Threat to British Freedom?

[D_Tully Tunnelrat]

...and now for the next phase of my diabolical plan :saevil:: the secession of Scotland and its split into South Scotland and North Scotland, each with its own currency and central bank.

Scotland has already politically split from England, and your last proposal sounds more like what England already has done in Ireland. So, really who's behind the times and who's ahead, esp. if one looks at std. of living on either side of the Irish border...

 

[deleted213967]

Part of the American public would indeed welcome Britain into NAFTA (especially that part of the public that doesn't know what NAFTA stands for), so long (suffice it to say) as she knows where her place is (nope, not on top, that's our place).

The harsh fact is that Britain needs the EU far more than the EU needs Britain. I am surprised that the EU has been so patient with Her Majesty's subjects so far. If I were in charge, Britain would have until December 31, 2009 to get with the program or risk permanent exclusion, along with "least favored nation" status, which would decimate its acutely EU-dependent economy within minutes and allow me to buy 10 mansions near Holland Park at last.

Our corporations are tired of incurring unnecessary operational costs in connection with all those rogue micro-currencies. We have to be competitive so we can repay our debt to China.

Aside from being European (like it or not), you Brits have more in common with your European neighbors than you do with us: you mostly agree with them on the role of government, the balance between work and play, the role of religion, the death penalty, the bearing of arms, immigration, circumcision even biggrin1 more than you agree with us, as you never fail to stress on this very board.

So join the EU Platinum club but stand by to play the bad guy for us when we want to push our agenda in the Old World.

Danke!

 

[eurotop40]

Part of the American public would indeed welcome Britain into NAFTA (especially that part of the public that doesn't know what NAFTA stands for), so long (suffice it to say) as she knows where her place is (nope, not on top, that's our place).

The harsh fact is that Britain needs the EU far more than the EU needs Britain. I am surprised that the EU has been so patient with Her Majesty's subjects so far. If I were in charge, Britain would have until December 31, 2009 to get with the program or risk permanent exclusion, along with "least favored nation" status, which would decimate its acutely EU-dependent economy within minutes and allow me to buy 10 mansions near Holland Park at last.

Our corporations are tired of incurring unnecessary operational costs in connection with all those rogue micro-currencies. We have to be competitive so we can repay our debt to China.

Aside from being European (like it or not), you Brits have more in common with your European neighbors than you do with us: you mostly agree with them on the role of government, the balance between work and play, the role of religion, the death penalty, the bearing of arms, immigration, circumcision even biggrin1 more than you agree with us, as you never fail to stress on this very board.

So join the EU Platinum club but stand by to play the bad guy for us when we want to push our agenda in the Old World.

Danke!

Very smart considerations!
I guess the feeling is that since the US, Canada etc. speak and write English (to some extent...), the UK is more close to them (which are anyway geographically far, and thus potentially less "intruding") than to continental Europe. It is mostly a communication problem. Apart from certain historical peculiarities I do not think that nowadays Britain is so different from the continent. This comes from traveling and from the economy. People mix up at continental level and no EU bureaucracy wants to rob or suppress Britains traditions as much as the ones of the other countries. Even the Euro coins have a national side. So the Queen would still be there. Plus dont forget that there are more continental Europeans who learn and speak English fluently than Britons who learn and speak fluently another Euroepan language (I think, but Id like to be wrong). So Britain is still privileged. In Switzerland we also write (not so much speak) in German, but we do not feel close to the Germans other than geographically. Thus, speaking the same language does not mean that you end up becoming the same type of society. The other way round, if you travel across the whole of Europe you see more and more that lifestyles are becoming very similar in spite of the different languages (which make everything very colorful but also somehow unpractical).

 

[798686]

We're similar in some ways to Europe - partly because of homogenisation over the past 30 years.

I'm not sure I agree with 'Britain needs the EU more than they need us'. It's cost us billions to be in the EU. A large net contribution every year since joining, not to mention the loss of our fishing waters. Also, changing almost every aspect of the way we do things to fit in with EU directives and regulations hasn't been cheap.

