why was england right about euro?

[etilit]

they didnt except it...why?

 

[gb2000ie]

Did they expect it is the real question - the jury's out on that.

What I saw as a non-British European looking in was just a bunch of pumped up nationalism. Not intelligence, not forethought, but brain-dead "we won't surrender our pound" crap.

The jury is also out on whether or not the Euro was a bad thing on balance. It's done a lot of good, now there is a bump in the road. Without the Euro there would still be a bump in the road now - we're in a global recession. Is the world outside the Euro Zone doing great? Heck no! So lets not pretend that all would be well if only there was no Euro.

B.

 

[loretta]

england was not right about the euro
look at germany: they have the euro and a powerfull, increasing economy although they have to pay for nearly all others in the euro zone
look at the uk: the have the pound and their economy is going down

 

[alexfot55]

YES.

 

[boy10]

To well us, we do not have Euro!

 

[smallsleepyrascalcat]

I'm glad I don't have coins in my pocket showing Lizzy

 

[hockeycock]

I think euro may end, I don't see Germans being too keen on paying for Greece's problems (i.e. generous retirement and social plans)

 

[alanalt]

Did they expect it is the real question - the jury's out on that.

What I saw as a non-British European looking in was just a bunch of pumped up nationalism. Not intelligence, not forethought, but brain-dead "we won't surrender our pound" crap.

The jury is also out on whether or not the Euro was a bad thing on balance. It's done a lot of good, now there is a bump in the road. Without the Euro there would still be a bump in the road now - we're in a global recession. Is the world outside the Euro Zone doing great? Heck no! So lets not pretend that all would be well if only there was no Euro.

B.

I agree that Britain's reluctance to join the euro was as much/more a political issue rather than one of monetary/financial policy. However, there were a lot of bad decisions within the eurozone that also had more to do with politics than monetary policy. For example, Greece should never have been admitted into the zone in the first place. They massively cooked their books to meet the eurozone criteria, everyone knew it (the Economist and Financial Times were running stories about it) and the French and Germans nodded and winked and let the Greeks in anyways (and the same goes for Portugal, probably Spain and Ireland and possibly Italy as well). One of the problems of the current situation as I see it is that many within the Greek government still think they can play the same old game of cooking their books and missing their targets and still get bailed out by the other eurozone countries...

I don't think one can "pretend that all would be well if only there was no Euro". I do think the Euro links a bunch of smaller problems together into a larger, and perhaps unsolvable, mess. Without the Euro, countries like Greece, Portugal, Ireland and Spain would still have massive problems, but they'd also have greater flexibility in addressing those problems through currency devaluation, quantitative easing and other mechanisms available to a country that has its own currency. Similarly, rather than having to worry about the quality of book-keeping in Lisbon or Athens, Germany and France could concentrate on their own problem - namely the over-extension of loans made by German and French banks. And bailing out your own banks (where your constituents have their life-savings deposited) is also a much easier political 'sale' to your electorate than bailing out foreign countries.

Whatever happens in the short-term, I still believe that the Euro is really only going to succeed over the long haul if it only covers countries with a common sober approach to fiscal, as well as monetary, policy (Germany, France, the Benelux countries, the Scandinavians and possibly the UK, Ireland and Italy). Countries beyond that core are either going to really move their own fiscal policies into harmony (as opposed to paying lip-service) or be left to stand on their own. It wouldn't surprise me if we end up seeing a transitional step of 'northern' and 'southern' eurozones in the next few years...

BTW, a lot of the world outside the eurozone is actually doing very well, with the obviously important exceptions of the USA and Japan. But BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, China, and India) are seeing their economies expand rapidly (despite the 'global recession') and becoming ever more vital to the functioning of the global economy.

 

[alanalt]

england was not right about the euro
look at germany: they have the euro and a powerfull, increasing economy although they have to pay for nearly all others in the euro zone
look at the uk: the have the pound and their economy is going down

Sorry, but as I see it, the UK's current problems have much less to do with their not joining the euro than the fact that Blair and Brown borrowed and spent like drunken sailors in the decade before 2007. And they surely would have done that even if the UK had joined the eurozone. The UK's current problems have little/nothing to do with the euro and much to do with the fact that they have little/no fiscal room to maneuver thanks to the 1997-2007 'spending spree'.

Germany, on the other hand, was far more prudent with government finances during that same time-period and while some of that prudence came from their role within the euro exchange mechanism, a lot more came from the reintegration of the former East Germany, the nature of German coalition politics, the structure of the German federal system and a whole host of other factors. Thus, when the economic crisis hit in 2007, the German governments had a whole lot more fiscal room to help their businesses and people weather the storm without needing to either borrow or tax excessively.

