I just heard on the news the following economics report : "Romania lacks workforce" (I'm from Romania).i
After being immersed in mises.org literature, this seems such an outdated/irelevant concept!
"Romania" does not have a shortage of workers. Businesses that operate in the territory commonly refered to as "Romania" have a demand for more workers.
Similarily, "Romania's economy" did not grow. It makes just as much sense to say "the area defined by straight lines between Berlin, Bucharest and Moskow registered economic growth", and is as relevant as comparing it to another random triangle.
Or at least it would, under a free market.
Am I right, or what?
I think you are right in principle. I have some good friends that worked in projects - mainly in the wine industry - in romania. I been told that it looks like huge parts of Romania are EU-Projects. (No offense here, cause I can understand that it is easier to take money from the EU than to come up with own ideas and efforts to start new after the desaster that communism brought).
Another thing I am told though is that there is a real issue with land titles. Basically, there is often no documentation about who owns what land which keeps non-governmanetal european investors out of the game. After what I have heard Romania is a great place for a florishing economy, especially for acriculture and it would be a mess, to say the least, if this huge opportunity would drown in a sea of EU financed projects that eventually will turn out to be a waste of money and resources.
In the begining there was nothing, and it exploded.
Terry Pratchett (on the big bang theory)