The EU seem to need us as much as we do them, imo. They certainly need our military capacity, and Britain as an export market is very important to them. Renegotiating our relationship with the EU wouldn't mean we had to stop trading with them, so our mutually beneficial commercial relationship could stay - whilst we withdraw from political union, and take things back into our own hands.

 

[798686]

FWIW I think Britain should stay out of the EU, if only for economic reasons. To be sure the Bank of England did about as good a job at regulation as the Treasury-Fed-FDIC-SEC. The ECB was the best central bank in the world over the last 10 years, but that's not saying much by comparison. The latest divergence in interest rates between Spain, and Germany of 60bps/ or .006%, indicates that all glitters is not gold on those Euro coins. IOW who will rescue Spain from 20% unemployment? I would be leery of this were I an EU member, because if Spain continues to pay even more interest, or defaults on it's debt, it could fall out of the Union, since it's deficit is already 6%, double the prescribed EU limit. Or the rest of the EU could be asked to pay up for Spain, and that seems unlikely given the debt limits and deficits in Italy, Portugal, and Ireland, and the general economic weakness in the stronger members as well.

Interesting post, thanks! :smile:

 

[eurotop40]

How could he be, since he lives in a newly lost one himself?

FWIW I think Britain should stay out of the EU, if only for economic reasons. To be sure the Bank of England did about as good a job at regulation as the Treasury-Fed-FDIC-SEC. The ECB was the best central bank in the world over the last 10 years, but that's not saying much by comparison. The latest divergence in interest rates between Spain, and Germany of 60bps/ or .006%, indicates that all glitters is not gold on those Euro coins. IOW who will rescue Spain from 20% unemployment? I would be leery of this were I an EU member, because if Spain continues to pay even more interest, or defaults on it's debt, it could fall out of the Union, since it's deficit is already 6%, double the prescribed EU limit. Or the rest of the EU could be asked to pay up for Spain, and that seems unlikely given the debt limits and deficits in Italy, Portugal, and Ireland, and the general economic weakness in the stronger members as well.

I am not an economist (although in my job I also have to deal with numbers and am not allowed to manipulate them) but, as far as I know, the ECB member states have the so-called "stability and growth pact" that was proposed by Germany whose economic success in the 90's was tied to low-inflation. These norms are however not carved in stone and can be modified. In particular, exactly Germany (that had always looked down on the mediterranean countries) after the reunification is confronted with problems similar to Italy with the Mezzogiorno and does not comply with the stability pact either. Now take the US that are a Union (and nobody questions the economic differences between NY and WY, or FL and IL etc.) and have no long-sighted monetary discipline and just print dollars according to their needs. When the Euro was created the rate was 1€ = 1.1$, then 1€ got down to 0.8€ and the anti-europeans were all happy about this "See, the funny money etc." and now we are at (wait) 1€ = 1.48$. So, I'd say... in spite of this the ECB still does not perform so bad altogether, huh? (Mind you, we are not going to give up the Swiss Franc, but that is for other reasons).

 

[798686]

The ECB has been good at keeping inflation down - which seemed to be it's main concern when many countries wanted lower interest rates to boost growth - did seem to work though.

I'd prefer Britain to keep the pound, though, and have the ability to set it's own interest rates according to our own set of circumstances. The one-size-fits-all approach hasn't seemed to suit all countries - Spain and Italy in particular.

I know Britain's economy is not the best right now, but through the second half of the 90s, and early 2000s, being independent suited us very well indeed. The current problems can hopefully be resolved over time, but I suspect joining the Euro would be a much more difficult decision to reverse.

 

[eurotop40]

The ECB has been good at keeping inflation down - which seemed to be it's main concern when many countries wanted lower interest rates to boost growth - did seem to work though.

I'd prefer Britain to keep the pound, though, and have the ability to set it's own interest rates according to our own set of circumstances. The one-size-fits-all approach hasn't seemed to suit all countries - Spain and Italy in particular.

I know Britain's economy is not the best right now, but through the second half of the 90s, and early 2000s, being independent suited us very well indeed. The current problems can hopefully be resolved over time, but I suspect joining the Euro would be a much more difficult decision to reverse.

