Economic development is Poland’s raison d’état
Geographical coordinates that support sources of income and the standard of living of their help can help you gain economic support. The National Reconstruction Plan (KPO) aims to accelerate the pace of development, including real income higher by over PLN 200 billion by 2026 – to 5.2 thousand. PLN per person.
Before 2004, many of them based their subjectivity on opposition to EU membership, but many of them did not survive the test of time, and the leading “no” politicians today are Euro-enthusiasts. Today, you can extrapolate the future of many misinterpretations of economic and geopolitical reality just as you did then. There is no room for them in one of the world’s fast-growing countries, unless it is to materialize, which is contrary to our national interest.
Transfers from the KPO have a real impact on the effects in financing the Polish transformation and transformation. These goals, especially in the energy sector, above-average independent Polish capabilities and well-engaged in this field, such as joint external funds – public and private.
A source of anxiety about the Polish language
But there is also something serious. The costs and availability of funds for Poland’s development are available from Polish economic credibility. The money itself from KPO matters here. But what is incomparably more important is the lack of agreement with the Commission on this issue, which is devastating for Poland’s credibility.
We are exactly a country with such an inflamed KPO dispute and no one on the market understands the real reasons for this state of affairs. This is a source of concern about whether Poland is a phenomenon and a calculable country.
European funds are needed for the Polish economy to serve the Polish society well so far. Even higher is the normalization of relations with Europe. Its lack of cost, put in an integrated way with simple failed attempts to reform the judiciary. We pay these costs for…nothing.
Cheaper EU debt
This allegedly usurious loan for Poland 7 percent. obtained in profits and only 4 percent. in costs. PLN 160 billion that Poland receives in grants and cheap loans, using 4.8 percent. GDP of our country, with the deficit planned for this year at the level of 4.5 percent. GDP. Without these funds, our budgets would have to increase by more than 9% this year. Further than during or during the financial week. With the profitability of Polish 10-year cable reaching nearly 6 percent. it would also mean additional debt servicing costs. Heating profitability up to 3 percent. For comparison, Hungary has 7.3 percent. and I did not get them to incur such large liabilities, not to mention that their debt is 80 percent. GDP (Polish currently constituting about 50 percent of GDP).
Larger debt guaranteed by all EU countries is more serious than debt guaranteed only by Poland, because its risk is spread across countries. And when debt is guaranteed by all EU countries, its risk is not zero. When one of the world’s major economies, such as France or Germany, are in the same pool of debt-taking countries, its cost is lower than Poland alone. Investors have more confidence in the EU debt market as a whole than in a single country.
In France, it has a lower fee yield than Poland, which means that investors require a percentage fee for lending money to the state.
France is one of the main and most stable economies in Europe, which gives investors greater security as to the additional source. It also has a debt-raising basis, giving investors confidence in the state as a borrower. Poland has been developing as a free country only since the 1990s and there is no such credibility.
Economic situation in Polish euro
The use of funds in the countries of other countries is also very important to us. The EU is Poland’s main trading partner, as 80% of of exports (and imports) is the effect on the Polish EU market. Due to the fact that if other markets develop, Polish producers can deliver their goods to the European market, which creates more jobs and more income for the country.
It also means that the attitude towards one sales market, access to technology, i.e. simply growth of development. A good economic situation in the correct euro is also a good economic situation in Poland.
Therefore, the destabilization of the euro zone is not just a “German concern”. This is a worry for everyone who understands what Polish prosperity depends on. We have the right to our monetary separateness and we have our source for it. A reckless, emotionally motivated approach to the economic and political stability of Europe to the same effect to the detriment of Polish interests.
How to finance the EU budget
The establishment of EU natural resources in the form of an action has been discussed for 20 years. It has intensified recently, because many countries that contribute more to the EU than they use it, are looking for other ways to finance the EU. Poland presents a rational and balanced position in these negotiations.
We are visible in the debate on taxes, as long as they do not shift the economy to poorer causes than is the case with the richest. Opposition to opposing regressives is consistent not only with our interests, but also with the common understanding of tax justice.
However, it is in Poland’s interest to find effective sources of EU funding, which will be provided by the richest. By rejecting any aid that supports the good, we are doing the richest a favor, while at the same time weakening the financing of our development from the source of origin.
As part of the agreement, we joined the tax on unprocessed plastic, because it was the cheapest version of the new EU funding sources for Poland. During the negotiations, Poland obtained derogations, which mean that we will pay not EUR 3 billion, but EUR 600 million, and this sum will decrease along with the already started plans for advanced effective implementation of plastic, which is somewhat in line with the already agreed plans of EU policy and law.
Poland thus effectively blocked other European forms. In which Prime Minister Morawiecki vetoed the tax on the unfair ETS climate policy system, which was supported by the overwhelming Member States in the final of budget negotiations.
What does sovereignty mean
Finally, receiving public funds does not automatically mean that the state has given up the benefit. The European Union is owned jointly by countries that work together to achieve common goals. Your application for what projects and investments to finance with funds, however, must be covered by a single criterion and compliance with standards.
Polish quality has more serious foundations than imagination. Among these foundations is not only our own national determination, through recognition of our fate, but also the material foundations of our state. Sovereignty is not defended by undermining the economic foundations of Polish development.
Until recently Hamiltonian
The Recovery Fund is a one-time foundation of all Member States to draw money from the market to support the recovery of the business after operations. This EU debt issuance corresponds to around 0.4% of GDP. GDP of the European Union in the period of long-term spending. Therefore, the story of the Union suddenly becoming Hamiltonian and the threat to Poland’s heritage is detached from reality.
To the truth that the rules for withdrawing money are more scrupulous than in the case of ordinary – primarily ex post. These principles, called milestones, applied to each user country, and from each, as with Poland, were negotiated for the use of line ministries that are part of the KPO financing of their national plans and strategies.
Economic development is a goal for all governments in the world. In addition, through medium-term investments, it will be possible to increase the quality of life of Polish residents, reducing the amount of smog in cities, improving the environment and even higher degree of digitization of the state and society. Only this year, without KPO, Poland would develop by 0.5 percentage points. GDP slower. In a similar way. Poland has already wasted its historical opportunities several times because of bad cooperation – for example in the 1930s or in the People’s Republic of Poland. It’s not worth getting these errors.
Piotr Arak is the director of the Polish Economic Institute. Konrad Szymański is the deputy director of PIE, until 2022 he was the minister for European Union affairs.
Subheadings from the editors