Greece is an interesting example of poor Government policy and it was propped up by the EU for many years. In my view one currency is a very good thing and Britian made a mistake in keeping the Pound.
I would further argue that economies in Spain, Portugal, Italy and Greece have survived only due to the EU, with Germany and to a lesser extent France keeping them afloat. While we complain about Australian Governments, all have managed finances reasonably and taken steps with the Reserve Bank to ensure we are solvent.
The world would be economically, financially and socially be a better place with one currency (the Fox Dollar)
And common power supply, power plugs, road rules and many other things would also make life easier.
I will admit my perception is skewed (married to a Spaniard) but I see Brexit by being driven largely by a fear of âothersâ. There may be all sorts of intelligent economic arguments being pushed around in hindsight, but if one looks at the propaganda pushed by Farage et al it was about being swamped by illegals and British money funding the undeserving continentals. Fear is a powerful motivator as we subsequently saw in the US.
Also, it never ceases to surprise me how some Britons still hold the âwe are superiorâ mindset. It reminds me of the pre-Brexit interviews NPR (US public radio) did with British expats living in Spain (enjoying free healthcare, low cost of living, not to mention this thing called the âsunâ). The expats first celebrated how they had never needed to learn Spanish as the enclaves they lived in were âalmost like home with pubs, restaurants, shops all managed by Britishâ. Then, when asked, many said they were in favor of Brexit. The kicker was one lady saying âwe need to exit the EU to prevent our country being taken over by migrants. You know how many Polish and Romanians are moving in and not integrating?â. Not a hint of irony.
Which brings us to today. So you are telling me an ill-informed, unplanned, based-on-fear exit is having trouble actually being implemented? Shocking!
It all sounds good but at the end of the day itâs only natural for nations to look after their own backyard first and foremost as they should. Many Brits I know including plenty of rellies are happy to stay in the EU but only with more control and say over what goes on in the UK
Ha, victory is getting less than half of the house to vote in favour of your continued existence⌠not sure if/how many of the 19 missing votes were deliberate non-votes.
Currency devaluation/appreciation is a vital tool of economic policy. Each policy-making unit should have its own currency.
The Euro could have worked if every nationâs fiscal policy was centralised at the EU level. But it makes no sense at all having Germany (strong industrial base, heavy exporter) share a currency with Greece (high debt, low exports, reliant on tourism)
Greece had plenty of economic problems of their own making from way back, and shouldnât have been admitted into the Euro. They just didnât meet the minimum economic criteria. Everyone knew it at the time, and everyone quietly agreed to look the other way in the interests of European unity and the greater EU ideal. But the Euro and the EU arenât the same thing, as the UK illustrates.
If Greece had its own currency, the bailout it got from France and Germany wouldnât have been needed (or it would have been much smaller) simply because they could have cut their debt and boosted investment and tourism simply by devaluing the drachma against the rest of the world. But they didnât have that option, so they ended up surrendering their ability to make national fiscal policy to their creditor (who, in the case of Germany in particular) have thoroughly benefited from Greece being shackled to the Euro, since it keeps their exports relatively cheap.
This is not correct. They do not have a codified constitution like Australia or the US but they have a body of different legislation, common law and parliamentary conventions which dictate how
Parliament is formed and the country is run.
It was initially an agreement to encourage freer movement of people across borders which grew into a mutually beneficial regional trade agreement. The original underlying philosophy was to encourage free trade and movement of people as it was (probably rightly) thought that you were less likely to want to blow the crap out of each other with that sort of agreement than the mutually assured destruction alliances they previously had which led to mutual destruction.
Now, Iâm not sure it knows what it is trying to achieve. Its focus appears to be on rules, taxes and regulations which actually undermine those original principles.