Thats exactly one of the reasons why Switzerland must keep the Swiss Franc (at least for now), just because we have ridiculously low interest rates and any adjustment given by the ECB would ruin at least half of the country. Still, if Spain and Italy have problems it is not the Euro currencys fault, but their governments fault, who are not able to create good conditions for the economy. Blaming the single currency has been an alibi that national governments have used a bit everywhere. Since e.g. one working italian from the north east must support two officially unemployed from the south, production costs cannot be competitive. In the past the government just devalued the lira and that was it (consider China and the artificially low exchange rate of the yuan). Now intrinsic problems and the incompetence of single national governments are exposed for all to see.

 

[Jason]

The economic pros and cons of Britain's membership of the EU seem beyond rational argument as everyone who puts forward an economic argument seems to have a political point to make.

There is a strong argument that because the majority of our trade is with other EU countries we need to be an integral part of the EU. The obvious counter is that we don't have to be part of a political union to trade. There are clear costs from EU membership, and how these are offset by benefts I don't know - does anyone? I'm guessing we would probably be a little poorer outside of the EU, but I'm not certain. We may be richer or a lot poorer. I don't believe anyone who says they know the answer to this one.

What I do feel is a sense of total alienation from the EU. It appears as a completely faceless bureaucracy imposing unwanted laws and restrictions which affect my life, and against which I have no democratic voice and no mechanisms for protest. I can feel a sense of loyalty to my country, but nothing whatsoever towards the EU. Part of Britain's history has become the national myth - the nation that stood alone against the Nazi conquest of Europe. The UK today has a curious mix of Europhilia and Europhobia. Of course we like European people, European culture, food, sunshine, whatever - but we also dislike Europe with an equal passion. The UK has never regarded itself as a part of the continent called Europe. This is a geographical convention, no more. Our kids have close to zero interest in learning European languages (a little holiday Spanish maybe, but that's about all that interests). At university level Figs (French, Italian, German and Spanish) are practically on a life support system. The language that is growing fast is Welsh (and throughout the UK, not just in Wales).

The challenge is to create in Britain a country that is happy with itself and its place in the world. We've got a knackered economy and a washed up government, and we have plenty of social problems. National pride is at a low ebb. But the idea that because of these problems we can be absorbed within Europe and somehow this will work is a non starter. I'm not saying there would be a revolution - that's not the British way - but there would be a mood of regarding the UK as a supressed nation and nationalist politics - already well developed with the electoral success of UKIP - would be a significant issue. I think it would be a corrosive force in the UK and ultimately do much social and economic damage.

Right now I want to see the UK leave the EU. I'm not coming out with some unprovable argument that we would be better off - indeed I think we would probably be worse off. I'm prepared to pay in the form of lower income and higher taxes. I think some sort of agreement with NAFTA is a pipe dream right now, but in a decade or two, who knows? NAFTA would not be perceived with the sort of loathing many feel for the EU.

An independent UK is worth paying for.

 

[798686]

What I do feel is a sense of total alienation from the EU. It appears as a completely faceless bureaucracy imposing unwanted laws and restrictions which affect my life, and against which I have no democratic voice and no mechanisms for protest. I can feel a sense of loyalty to my country, but nothing whatsoever towards the EU. Part of Britain's history has become the national myth - the nation that stood alone against the Nazi conquest of Europe. The UK today has a curious mix of Europhilia and Europhobia. Of course we like European people, European culture, food, sunshine, whatever - but we also dislike Europe with an equal passion. The UK has never regarded itself as a part of the continent called Europe.

The challenge is to create in Britain a country that is happy with itself and its place in the world. We've got a knackered economy and a washed up government, and we have plenty of social problems. National pride is at a low ebb. But the idea that because of these problems we can be absorbed within Europe and somehow this will work is a non starter.

Right now I want to see the UK leave the EU. I'm not coming out with some unprovable argument that we would be better off - indeed I think we would probably be worse off.

An independent UK is worth paying for.

I'm pretty much with you on this.

 

[deleted213967]

The economic pros and cons of Britain's membership of the EU seem beyond rational argument as everyone who puts forward an economic argument seems to have a political point to make.

