The EU debate - Part III

exactly, and even if it was, it still loses!

 

... so true ... remember watching the news unfold and getting angrier and angrier with that coxless **** of a Tory Sports Minister, Moynihan, blaming it all on drunken football hooligans ... only the Tories could think that a small man without a penis sitting in a boat watching muscly big guys rowing would be a suitable qualification for overseeing the nation's beautiful game ...

... akin to making Pete Minister responsible for combatting obesity

 

If that were true then the EUR economies would have performed less well than the GBP economy leading to people selling EUR and buying GBP so the GBP would have gone up relative to the EUR. A strong currency is an indication of economic performance. the EUR was not implemented that well but its far from the disaster that everyone believes. The fact that the EUR went up against the GBP on the Brexit vote just demonstrates that people think the UK will suffer more from leaving than the EU will.

 

Of course the absolute value of the EUR v the GBP doesn't matter. That is just arbitrary. The change in value matters a lot.

 

It's the uncertaintly that increases the risk and increased risk reduces value

 

don't you mean relative value?

 

Not true.
The issue with the single currency is that debt and liability are detached. It allowed countries to improve their economies way beyond sustainable levels.

Countries are able to borrow way above their means based on all the Eurozone countries underwriting the debt and so they get in over their heads. The problem Greece found itself in was that the Germans refused to cover the debt they had originally underwritten, all be it whilst pretending they weren't.

It requires more integration to work effectively and the central power taking on and controlling national debts. That does not mean countries economies are weakened, but it does mean countries have to have any debt approved by the ECB.
Whether when these stresses threaten to break the system an agreement of further integration is reached or countries decide to back out of the currently flawed structure is anyone's guess tbh.

 

... nah ... but I might consider staying if the divorce was going to be financially catastrophic for me and the family ... it's not all about the self you narcissist

 

No. Bodanki seems to think that the fact that the EUR is worth more than one GBP is of some relevance. I was just trying to explain that that was not true. the Yen is worth much less than either but has been a stronger currency mostly.

 

You brought it up!

 

I didn't. It was the change in value I brought up. Your saying the EUR still loses is about the absolute value which is irrelevant

 

No......I am saying it isn't, you are saying it is.
You tried to use the fact that the pounds value has dropped against the EUR as proof that the single currency has been a success.
Which is irrelevant.
I made the point that is not proof of anything as far the the Euro goes, all it proves is that the pound is weak right now.
Then I added, even if it WAS about relative value, the EURO would still lose

 

https://www.youtube.com/shared?ci=uW8PfdJN6IM

 

exactly
it is weak because of the uncertainty
the euro isn't "strong" except relative to the pound
the euro is getting weaker relative to the dollar

 

Anyway, most expert opinions on the Eurozone have ranged from "Disappointing" to "abject failure".
I think you are very much in the minority in wanting the UK to join the Eurozone mate, even on this board.
Even the remainers on here were largely against it.

 

Bull ****
Euro - Dollar has remained largely unchanged and the dollar is weaker today at 0.90-0.92 than it was nearly a year ago when it was 0.94.

 

Pete owned again.

 

Sadly it's an inherent weakness in some to assume the Euro is pants and everywhere else is a bed of roses.
It's not the Euro that is the biggest risk to world economies, it's Chinese debt and slowing growth.

 

@PowerSpurs

Even the CER, which usually tongues the EU ring piece with gusto, came to the consensus that it was a failure.
http://www.cer.org.uk/publications/archive/report/2016/has-euro-been-failure

There was broad consensus that the euro had been a disappointment: the currency union’s economic performance was very poor, and rather than bringing EU member-states together and fostering a closer sense of unity and common identity, the euro had divided countries and eroded confidence in the EU. While only a few participants thought it possible or advisable to dismantle the eurozone, there was broad pessimism over the ability of the eurozone political elite to sell the needed integrationist steps to their increasingly disillusioned electorates.

For most participants there was a widening gap between what was needed – more integration, risk sharing, and solidarity – and what electorates were prepared to support. The eurozone could only flourish with institutions founded on democracy; rules were a poor substitute and lacked legitimacy as they were effectively set by a select group of member-states and the ECB. For a minority, the rules were the right ones, and the eurozone could work if countries abided by them. For another minority, the problems were the result of policy mistakes, not the eurozone’s institutional set-up.

 

... Pete is, at least, effective in countering the latter