The Euro: Dead

[scottycelt]

A two-tier zone with the exiled currencies devalued would advantage those within the Eurozone in trade terms with the former group. As far as I can see there is no easy way out; long-term I would hope for repatterned trade links worldwide, with Britain linking up with the "defectors" to seek to increase the volume of trade with countries such as Brazil and Argentina.

You are now beginning to sound dangerously like that despicable right-wing Tory MP, John Redwood, S-A ...!

Brazil, Argentina? ... you mean we suddenly pretend we are an island off S. America and not N. Europe? ... you might 'hope for repatterned trade links worldwide' but the flaw in that argument is that, unfortunately, nobody else might!

Also, a devaluation in currency does not mean a disadvantage in trade terms, quite the opposite. However, it does mean a reduced standard of living relative to former peers.

The only realistic future in view for the UK (apart from being a virtual colony of the US) is to get off its backside and play its rightful and important role in an increasingly United Europe, which is now politically and economically inevitable whatever the temporary setbacks.

All in my ever-humble opinion, of course ...

[MrGongGong]

I'd duck behind the sofa with your rosary beads Scotty !

(I do agree though )

[aeolium]

A two-tier zone with the exiled currencies devalued would advantage those within the Eurozone in trade terms with the former group. As far as I can see there is no easy way out; long-term I would hope for repatterned trade links worldwide, with Britain linking up with the "defectors" to seek to increase the volume of trade with countries such as Brazil and Argentina.

Why would it advantage those within the Eurozone, whose currency would be stronger - that ought to advantage the countries with the weaker currencies? I agree there is no easy answer and it looks pretty bad for pretty well all the European countries for the next few years. There's certainly not the slightest chance of the UK joining the euro, anyway, in its current form.

[mangerton]

that despicable right-wing Tory MP

Seriously tautological there, shurely, scotty!

[Mahlerei]

Scot on, spotty :)

[John Skelton]

Scot on, spotty :)

http://www.peoplesworld.org/austerity-cuts-in-greece-cause-suffering/

[John Skelton]

The only realistic future in view for the UK (apart from being a virtual colony of the US) is to get off its backside and play its rightful and important role in an increasingly United Europe, which is now politically and economically inevitable whatever the temporary setbacks.

What does that mean, scottycelt? Are you saying that Europe will be militarily independent of the US? Collectively Europe will leave Nato? I think that's staggeringly unlikely. In fact I think it's perfectly plausible to argue that Europe will find itself involved and 'obliged' as a collective 'ally' of the US, militarily.

Will be economically stronger? Really? Will form an economic alliance with China, perhaps?

Incidentally: in a politically and economically united EU I wonder how long it would take for the UK to be obliged to complete the dismantling of the NHS: under collective European competition laws?

[scottycelt]

What does that mean, scottycelt? Are you saying that Europe will be militarily independent of the US? Collectively Europe will leave Nato? I think that's staggeringly unlikely. In fact I think it's perfectly plausible to argue that Europe will find itself involved and 'obliged' as a collective 'ally' of the US, militarily.

Will be economically stronger? Really? Will form an economic alliance with China, perhaps?

Incidentally: in a politically and economically united EU I wonder how long it would take for the UK to be obliged to complete the dismantling of the NHS: under collective European competition laws?

What does it mean?

It means, John, that we respond to the call from Angela Merkel in seeing that the only real and lasting solution to Europe's current problems is greater fiscal and political union. It is depressing to hear Cameron yet again indulging in national tribalism when it is glaringly obvious that what is now required is broad-minded statesmanship. Because we have been only half-committed to the European cause (and that's being generous) we now find ourselves with little influence in the big decisions that will shortly have to be made by Europe's leaders.

I don't know where you get the idea from that seeing the need for an United Europe is anti-Nato or anti-American. On the contrary, the Americans have always urged we Europeans to start standing on our own feet militarily, and Obama more or less said as much by letting the European Nato members take the military lead in Libya.