[...]

What surprises me in your line of argumentation (which certainly represents that of a larger group) is its implication that Britain is the only nation who has or had something to lose in the EU integration initiative.

Aren't Italy, Germany, or France equally great nations with strong identities, rich histories, and economies of equal or greater sizes?

They too had to give up (some) independence and a lot of money to set the stage for a more powerful, more efficient, more harmonious, but certainly no less diverse Europe and reap the benefits later.

They too had to give up their former currencies (and lived). They too agreed to the suppression of multiple and unnecessary border controls.

Would you like to fly to New York, pass border control, and pass border control again when you fly on to Dallas, because "Texas Is So Special"?

As for the military, no offense but I believe that France has an equally modest arsenal of nuclear warheads and conventional forces. The combined military might of all EU nations, I am afraid, could not begin to face a major aggression from Russia without a massive intervention from the US.

Neither the Danes nor the Spaniards have an interest in Britain's losing its Britishness, and I can assure you that most Americans expect and relish the prospect of cultural diversity when they visit Europe.

Yet the last economic crisis (the one you have us to thank for...bitte sehr! :biggrin1, has certainly confirmed that world economies are irredeemably intertwined, and that economic sovereignty is therefore mostly illusory, especially for a country so comparatively minuscule.

What riles me about the mainstream attitude of the Brits towards the EU is that they seem to want to have their cookies and eat them too.

Opt out of the EU entirely if you want but don't expect the EU to treat you like a friendly trade partner thereafter.

 

[D_Tully Tunnelrat]

Now take the US that are a Union (and nobody questions the economic differences between NY and WY, or FL and IL etc.) and have no long-sighted monetary discipline and just print dollars according to their needs. When the Euro was created the rate was 1€ = 1.1$, then 1€ got down to 0.8€ and the anti-europeans were all happy about this "See, the funny money etc." and now we are at (wait) 1€ = 1.48$. So, I'd say... in spite of this the ECB still does not perform so bad altogether, huh? (Mind you, we are not going to give up the Swiss Franc, but that is for other reasons).

Yes, the comparison to the our Union and States is an apt one, and interesting. I am no economist either, just an interested participant in world economics. It is true for instance that today, California is offering bonds at 1.5%, whereas Texas is only paying .48%. California is not going to disappear as most of the States problems are political, not purely economic, but the State is paying a "premium" for being fiscally irresponsible regardless of how it got there. If we take this analogy to Europe, and I don't think anyone in the EU would consider themselves a "state" in that system, but that is a major distinction and potential rub as far as shared liabilities are concerned. For now Spain can probably continue to pay more for its bonds than Germany. Within the EU system you describe, how can Spain, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, and Greece continue to remain in the Union if they are continually above the 3% deficit budget ceiling, and if what will be the backlash to reduced government spending say in Spain where unemployment is already 20%?

I don't have the answers, but think it's worth raising the question, since the UK's potentially joining the EU might be fraught with assuming the economic liability of the weaker EU members. Ultimately I see this as the weak point in the system. In the US by contrast, and in no way do I give the Fed high marks during the mid 90-s to mid 00's Greenspan era, the Fed can borrow, and Congress can redistribute to the States, as they recently did during the stimulus, to make whole the shortfalls, of which almost every state was under, less painful. Given the high debt levels already in the UK for both the private and public sectors assuming potential unfunded liabilities would seem to be the last thing everyone needs.

None of this has anything to do with the cultural aspects of why the union makes sense, and from that perspective it does, even though the English, including the Scots, Cornish, and Welsh, etc. have always been considered distinct culturally from the Continent, even with the "Old Alliance.". However the convenience of transportation, and trade, continue to bring peoples closer together, reducing old cultural distinctions, which at times seemed far wider than the Channel.

Lastly, do tell me more about why you feel it paramount to keep the Swiss Franc especially since the vaults of the banking system have been pried wide open by the IRS.

 

[Jason]

What surprises me in your line of argumentation (which certainly represents that of a larger group) is its implication that Britain is the only nation who has or had something to lose in the EU integration initiative.