 

[XMan101]

Sorry, but as I see it, the UK's current problems have much less to do with their not joining the euro than the fact that Blair and Brown borrowed and spent like drunken sailors in the decade before 2007. And they surely would have done that even if the UK had joined the eurozone. The UK's current problems have little/nothing to do with the euro and much to do with the fact that they have little/no fiscal room to maneuver thanks to the 1997-2007 'spending spree'.

Germany, on the other hand, was far more prudent with government finances during that same time-period and while some of that prudence came from their role within the euro exchange mechanism, a lot more came from the reintegration of the former East Germany, the nature of German coalition politics, the structure of the German federal system and a whole host of other factors. Thus, when the economic crisis hit in 2007, the German governments had a whole lot more fiscal room to help their businesses and people weather the storm without needing to either borrow or tax excessively.

Can't disagree with any of that. I'm sure the UK would still have some problems but they wouldn't be anywhere near as bad.

I'm totally against any country joining the Euro , in theory it was a good idea, but the way it was handled in practise is what has caused these horrendous problems. Many think it's something that will eventually just pass over but it won't. There is very likely far worse to come , especially if the "old boys club" at the centre of the EU make the wrong decisions now.

 

[gb2000ie]

For example, Greece should never have been admitted into the zone in the first place. They massively cooked their books to meet the eurozone criteria, everyone knew it (the Economist and Financial Times were running stories about it) and the French and Germans nodded and winked and let the Greeks in anyways (and the same goes for Portugal, probably Spain and Ireland and possibly Italy as well).

You are totally spot on about Greece - they literally asked Wall St. over to help them do an Enron on the EU!

You are dead wrong about Ireland though. Ireland was not a crackpot when it joined the Euro, it became crackpot after it joined the Euro, and the problem in Ireland is not that we are living beyond our means like Greece, but that we foolishly issued a state guarantee on our banks - which, as it happens, played a great con on us all, and have now sunk our country. The actual deficits would be manageable were it not for the tens of billions of bank debt we took on. Ireland, like the rest of the world would have had a recession, but like most of the rest of the world we'd have gotten through it, were it not for the state taking on private debt. The ECB should have been let bail out the Irish banks, that's literally what it's there for!

As for Portugal & Spain, I don't know enough to comment.

One of the problems of the current situation as I see it is that many within the Greek government still think they can play the same old game of cooking their books and missing their targets and still get bailed out by the other eurozone countries...

If you assume for a moment that politicians have no shame, then that makes sense. What have they got to lose? If they give in and do the right thing, the people will throw them out. If they push back, Germany will probably keep bailing them out to protect the euro, and they get to keep living the good life a little longer. It's cruel and heartless, but as long as the EU leaders keep trying to re-assure the world, there is no incentive on Greece to get it's act together!

I don't think one can "pretend that all would be well if only there was no Euro". I do think the Euro links a bunch of smaller problems together into a larger, and perhaps unsolvable, mess. Without the Euro, countries like Greece, Portugal, Ireland and Spain would still have massive problems, but they'd also have greater flexibility in addressing those problems through currency devaluation, quantitative easing and other mechanisms available to a country that has its own currency. Similarly, rather than having to worry about the quality of book-keeping in Lisbon or Athens, Germany and France could concentrate on their own problem - namely the over-extension of loans made by German and French banks. And bailing out your own banks (where your constituents have their life-savings deposited) is also a much easier political 'sale' to your electorate than bailing out foreign countries.

I agree there is a larger problem, but I disagree on what it is. The US is a massive currency block, and it works fine, so what's the difference? They have a single currency, AND a single fiscal policy, Europe does not, it has a single currency, and a separate fiscal policy for each state. That imbalance has to be fixed in one of two ways, a move towards harmonized fiscal policy, or the end of the Euro. I don't think there's another way out. Me, personally, as an Irish Belgian who's father commuted to London to work, and now lives part-time in Spain, I want to see the Euro continue. I want a federal Europe, similar, but not the same as the US, with a little more autonomy for each state, but with more direct electoral control over Europe than we have now.

Whatever happens in the short-term, I still believe that the Euro is really only going to succeed over the long haul if it only covers countries with a common sober approach to fiscal, as well as monetary, policy (Germany, France, the Benelux countries, the Scandinavians and possibly the UK, Ireland and Italy). Countries beyond that core are either going to really move their own fiscal policies into harmony (as opposed to paying lip-service) or be left to stand on their own. It wouldn't surprise me if we end up seeing a transitional step of 'northern' and 'southern' eurozones in the next few years...

