Merkel, Sarkozy, Propose Eurozone Government

Merkel, Sarkozy, Propose Eurozone Government

Never let a crisis go to waste, eh? Those who seek Global Governance never do give up, now do they?

Discuss

 

Hey, Chicken Little, how about doing a little more than posting several article threads with one paranoid sentence, saying "discuss," and then dropping by as infrequently as Halley's Comet afterward?

 

When I saw just the first 3 words of this on the main page, I thought this was going to be, "Merkel, Sarkozy Propose Marriage."

I see I wasn't that far off the mark, though...

 

It seems inevitable as the Euro is otherwise going to get sunk by the George Soros wannabes of this world -- and its sinking might happen even if they do achieve fiscal integration -- the vultures are circling.

 

I think that it is just wonderful to see all us Europeans getting together and motivating ourselves to sort out the problems of the world.

Worked out really well in the past...

 

IMO this is what was always going to happen, and the only way to keep the Euro stable, the idea of having a currency controlled by many differnt governments is crazy, if there is real currency control from Europe the currency should be more stable.

The problem is of course, it weakens all governments in the Euro zone, to the point its almost not worth while having them.

 

This is Germany conquering Europe for the third time. They may be successful this go around.

 

You can't have an effective monetary union without an effective fiscal union; I've said that right from the start, which is why I was very glad the UK had a lucky escape from the Euro.

Since we aren't part of the Euro, I'm all for the eurozone countries fiscally integrating more fully in order to stabilise their currency (and tangentially, to calm markets and so make my portfolio healthier). If I was in a northern eurozone country like Germany, I'd probably feel a lot more unhappy about the prospect of subsidising club med, but since I'm not...

What does cheese me off slightly is that instead of actually doing this, they want to slap this new financial services tax they're talking about on all EU countries, not just eurozone countries. The Euro is their problem; let them sort it out on their own. Having said that, if it's set at a suitably low level, and is a necessary precursor for the eurozone countries to get used to the fact that they have no other eventual choice but eurobonds and a common fiscal policy set largely by the few financially-responsible eurozone countries like Germany, it may be worth it.

 

Well...Germany never really conquered Europe during either of the world wars. They had Central Europe down in both but that's about it.

Also, "conquering" has the connotation of being a success. If they also conquering during the 1910s and 1930-40s then the correct modifer would be "again". As in: This is Germany conquering Europe for the third time. They may be successful again.

Of course, that's just clunky phrasing and since it didn't happen previously, it's moot.

ALSO: If the leader of France is on board...it wouldn't even be Germany conquering Europe this time. It would be a bilateral act initiated by several sovereign states.

In short: I think the Maginot Line shall hold.

 

Finally. It's about time. You can't have a dozen countries sharing the same currency without a unified economy. That's impossible, and we only realized that now.

Transaction taxes are the best idea they had in a long time. Even with just a tiny amount like 0.1% to large transactions they could gain billions.

Why is that a problem? Nations evolve, that's a normal thing. If the European Union turns into the United States of Europe, I'd have no problem with that at all.

 

First I've heard. My knee-jerk response is screw that for a game of soldiers -- 90% of such a levy will just go to Van Rumpuy's pals to have nice dinners. It'll be interesting to see what the Danes and Swedes make of it as well. Like the UK, even less incentive for them to join the Euro and more reason to bitch about the Eurocrats.

 

The reason they want to impose it EU-wide is because they know that Frankfurt, Paris et al. will lose business to London without it being universal. Having said that, London already has SDRT, so the principle's already embedded in UK taxation (much as I dislike it on a personal level), and without particularly significant capital flight. But then again, London is a bigger market. Importantly too, however, SDRT only applies to purchases, not to sales, which makes a considerable potential difference to the effect of the tax on liquidity.

Sweden has had national experience of the catastrophic effect of a two-way Tobin tax on market liquidity (especially on bond trading) and was forced to abolish it fairly soon after introduction IIRC.

Personally, I tend to agree with you, and that it will a) raise much less than people expect, because liquidity will drop proportionately, and b) be frittered away on nonsense projects instead of being used to subsidise PIIGS et al. Better for Germany (and to a much lesser extent France, Netherlands, etc) to just suck up the pain of being the long-term subsidiser of southern Europe, and for the south to accept they've lost the right to national sovereignty by royally fucking up their economies with unaffordable social programs and mass corruption. Either that, or break up the Euro. I don't really care which, as long as either option is done rapidly to provide market certainty. The first option is faster though.

 

Is all of continental Europe prepared for the Germans and to a lesser degree the French become their economic overlords? There are many [as I'm sure you're aware] historical ironies and sensitivities to such an arrangement.

 

Sigh, you're probably right. We'll just have to grin and bear it. Suddenly, living on an offshore libertarian island as some billionaire's fucktoy gimp slave starts to sound like a more attractive alternative.

 

Sigh, you're probably right. We'll just have to grin and bear it. Suddenly, living on an offshore libertarian island as some billionaire's fucktoy gimp slave starts to sound like a more attractive alternative.

 

They should have thought of that before signing up to the Euro; it was all obvious from the start (and not even particularly well-hidden). Actions have consequences. I have little sympathy for them. Of course, they'll bitch, complain, protest, negotiate it back a bit, riot on the streets... but at the end of the day, they're broke and need the money. The alternative for them is to leave the Euro, and probably the EU, default, and get the money from the IMF instead. The IMF's loan conditions will be even stricter.

 

This. It's been long due, and I'm glad the finally got it.

Yep. Completely agree.

They already are, and they have been been for the last 40 years (at least). It's not like this is something new.

And I think it's about time you stop doing the lol-Nazi-wink-wink-nudge-nudge-thing every time there is something involving Germany. It's getting old. And grating.

Bollocks. Social initiatives and welfare-state programs (as they have in Nordic countries) would be perfectly affordable if run with efficiency.

This one, however, is true.

There are also people, yours truly included, that think this is the expected next step in European integration, and argue it is actually a good thing.

 

the problem is that some are against that kind of move, its the kind of thing you to consult people on, before you go making such a major change not only how a country is run, but its very idenity.

 

It's fine for the big countries, not so good for the small countries.