Aren't Italy, Germany, or France equally great nations with strong identities, rich histories, and economies of equal or greater sizes?

The EU is made up of great nations - and all of them like the UK have lots to lose through the Lisbon Treaty.

A good solution would be all the nations of Europe working togather to create a Europe that the people of Europe want. Instead we have a Lisbon Treaty that does not reflect the will of the people of Europe and would almost certainly be rejected in a Europe-wide referendum. It has been imposed by the politicians of Europe against the will of the people of Europe and because the politicians think they know better than the ignorant people they govern. When the people of Ireland rejected this unpopular treaty it should have been a cue for a rethink.

What is being created is a dangerous union with a democratic defecit so great that it can hardly be called a democracy. The EU parliament operates as a grand alliance of the left and centre parties which have a massive majority - it is inconceivable that they will not govern. There is no opposition. They've even decided who the leader will be in a couple of year's time. Elections have abysmal turnouts, and because people across Europe vote for what are in effect national parties they are not engaging with European politics. In most of Europe the leading parties might fight against one another in elections but end up sitting in the same grand alliance. Anyone who opposes the grand alliance is presented as an extremist. With the democratic deficit in the EU and the willingness of the EU to smash any efforts to criticise them we are sleep-walking into a nightmare. In the 1930s Europe saw decent democracies become dictatorships. In the 1940s to 1990s Europe saw the Eastern Bloc nations governed by claimed democracies. Democracy has a rotten track record in Europe, and the EU is showing worrying signs of going rotten.

Yes I would like to see the UK leave. I would hope the Irish Republic would come with us. We need a new solution for Poland and all of eastern Europe. Iberia needs something different. So do Greece and the Balkans. And the Nordic countries. Probably Italy too. That leaves France, Germany and BeNeLux. If they want to recreate Charlemagne's Empire that is up to them.

I am an enthusiast for European integration. But even more important are the values of democracy and integrity. The EU is rotten at its heart. For the UK the right way forward has to be to leave. I would hope as many other countries as possible would also leave. Then we begin to build structures which are democratic and which reflect the will of the people. We might even build a European union!

 

[Jason]

Within the EU system you describe, how can Spain, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, and Greece continue to remain in the Union if they are continually above the 3% deficit budget ceiling, and if what will be the backlash to reduced government spending say in Spain where unemployment is already 20%?

I don't have the answers, but think it's worth raising the question, since the UK's potentially joining the EU might be fraught with assuming the economic liability of the weaker EU members.

Spain, Italy, Ireland, Portugal and Greece have promised on their honour to be good and keep within the 3% budget deficit ceiling. To do this they need to make massive cuts in spending which would send unemployment to even higher levels. Of course they won't.

Options are:
* All EU countries agree on higher budget deficit levels. Economic madness!
* Por, It, Gr, Sp and Ir are bailed out by the other EU countries, particularly France, Germany and yes the UK too. Ouch. Very hard for politicians to justify.
* We take the ostritch approach, ie we try to ignore the problem (which is what the Eurocrats are doing).
* They crash out of the Euro and devalue. Technically this can be done - the serial numbers on Euro banknotes are different nation to nation so a Greek Euro (for example) could have a different value to other Euros.

On this board on 1st Jan 2009 I predicted that a country would leave the Euro before the end of 2009. I certainly think a departure (or 5) is inevitable though I'm less sure about the timing.

The economic consequences are dire. I don't want this to happen. But if it is going to happen I hope it happens before Lisbon is ratified.

 

[eurotop40]

Yes, the comparison to the our Union and States is an apt one, and interesting. I am no economist either, just an interested participant in world economics. It is true for instance that today, California is offering bonds at 1.5%, whereas Texas is only paying .48%. California is not going to disappear as most of the States problems are political, not purely economic, but the State is paying a "premium" for being fiscally irresponsible regardless of how it got there. If we take this analogy to Europe, and I don't think anyone in the EU would consider themselves a "state" in that system, but that is a major distinction and potential rub as far as shared liabilities are concerned. For now Spain can probably continue to pay more for its bonds than Germany. Within the EU system you describe, how can Spain, Italy, Ireland, Portugal, and Greece continue to remain in the Union if they are continually above the 3% deficit budget ceiling, and if what will be the backlash to reduced government spending say in Spain where unemployment is already 20%?

