What do YOU think should happen to the Eurozone?

[swl]

Ultimately, given the inability of the different peoples of Europe to live next to each other, as shown by more than 2000 years of permanent war, we need to make one people of Europe. Then we can start creating the United People of Earth.

So option 2.

There is a long process to link the propositions, but it would be too long to go into details.

[AggregateDemand]

What?!? I can't even follow the thought process behind this one, that's like suggesting that Texas should secede from USA to counterbalance the Californian position in the electoral college.

Obviously, because Texas and California use different currencies.

[swl]

Well the UK and Germany also use different currencies.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

UK should drop out, and use economic relations with its former colonies to counterbalance German hegemony.

The UK is not in the Eurozone.

UK should drop out of the EU to counterbalance German hegemony within the Eurozone.

Why the hell would it do that? I know you are the sort of American right-winger who finds the idea of Europe disturbing, which is hilarious as it shows how little you know of it, but what's the plan here? Why would the UK set itself up as a rival to Germany? What good would that do?

When discussing this people have to keep in mind: Given what we know, what would actually work as opposed to what seems like a good idea in an abstract sense.

[angus]

The Euro was a mistake and should be eliminated

I'm no expert either, and my portfolio doesn't really feature much in the way of German or French or Italian investments as I prefer established US companies with a somewhat aggressive 30% developing world stock in the mix, but I have always been against the common currency.  That said, I do like the idea of a stable, peaceful Europe.  The Europe of the 90s was fine.  No need for the Euro.  Still, the one semester that I worked in Amsterdam since the Euro became the coin of the realm, it was also satisfactory then, but from my conversations at that time with European workers, not only from Netherlands but from other (poorer) parts of the continent, I gather that they are not universally satisfied with the common arrangement.  I think it should be abandoned.  There would be some initial disequilibrium, but I suspect that it would be for the best in the long run.

[AggregateDemand]

Why the hell would it do that? I know you are the sort of American right-winger who finds the idea of Europe disturbing, which is hilarious as it shows how little you know of it, but what's the plan here? Why would the UK set itself up as a rival to Germany? What good would that do?

When discussing this people have to keep in mind: Given what we know, what would actually work as opposed to what seems like a good idea in an abstract sense.

Economic xenophobia is your most compelling argument on behalf of the EU? Quite revealing.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

Why the hell would it do that? I know you are the sort of American right-winger who finds the idea of Europe disturbing, which is hilarious as it shows how little you know of it, but what's the plan here? Why would the UK set itself up as a rival to Germany? What good would that do?

When discussing this people have to keep in mind: Given what we know, what would actually work as opposed to what seems like a good idea in an abstract sense.

Economic xenophobia is your most compelling argument on behalf of the EU? Quite revealing.

Where did I say that?

[Velasco]

I've been always fond with the idea of a United States of Europe, but I fear Al is right. In any case, is unlikely that the USE will be ever installed, because it's pretty obvious that there's no political will for further integration. European countries are even unable to develop their potential acting together in something like a common foreign policy. The usual result is that 'Europe' is politically irrelevant; nobody pays attention when certain Baroness Ashton makes statements on the Middle East or Ukraine. The Eurozone as it stands now is an absolute failure, but the worst of all is that there's no way back and no way forwards. Of course, dissolving the Euro and the Union is unworkable too; European nations alone will be increasingly irrelevant and anything but 'sovereign'. Aside trying to turn the EU Commission and the ECB into something remotely democratic, I see no clear solution. Maybe some countries might work together in order to achieve some reasonable goals, pressing to give a draft to the disastrous economic policies. I don't know.   

[ingemann]

I think some people are too impatient with the whole close cooperation. Such things, if they're going to be stable, takes time, and we can already see some interesting development, in that many of the EU "opportnents" on the far right or left, no more wish for EU to be abolished, but instead they push for the states to take some influence back from EU.

EU have in many ways become the new normal, in that's it no more a revolutionary project, but just part of people's daily life. As such EU now have a stable point from which it will likely continue to evolve.

Of course some kind of USE are unlikely and in fact unwelcomed, Americans may see their state as multicultural, but it's nothing compared to how a USE would be, the languages difference alone would make such a union unstable, to say nothing about the cultural differences.
But a looser union would be a welcomed and are in many ways already in existence.

As for EU being powerless in foreign policy, yes EU are not able to run around beating third world dictators with a big stick, but EU have shown that through using trade agrements and EU membership in a carrot and stick manners, they have push increased liberalisation and peaceful solutions (with the Ukranian exception) on their neighbours and trading partners. Yes people may not listen to Lady Ashton, but when the Council of EU say something in unity, other states listen.

[AggregateDemand]

I think some people are too impatient with the whole close cooperation. Such things, if they're going to be stable, takes time, and we can already see some interesting development, in that many of the EU "opportnents" on the far right or left, no more wish for EU to be abolished, but instead they push for the states to take some influence back from EU.

People eventually stop fighting to stay active and fit. It's the beginning of the end, not a sign of cultural evolution.

EU is not like the US. It's an insular trade union with an irrational fear of US manufacturing, and an irrational preference for intra-Europe trade.

[Tetro Kornbluth]

I think some people are too impatient with the whole close cooperation. Such things, if they're going to be stable, takes time, and we can already see some interesting development, in that many of the EU "opportnents" on the far right or left, no more wish for EU to be abolished, but instead they push for the states to take some influence back from EU.

People eventually stop fighting to stay active and fit. It's the beginning of the end, not a sign of cultural evolution.

EU is not like the US. It's an insular trade union with an irrational fear of US manufacturing, and an irrational preference for intra-Europe trade.