3 years ago that would have sounded insane - now, it sounds quite reasonable!

BTW, a lot of the world outside the eurozone is actually doing very well, with the obviously important exceptions of the USA and Japan. But BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, China, and India) are seeing their economies expand rapidly (despite the 'global recession') and becoming ever more vital to the functioning of the global economy.

The BRIC countries are in a very different dynamic to the western world though. I think it's very western-centric of is to call this a world recession, it's a 1st world recession.

B.

 

[gb2000ie]

Can't disagree with any of that. I'm sure the UK would still have some problems but they wouldn't be anywhere near as bad.

I'm totally against any country joining the Euro , in theory it was a good idea, but the way it was handled in practise is what has caused these horrendous problems. Many think it's something that will eventually just pass over but it won't. There is very likely far worse to come , especially if the "old boys club" at the centre of the EU make the wrong decisions now.

What I want is for the problems to be fixed and the great idea in theory to become a great idea in practice.

B.

 

[Rozas]

xman101
"especially if the "old boys club" at the centre of the EU make the wrong decisions now."

You mean the guys in Brussels?

 

[shakaypa]

The British were not, are not and will not be right about Europe. They have an insular mind and pride themselves in tiny meaningless things. A lot of the global financial crisis has its roots in London's City, so I would say that it is a blessing for the Eurozone that the UK stayed out of it. Europe will rebound! The UK, I am not so sure and I am confident that next year's world cup costs will be like the matador's spear for the English Bull. OLE!

 

[NYDude25]

The UK, I am not so sure and I am confident that next year's world cup costs will be like the matador's spear for the English Bull. OLE!

Euro 2012 for the UEFA Championship next year is in Poland and Ukraine, not UK.

 

[alexfot55]

UK's interests lay with their Cousins,the US. Too many factors in Europe to cope with and no greater gain at that.

 

[XMan101]

Here's the latest outburst from UKIP member Nigel Farage.

He might be a ranter and some may laugh at him but his arguments have always been how totally undemocratic the EU is ! Something I totally agree with him on.

 

[etilit]

ok im going to laugh here..hahahaha

didnt you get what you wanted? oh wait...is the pound better than the euro?

whatever finger pointing you want..its stupid

we will all suffer from greed be it ares or theres lol

 

[reflex]

The British were not, are not and will not be right about Europe. They have an insular mind and pride themselves in tiny meaningless things. A lot of the global financial crisis has its roots in London's City, so I would say that it is a blessing for the Eurozone that the UK stayed out of it. Europe will rebound! The UK, I am not so sure and I am confident that next year's world cup costs will be like the matador's spear for the English Bull. OLE!

I thought we were hosting the olypics in 2012.
Maybe i have a insular mind.

 

[Tjerk12]

It strikes me that in political discussions terms are always used everyone seems to understand. I may not be super smart but still possess some IQ, Yet, I seem not to understand many obvious things. The financial system, to name just one example. I don’t understand a bit of it. Money used to be an equivalent for a physical cause or service. These goals seem no longer applicable. Money seems to be an aim in itself. Daily flies well over a hundred times more money around the world than there is possible value in labor and property. Money rules the world (there was a time that Brittania did, but that is long ago). Stock markets used to be places where the value of industries was determined using the achievements of companies. Nowadays they seem Las Vegas look alikes. Empty shells are traded for idiotic prices. Sometimes you are lucky and sometimes not. The experts seem to understand also little of what is happening, because their predictions are mostly inaccurate. No wonder I can’t understand it.
The same with Democracy. We all learned at school that it is the best system there is. But is it sufficient to declare it holy. Democracy didn’t change for long, long times. The world changed enormously. Wouldn’t it be proper to adjust democracy? Parties promise heaven on earth when they campaign, but what do they actually realize of their promises? Should not we find ways for accountability? Voting after four years is not enough. Democracy is in no way ruling by majority. Take 100% population. About 20% is too young to vote. So 80% can actually vote. But only 60 to 70% of the possible voters actually do vote. So 52% of the population votes. When one party becomes 40% of the votes it is hallelujah for them. But that is not more than 21% of the whole population. So 21% of the population decides what happens. Of course I do know that things are in reality a bit more difficult, but still it is a bit strange. At least worth to think about possible changes.
And about the Euro and the common market I hear so seldom people talk about one of the major achievements of the European Communion, namely the reason why they started the experiment. The main goal was to avoid war in Europe. And they may have made many mistakes, but that goal is achieved!