I don't have the answers, but think it's worth raising the question, since the UK's potentially joining the EU might be fraught with assuming the economic liability of the weaker EU members. Ultimately I see this as the weak point in the system. In the US by contrast, and in no way do I give the Fed high marks during the mid 90-s to mid 00's Greenspan era, the Fed can borrow, and Congress can redistribute to the States, as they recently did during the stimulus, to make whole the shortfalls, of which almost every state was under, less painful. Given the high debt levels already in the UK for both the private and public sectors assuming potential unfunded liabilities would seem to be the last thing everyone needs.

None of this has anything to do with the cultural aspects of why the union makes sense, and from that perspective it does, even though the English, including the Scots, Cornish, and Welsh, etc. have always been considered distinct culturally from the Continent, even with the "Old Alliance.". However the convenience of transportation, and trade, continue to bring peoples closer together, reducing old cultural distinctions, which at times seemed far wider than the Channel.

Lastly, do tell me more about why you feel it paramount to keep the Swiss Franc especially since the vaults of the banking system have been pried wide open by the IRS.

I think you are sometimes calling EU what is the EMU (european monetary union which uses the Euro). Again, these issues are interestingly mostly emotional and not very objective, since the majority of the people has no idea of monetary policies. The funniest story happens with Denmark, where the local currency (the Danish Crown) is solidyl tied to the Euro. So their monetary policy is basically dictated by the ECB in Frankfurt but the people still have the "thrill" of using their national currency.

Only in one issue I could really understand complains in certain countries (as I heard the other day in Denmark), and this is when you get an increase in crime due to immigration of uneducated people. But interestingly, this has nothing to do with the free circulation of EU citizens: to prove this I can tell you that the biggest security problems in Switzerland (that has a free circulation agreement for all 27 EU nations) come from Balcan nationals (such as people from Kosovo, Macedonia etc.) who are NOT in the free circulation system. So, the EU is really not to blame for this.

And finally, I personally feel, as Domisoldo says, that if the UK wants to leave, it's up to them, but also to carry all consequences. We missed in 1990 the European Economic Space and things went really bad for about 15 years, until opening our borders a few years ago gave a big impulse to the economy.

 

[eurotop40]

On this board on 1st Jan 2009 I predicted that a country would leave the Euro before the end of 2009. I certainly think a departure (or 5) is inevitable though I'm less sure about the timing.

Your "mors tua vita mea" attitude is quite interesting. Some people in Britain or in the US are so wishing that the single european currency fails in order to show that they are better off and that their "splendid isolation" ist the only way to be. Isn't a certain jealousy there? The UK is not in the EMU so it's none of your business what the other countries do, am I right?

 

[798686]

The EU is made up of great nations - and all of them like the UK have lots to lose through the Lisbon Treaty.

A good solution would be all the nations of Europe working togather to create a Europe that the people of Europe want. Instead we have a Lisbon Treaty that does not reflect the will of the people of Europe and would almost certainly be rejected in a Europe-wide referendum. It has been imposed by the politicians of Europe against the will of the people of Europe and because the politicians think they know better than the ignorant people they govern. When the people of Ireland rejected this unpopular treaty it should have been a cue for a rethink.

What is being created is a dangerous union with a democratic defecit so great that it can hardly be called a democracy.

I agree. I'm not sure people's comparison of the US and EU is a good one. The states of the US speak the same language, and are similar culturally and in terms of recent history. Many EU nations have long and distinct histories, speak different languages and are different culturally and even ethnically. These differences are likely to remain and eventually resurface if surpressed (a la USSR or Yugoslavia) - and the result isn't always pretty. The only way to prevent this would be to completely mix the EU peoples together and erase their individuality (free movement of people would assist this but only to a certain degree - a deliberate policy maybe..to aid a homogenous Europe?).

