Economics and sovereignty-thoughts

Watch this thread
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#1
Trump posted something on Facebook yesterday which gave me a good chuckle and provided a decent example of the problems that for lack of a better word 'nativism' faces in a capitalist system.

To paraphrase he essentially said 'China keeps devalueing their currency without asking for our permission. This hurts our economy!'

This highlights that our economic sovereignty is often dependentsnt on the actions of other states. Among other reasons, one of the central causes of the creation of the Euro was the ever increasing value of the Deutschmark and the consequences this had on the rest of Europe.

How if possible can this contradiction be resolved? Or must we return to ever present trade wars, high tariffs and their consequences?

The only possible alternative that I can think of would returning to the gold standard or allowing TNC banks (i.e. Something like bitcoin) but again this would require all governments to forgo some sovereignty (creating fiat money)

Thoughts?




Disclaimer- although I don't think I'm a complete novice when it comes to economics it is most certainly not my forte- although I have some learning in economic theory, when it comes to practical economics I am mostly self taught- so any glaringly stupid mistakes I apologise for. On this subject I am truly humble (ish)
0
reply
ckfeister
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 5 years ago
#2
Everyone depends on everyone.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#3
Additionally food for thought- https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...er-ussr-russia

ChaoticButterfly
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#4
(Original post by Foo.mp3)
Not quite, as exogenous factors relating to exchange rate variability cannot possibly fall (legitimately) under (our) sovereign control in the present international system. It does further illustrate that our macroeconomic actions/fates are somewhat mutually interrelated, however, aye; hence, complex interdependence theory and the imperative for international cooperation

Problem is, unless you set the price level across the board what do you end up with? Higher prices in Germania. Similar picture, and same fundamental economic basis, just different bits of paper/metal involved and lower barriers to associated unhelpful movements of various forms of capital

Plus, under the Euro individual nations are not free to set their own monetary policy. So, when already heavily indebted nations are permitted to sign up to EMU (against the EU’s own stipulated convergence criteria, no less), take on more and more debt, and eventually this becomes unsustainable and starts to cripple their societies, can they print their way out of trouble? Hell no. Hence Southern Europe is totally ****ed and the European project destined to collapse irrespective of any other concerns (from Brexit to Bangladesh [EU Migrant Crisis])

Not clear what you’re asking us here. Do you mean the US/Chinese conflict of interests?

See no reason to suppose we must, no, albeit that trickle-down and fiscal levers are going to require a reboot if globalisation is to continue to push on. Haven't read the Mason article,* but the integration-disintegration thematic noted in the subtitle certainly holds, as history shows (e.g. yes, the Soviet Union + The Age or Rome vs. fall of Rome and The Dark Ages, Treaty of Westphalia vs. French Wars, Inter-war/Weimar period vs. WWII)

Difference being that whereas it was very much easier to control the masses (especially in terms of controlling the flow of people, assets, and information) in the past, and will be in the future, presently the system (and narrative) is extremely fluid

* Not a fan, his analyses are rarely on point and his argumentation often inconsistent, but feel free to exec summary it up

1) That could only happen after the coming reset (think Great Depression times ten)

2) The powers that be will bend heaven and earth to prevent it

Spoiler:
Show





Off-book cryptocurrencies will never be state sanctioned. Central bankers and in some cases e.g. outside the West, still, primarily, governments, must control the money and, by extension, the people :furher:

Disclaimer: Please don't zap me CIA/Mi5 et al., I'm just a humble student with earnest concerns for humanity :innocent:
Thank you for that interesting analysis


I (shock, horror!) largely agree with your assessment- (I always supported the EU more out of realist grounds). The EU is Europe's Levisthian- can potentially be ghastly but far better than a post EU future which will decline to Nationalistic Oligarchies in the mound of Russia (Italy and France for sure) which will neither be good for them or us.

I don't buy that the answer to southern Europes economic woes is merely to leave the EU/ Euro or that it is a primitivism Southern European cultural deficiency- any state run by corrupt socialists will suffer.

You answered it Kind of with your first paragraph. If you have any nuggets regards Chinese/ US Conflict of interests I'd be interested to hear them,

Pretty much what you deduced, plus Mason argues that when the USSR collapsed there was an external idea to latch onto 'western democracy' which would be missing if western democracies began to collapse onto *nationalistic oligarchies which he labels as the default position of failed economies. However, the west does have a young, free and educated segment of the population to look for alternatives.

I'm not a fan as such of Mason either but I think he's broadly on the money here.



Why do you think it will be easier to control the masses in the future? Big Brother?



Regarding gold standard- if by some miracle it was possible to bring about (IIRC Trump is a fan) would that be a good thing in your view? If so, why? ( I believe you advocate yourself as something of an economic leftie)
0
reply
the bear
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 5 years ago
#5
the elephant in the room is what happens to the 40% of people in England who are not economically nimble ? all the jobs they occupied before about 1980 have been taken over by Chinese etc abroad or Poles etc in this country.

it will end in tears.
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 5 years ago
#6
economic national sovereignty doesn't make any sense and it never really did, unless you're north korea
in the age of globalisation, the market is sovereign when it comes to economics
you can't insulate a nation from the global market unless you want to lose all of your trade and hence international profits
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 5 years ago
#7
(Original post by sleepysnooze)
in the age of globalisation, the market is sovereign when it comes to economics
you can't insulate a nation from the global market unless you want to lose all of your trade and hence international profits
Which is basically everything that matters.

Therefore leaving the EU is futile. We have no sovereignty anyway.
0
reply
sleepysnooze
Badges: 3
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 5 years ago
#8
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Which is basically everything that matters.

Therefore leaving the EU is futile. We have no sovereignty anyway.
um, political sovereignty and legal sovereignty just suddenly disappear in your view just because economic sovereignty is a non-concept in a globalised world of various private actors...? or are you just pretending for the sake of defending the EU? or do you simply not care about political/legal sovereignty? I'm having trouble understanding your point of view. there's a difference between a globalised economy and a series of national states...also, in this generation, the state isn't even so understood as an institution that actively aims to control any kind of economy, be it local or global. what kind of government would even *try* to control the international economy in an absolute and decisive way? if that were the case then one country would be massively wealthy and all the others would be dirt poor
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Psychology Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (229)
42.25%
The paper was reasonable (230)
42.44%
Not feeling great about that exam... (49)
9.04%
It was TERRIBLE (34)
6.27%

Watched Threads

View All