
10 Jan ’10
Hi-tech prospects and pitfalls
Individual initiative and freedom are essential for creativity—in hi-tech as in all other spheres.
The Jerusalem Post
14 Oct ’09
A woman who knew her worth
As far as Rose Friedman was concerned, public kudos did not matter that much. She persisted in being a rose, no matter what.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Sep ’09
Movies in Nablus, dramas in Bethlehem
Lasting peace must grow from the bottom up, from an “economic peace process” that proves what advantages peace has to offer on a daily basis. It cannot come from signing peace agreements with radical and corrupt entities propped up by corrupting Western handouts.
The Jerusalem Post
15 Aug ’09
Israel’s ‘scrambled’ economic system
A courageous recent film has exposes the strong connection between Israeli oligarchs and bureaucrats. Unfortunately however the film’s simplistic pseudo-Marxist treatment is more misleading than revealing.
The Jerusalem Post
24 May ’09
The economy: look to the future
Netanyahu paid heavily to pass a budget in time; his “partners”’ bargaining tactics, bordering on blackmail, reflect poorly on our politics.
The Jerusalem Post
4 May ’09
Reform: prospects and pitfalls
Binyamin Netanyahu’s recent economic plan has great promise but faces obstacles—such as the media and the Histadrut—that may undermine its success.
The Jerusalem Post
11 Apr ’09
Big government? Yes, but there’s a reason
Is Binyamin Netanyahu’s government too big? Yes. So why would Netanyahu create such an unwieldy beast?
The Jerusalem Post
30 Mar ’09
To bail or not to bail
Should the government bail out those of our tycoons who cannot redeem NIS 100 billion worth of bonds?
The Wall Street Journal
12 Mar ’09
Mideast peace can start with economic growth
Billions of dollars in foreign aid to the Palestinians has resulted in war not peace. There’s a better way.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Feb ’09
Warning cries from Herzliya
The government is dysfunctional. The question is why—and how to mend it.
The Jerusalem Post
2 Feb ’09
A lesser economic evil
All government deficit spending is bad. But sometimes deficits are unavoidable. And some deficits are better then others.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Dec ’08
Spinners and cheaters
Why not exploit the crisis to destroy what little freedom Netanyahu’s reforms brought to the economy? Why care if the country will lose its only hope of deliverance from the economic retardation caused by our statist heritage?
The Jerusalem Post
3 Dec ’08
Precipitating the next collapse
Focusing on a putative pension crisis distracts our attention from the real serious crisis that a worldwide recession is bound to create here.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Oct ’08
The panic-mongers’ one-note chorus
The country, the pundits conclude, must return to the good old days of “social democracy.”
The Jerusalem Post
15 Jul ’08
The banks are bamboozling us again
In the name of stability the comptroller has ignored many of the banks’ offenses.
The Jerusalem Post
29 Apr ’08
An Irish-style banana republic
It must be either naiveté or cynicism that allows “Israel 2028” to recommend a reform that will make government a larger and a more efficient instrument for economic growth.
The New York Sun
29 Apr ’08
Israel still doesn’t get economy
Israel’s elites—especially the chattering classes in the press and the academy—are hostile to capitalism because our universities’ social sciences and liberal arts departments are dominated by post-modernist and neo-Marxist professors.
Ideas matter. Hostility to capitalism exacts a great price from the Israeli economy and from its hapless workers.
inFocus
2 Apr ’08
US charity to Israel reconsidered
Jewish institutional efforts must now undergo a period of reform and greater accountability. Some charitable efforts should be privatized. Individuals or groups of donors must take personal responsibility for specific projects, to ensure that funds are dispensed in a responsible and cost effective manner.
The Wall Street Journal
8 Mar ’08
Israel’s no-win strategy
Israeli politicians are preoccupied with political machinations designed to buy support from powerful interest groups by distributing government largesse. This causes not only the factionalization of politics and growing corruption, but consumes time and energy that leadership should use to address life and death issues.
The Jerusalem Post
20 Feb ’08
Dangerous infatuation
Government can no more control powerful economic forces than it can the rise and fall of tides. To effectively fulfill its nightwatchman role—to protect us from internal and external violence and to enforce contracts—government must be kept limited.
The Jerusalem Post
22 Jan ’08
What’s ‘public’ about their broadcasting?
Our “public channel,” funded by a compulsive tax, does not need to be pluralistic or even-handed.
Like other public institutions that lack well-defined ownership, Channel 1 has consequently been taken over by bureaucrats and by undemocratic workers’ unions.
The Jerusalem Post
21 Nov ’07
A year without Milton Friedman
This man did more good for humanity than any other.
The Jerusalem Post
17 Oct ’07
Getting beyond the teachers’ strike
As long as education remains a government monopoly, it is bound to function like all other government monopolies, where union bosses fill the vacuum that lack of defined ownership creates, and monopoly power allows them to blackmail the public.
The Jerusalem Post
19 Sep ’07
A healthy dose of skepticism
In the wake of the Second Lebanon War, there is hope that the phenomenal performance of the economy will finally make Israelis realize the crucial role it plays in their lives.
The Jerusalem Post
14 Aug ’07
How to grow Israeli hi-tech
At the recent Merage Foundation conference to help Israel’s hi-tech sector grow, calls were heard for more government “direction”. This despite sixty years of massive government intervention and “development efforts” that have led mostly to massive failures and waste.