Imo, Britain has a great deal more in common with the US and other Anglo-Saxon nations, than we do with the continent. We have a much stronger shared history. The UK has always been distinct from the continent, in mindset and geographically (I'm not sure we really even fit in too well in the original Roman Empire?) and will continue to be so. 30 years of EU integration doesn't really cancel out the last 2,000.

Let the UK go it's own way, otherwise we're likely to be a lot more difficult if we feel we're trapped or tricked into something we don't want. Also, a commercial/trading relationship with the UK would be in the EU's interests as well as ours, imo.

In the 1930s Europe saw decent democracies become dictatorships. In the 1940s to 1990s Europe saw the Eastern Bloc nations governed by claimed democracies. Democracy has a rotten track record in Europe, and the EU is showing worrying signs of going rotten.

It does seem like a one-party state really. Everything is done by consensus, and the public can't really 'vote-out' a governing power they dont like (the Delors Commission was sacked due to corruption, but I'm not sure the citizens have the power to do this - after all, when they vote against something, eg: Lisbon, it's usually ignored) - opposing voices are treated as scaremongers or europhobes and relegated to the sidelines.

Also, Europe has grown very powerful and influential in a relatively short period of time, I wonder how long the soft power approach will last? Will it always be so benign, or when their power reaches a certain point will they become more belligerent? For the past 10 yrs or so, EU Politicians have been wanting to increase the EU role on the world stage, become a world power, use the EU template 'as a model for world governance', etc.

That leaves France, Germany and BeNeLux. If they want to recreate Charlemagne's Empire that is up to them.

I think that kind've IS what they want lol. For the past 1600yrs or so, Europe has been periodically obsessed with re-creating the Roman Empire. From Charlemagne and Otto, to the Hapsburgs and Napolean. And it always seems to end in tears...

 

[Jason]

Your "mors tua vita mea" attitude is quite interesting. Some people in Britain or in the US are so wishing that the single european currency fails in order to show that they are better off and that their "splendid isolation" ist the only way to be. Isn't a certain jealousy there? The UK is not in the EMU so it's none of your business what the other countries do, am I right?

I don't WANT the Euro to fail - but I BELIEVE it will fail.

The Danish Crown was for years linked with the German Mark. The decision to link with the Euro is in the same spirit. Similarly the Irish Punt was for decades pegged to the pound sterling (though with some room to move). It makes sense for currencies of small economies to peg. The beauty of the Danish situation is that they can change the peg point if their economy diverges from the lands that use the Euro. How Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain and Ireland must wish they had this flexibility! Right now a planned devaluation for those countries would reduce unemployment there and give them a way to prosperity. That would be a lot less misery for a lot of people there who are currently unemployed.

Central banks can link currencies without the need for a single currency. Indeed it is very hard to see how a single currency can work without a single economic policy and a single government, and the whole Euro project seems to have strengthening the EU as a necessary consequence.

 

[eurotop40]

I don't WANT the Euro to fail - but I BELIEVE it will fail.
...

For sure, it sounds as yours is a wish (as of many others) to justify their attitude. We are not in the Euro system but I think that if the Euro is a success we have all to gain from that. Exactly in the sense that we then are not slaves of the moods of the FED. Who has provoked the economic crisis? What is the status in the UK? How many banks collapsed there?

Again, as for what I am concerned, the UK can do whatever they want but should be honest in recognizing their limitations. Just consider that British decline and the loss of the Empire (India etc.) started way before the treaties of Rome were signed (at that time "Brussels" was not to blame). This is hard to swallow. Also your system is far from being instrinsically perfect and successful.

 

[jason_els]

And the collapse of UBS, paying $780 million in fines for fraud, along with the Swiss government allowing the banking records of Americans to be examined is a sign the Swiss system is? The fact is, Switzerland got greedy and started playing with the derivative market it had traditionally shunned. Switzerland also made a huge mistake by going off the gold standard. Switzerland did one thing very well and it should have stuck to it. Now everyone's banking in Liechtenstein and you're left with wheels of cheese and cuckoo clocks.

You should never have let Phil Gramm into the country.

Careful to throw stones when you live in a glass house.