Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Collingwood)
    I think this is probably the truth. Regardless of whether the Euro may or may not be economically benficial, it is first and foremost a political tool to further integration.
    To the benefit of whom?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnythingButChardonnay)
    A big difference indeed.

    The difference being that our interest rates are currently set for the United Kingdom's economic interests. Not a one-size-fits-all rate for the whole of the Eurozone (which doesn't fit all at all, hence the crises in Ireland, Greece, Spain and eastern Europe).
    Maybe so. But that's part of the package of a single currency. One of the advantages of which is that out currency doesn't plummet if we're doing badly economically (as we are during the recession, more so than other countries)
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Student2806)
    Rubbish. The UK has the second largest economy in Europe and the Eurozone would gain a lot more clout with us in it. If we expressed a desire to join they'd jump at the chance to get the last major economy onboard.
    Third, we fell behind France recently.

    How embarrassing is that?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KwungSun)
    To the benefit of whom?
    People who support EU integration, presumably. I don't personally think this is beneficial.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Collingwood)
    People who support EU integration, presumably. I don't personally think this is beneficial.
    But what kind of people favour EU political integration over EU economic integration? I just don't see how it would be a political goal rather than an economic goal.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rajandkwameali)
    That may seem a silly question, but considering some people in the UK say we should join now the economy is in recession, then I think asking what the point of the Euro is makes sense.

    If it is to improve the macroeconomic performances of member states, then is there any evidence of this? Hasn't the Eurozone underperformed compared to the USA or Japan since it was founded in 1999?

    I know this is why Blair and Brown created the five economic tests, to see if joining the Euro would have any positive macroeconomic benefit, but as things stand now, what would the macroeconomic benefit be (if any) in joining the Euro?
    I do economics:

    The uk joining the Euro has good and bad effects

    But atm the Uk shouldnt if we did inflation would go out of control and we would have control over the interst rates.

    Which would cause the country to grow at an even slower rate.

    Italy's economy at the moment is awful because they cannot control their own interest rates.

    The european central bank which sets the european interest rate is only interested in europe as a whole and not individual countries.They are not interested in macro economic problems such as unemployment. They are only interested in inflation.

    The good think about the uk joining the euro is that there will be an increase in global investment. which will cause huge growth in the future. Which will increase productivity and exports

    however, the u.k is a country that highly relys on imports, if we changed to the euro, imports will increase even more cause even more of a deficit, and this would cause it to be out of control.
    If we import more then productivity could then increase causing this contry to not need to make goods to import.

    There is more disadvantages,but that is so long to type lol
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KwungSun)
    But what kind of people favour EU political integration over EU economic integration? I just don't see how it would be a political goal rather than an economic goal.
    These two purportedly seperate goals are identical. Central banks are political institutions, as are regulations, tarrifs and all the other things the EU wants to "harmonise".
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    Surrendering what? Our interest rates are currently controlled by an independent MPC. What's the difference if they're controlled by an independent ECB?
    (Original post by bax-man)
    The MPC looks after the interest rates of the entire of the UK, so they are set based on UK-wide concerns, not necessarily to the benefit of the Scottish economy.

    (In other words, your argument is a stupid one.)
    Scotland's economy is very closely related with the UK economy.

    The economy of countries like Poland is much less so. Different interest rates are appropriate for countries like Italy on the one-hand, and countries like Poland on the other. Thats why a Euro-wide interest rate would not be a good thing for us.

    Moreover, I am doubtful about the ECB's ability to set interest rates. The ECB is absolutely obsessed with controlling inflation to the detriment of growth, I simply don't trust them as much as the MPC.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Callum828)
    Maybe so. But that's part of the package of a single currency. One of the advantages of which is that out currency doesn't plummet if we're doing badly economically (as we are during the recession, more so than other countries)
    How's that a good thing? At least if our currency plummets it allows us to be priced into the market.

    And also try putting the shoe on the other foot. Our currency plummets if other countries are doing bad economically.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Collingwood)
    These two purportedly seperate goals are identical. Central banks are political institutions, as are regulations, tarrifs and all the other things the EU wants to "harmonise".
    But you just said that political integration is higher on the agenda that economic integration...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Student2806)
    Rubbish. The UK has the second largest economy in Europe and the Eurozone would gain a lot more clout with us in it. If we expressed a desire to join they'd jump at the chance to get the last major economy onboard.
    You mean just like they jumped at the chance when the UK first applied to join the EC? Its application was rejected.

    Edit: Twice ('63 and '67).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KwungSun)
    But you just said that political integration is higher on the agenda that economic integration...
    I havent at any point even used the phrase "economic integration" - only you have.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Frodz)
    It's simply the fact that the pro-euro people realise that if we were to join now we would "get a good deal" due to the relative strengths of the currencies.

    The thing is the last thing we should be doing in the current economic climate is surrendering control over our currency to Europe.
    The menu and shoe leather costs would be crippling given the current state of the economy anyway. These will no doubt be transferred to consumers by already struggling businesses, which would in turn lower consumer expenditure even more, multiplying to a fall in aggregate demand [domestic]. Not to mention the fact that the common consumer will have no ******* idea about the value of goods they wish to purchase in Euros anyway.
    We may get a good 'deal' but our inflationary targets will have to be of course revised, and monetary policy surrendered to the European Bank; is this really a step forward? :rolleyes:

    Call me a Euro-sceptic if you like, but there is NO benefit to the UK of joining the Euro, apart from strengthening ties with our European 'brothers' (probably better if we just called them neighbours given our history!), and working towards a more unified European State (possibly leading to the United States of Europe- which will, of course, never happen). It seems more like a policy/ regime the French strongly support, given the fact that Chirac called for a 'European joint army' instead of Nato already; of course his calls were silenced.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    You mean just like they jumped at the chance when the UK first applied to join the EC? Its application was rejected.

    Edit: Twice ('63 and '67).
    That was the Charles De Gaulle led France which saw the UK as a major competitor to its own clout in EC, they were able to veto it. I don't think this would happen again in regards to the euro - its a different issue.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iwilson03)
    That was the Charles De Gaulle led France which saw the UK as a major competitor to its own clout in EC, they were able to veto it. I don't think this would happen again in regards to the euro - its a different issue.
    Yes, the modern EU very much sees British non-involvement as a threat rather than an advantage.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Collingwood)
    Yes, the modern EU very much sees British non-involvement as a threat rather than an advantage.
    Well yes, of course- although Britain has now ceased to be a superpower, it would still bring much benefit to the European Economy, at least in the long run.
    Just looking a little closer at the notion of the European Super State though- how the hell will this ever happen; we seem to have enmities with almost every country in Europe (albeit stereotypical) whilst they must undoubtedly have similar beliefs about us Brits. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HJV)
    You mean just like they jumped at the chance when the UK first applied to join the EC? Its application was rejected.

    Edit: Twice ('63 and '67).
    That was more of intergovernmental politics (France, non?) than of monetary union (which wasn't conceived of until Maastricht in '92).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I really dislike the Euro, I hope we don't ever take it.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Collingwood)
    I havent at any point even used the phrase "economic integration" - only you have.
    You said regardless of economic benefits the euro is first and foremost political. I don't see who would gain from the euro politically more than they would economically.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sebas_back)
    That was more of intergovernmental politics (France, non?) than of monetary union (which wasn't conceived of until Maastricht in '92).
    Yeah, but just shows that the UK isn't seen as some kind of a almighty blessing which will be open-handedly welcomed to join anything and everything.

    The first rejection was by French veto, the second by both French and German.
 
 
 
Poll
Did you get less than your required grades and still get into university?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.