Europe, now largely economically united, is the largest trading bloc in the world ... because of that, the current superpowers like the US and China have to sit up and take notice ... divided, it's merely a collection of mostly despised former colonial powers, impotent in world affairs and therefore bullied or simply ignored by the big boys.

Does Cameron, with his suffocating village-green mentality, really see this as the future for Europe and the UK?

As for dismantling the NHS, I would imagine that extreme scenario may be much more likely if we continue to be a semi-colony of the US, rather than being part of a largely centrist Europe!

[Serial_Apologist]

You are now beginning to sound dangerously like that despicable right-wing Tory MP, John Redwood, S-A ...!

The only time I sound like John Redwood is when attempting to sing Land of my Fathers - which is not very often.

[aeolium]

This article puts the European situation in a wider context and challenges the usual Tory Eurosceptic line of returning to just a free trade Europe.

[Simon]

It seems as though I've not been the only one away recently. Though I've not been with the fairies.

What fascinating posts you have been making. I'll have to have a good read through before commenting.

[scottycelt]

The only time I sound like John Redwood is when attempting to sing Land of my Fathers - which is not very often.

Funny, poor John will always be remembered for that very human moment probably more than anything else ... there but for the .. etc etc etc.

Let's face it, in the good old Empire/Commonwealth days without television it would have almost certainly been a complete non-issue ... ?

[John Skelton]

"I don't know where you get the idea from that seeing the need for an United Europe is anti-Nato or anti-American. On the contrary, the Americans have always urged we Europeans to start standing on our own feet militarily, and Obama more or less said as much by letting the European Nato members take the military lead in Libya."

I don't get it from anywhere. A lot of people talk about a politically unified Europe as being a counter-balance to the US and cite the disagreements over the Iraq War. My suggestion is that the effect would be to over-ride any individual objections and tie a European Army into Nato and hence into supporting further US military action as and when. I find that prospect chilling.

In all your posts you completely ignore the real effects of European fiscal and political integration on people living in Europe, the latest development in which any pretence at democratic accountability is junked and technocrat led governments are spirited into place and the imposition of savage austerity measures in order to protect the interests of bankers and financiers. "Save the banks and screw the people", in David Harvey's succinct formulation.

What does "centrist" mean (actually mean, as against something you know you are?) There have already been suggestions that once the NHS is opened up to 'competition' EU competition laws will make it difficult to protect any 'services' from the market.

[scottycelt]

I don't get it from anywhere. A lot of people talk about a politically unified Europe as being a counter-balance to the US and cite the disagreements over the Iraq War. My suggestion is that the effect would be to over-ride any individual objections and tie a European Army into Nato and hence into supporting further US military action as and when. I find that prospect chilling.

In all your posts you completely ignore the real effects of European fiscal and political integration on people living in Europe, the latest development in which any pretence at democratic accountability is junked and technocrat led governments are spirited into place and the imposition of savage austerity measures in order to protect the interests of bankers and financiers. "Save the banks and screw the people", in David Harvey's succinct formulation.

So you are saying a potential superpower such as an United Europe would be more beholden to the US than a bunch of divided, squabbling independent countries? Well, I've come across many Eurosceptic 'arguments' but that just about takes the biscuit!

All the countries in the EU are democracies and the national governments will eventually have to ensure mandates from 'the people' when their term is up or before. That is a condition of membership of the EU ... didn't you know?

You have told us what you are against. Can you now tell us, in the absence of European economic and political unity, what your own solution would be to the present crisis, over and above verbally stringing-up 'technocrats, bankers and financiers'?

[teamsaint]

one problem with a big centralised europe is that if the big centralised organisations make bad decisions, we are in big centralised trouble.

So for example, who or what is controlling the ECB at present? They make a bad, (and indeed probably undemocratic) decision, and we all feel the pain.

I fail to see the attraction of a european super state. There are other ways of trading, operating, defending. Big undemocratic government in the pockets of the usual interest groups. Shudder.
John Skeltons assertion that a big centralise EU would be more easily controlled by the US is perfectly reasonable. much easier for the US to control a few eurocrats than 35 seperate states, I should have thought.