You are talking complete nonsense, you do know that, do you?

[Velasco]

I think some people are too impatient with the whole close cooperation. Such things, if they're going to be stable, takes time, and we can already see some interesting development, in that many of the EU "opportnents" on the far right or left, no more wish for EU to be abolished, but instead they push for the states to take some influence back from EU.

Of course some kind of USE are unlikely and in fact unwelcomed, Americans may see their state as multicultural, but it's nothing compared to how a USE would be, the languages difference alone would make such a union unstable, to say nothing about the cultural differences.
But a looser union would be a welcomed and are in many ways already in existence.

There is an inherent contradiction in the fact that the Eurozone is a fiscally decentralized confederation subordinated to a central bank which is not submitted to political control. Member states do not have control on the currency in which they issue their debts, but there not exists a fiscal joint support from Europe in compensation. We can see the consequences of the extreme fragility of the foundations in the periodical Eurozone 'death spirals'. The logical way out should be that the member countries were joining their fiscal resources together, and that implies common fiscal policies, integration and creating a political structure sustaining the whole building. Maybe the idea of the USE is unworkable and/or undesirable for many, but the present model of a loose Union with a common currency is an utter disaster. I think that Europe needs at least a clearer and stronger political direction, besides a complete institutional reform starting with the ECB, which must be accountable to the political power (Europe and member states). Inevitably, fixing the Union's structure would lead to increase the budget handled by the Commission, something that only would be acceptable if it was perceived as more democratic than now (and still it would raise a great opposition). Loosening the already fragile Union is not going to solve anything, because that implies weakening the defective structure of its foundations.

As for EU being powerless in foreign policy, yes EU are not able to run around beating third world dictators with a big stick, but EU have shown that through using trade agreements and EU membership in a carrot and stick manners, they have push increased liberalisation and peaceful solutions (with the Ukrainian exception) on their neighbours and trading partners. Yes people may not listen to Lady Ashton, but when the Council of EU say something in unity, other states listen.

I think Europe's lack of power in the international geopolitics is a tragedy when it comes to big messes like global warming, the endless Israel-Palestine conflict and some others. An effective common policy would be very beneficial to increase "liberalisation and peaceful solutions" elsewhere.  

[windjammer]

The European Union should be transformed into a united states of Europe with an elected parliament that has the power to make binding law for all component members and the ability to develop and make policy on a continent-wide level. The only solution to this crisis is political integration; economic integration without political integration will only serve to further the interests of finance capital at the expense of the European working class. Political integration itself probably wouldn't offer a clear way out, but it would break down some barriers between coordinated working class action in Europe and help speed up the destruction of respective nationalisms.

[ingemann]

There is an inherent contradiction in the fact that the Eurozone is a fiscally decentralized confederation subordinated to a central bank which is not submitted to political control. Member states do not have control on the currency in which they issue their debts, but there not exists a fiscal joint support from Europe in compensation. We can see the consequences of the extreme fragility of the foundations in the periodical Eurozone 'death spirals'. The logical way out should be that the member countries were joining their fiscal resources together, and that implies common fiscal policies, integration and creating a political structure sustaining the whole building. Maybe the idea of the USE is unworkable and/or undesirable for many, but the present model of a loose Union with a common currency is an utter disaster. I think that Europe needs at least a clearer and stronger political direction, besides a complete institutional reform starting with the ECB, which must be accountable to the political power (Europe and member states). Inevitably, fixing the Union's structure would lead to increase the budget handled by the Commission, something that only would be acceptable if it was perceived as more democratic than now (and still it would raise a great opposition). Loosening the already fragile Union is not going to solve anything, because that implies weakening the defective structure of its foundations.

The world doesn't work that way, you don't reform institution by remaking them, you reform them by making patches until at some point you have something which work.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If you think an USE could solve the Israel-Palestine conflict, well you're going to end up live your entire life disappointed, if you set up expectations like that.

As for global warming an USE would likely do less about global warming than EU does.

[Velasco]

If you think an USE could solve the Israel-Palestine conflict, well you're going to end up live your entire life disappointed, if you set up expectations like that.

As for global warming an USE would likely do less about global warming than EU does.

I saiud "an effective common foreign policy", which doesn't imply necessarily the USE. While having a clear and strong voice representing Europe is not going to solve all the problems in the world, it should be obvious that a joint effort in diplomatic action would be more useful than disparate efforts from single countries (or the hapless Baroness Ashton) in order to push forward 'peaceful solutions', being respected, taken into account, etc, etc.

The world doesn't work that way, you don't reform institution by remaking them, you reform them by making patches until at some point you have something which work.

I don't understand your point here, honestly. I think the big question is that the Eurozone and by extension the EU have a huge structural problem, which European leaders are not willing to address. Remake or reform, the question is they must do something. I'm very pessimistic on this ground; as long as Merkel continues being chancellor, the approach to a solution will be marked by her particular sense of morality. In any case, she's not the only to blame: there are not leaders in Europe.

[AggregateDemand]

You are talking complete nonsense, you do know that, do you?

I avoid the tragedy of the plebs altogether by adhering to modern economic theory about decentralized decision-making. I'm not opposed to public transportation; however, I will mock people for making normative statements about what society should/shouldn't have. Obviously, we should give people the money, and let them decide what to do with it.

The possible exception is insurance funding models, which may require full participation to be cost-effective. Even then, a mandate is less problematic than one-size-fits-all government services.

[swl]

I don't understand your point here, honestly. I think the big question is that the Eurozone and by extension the EU have a huge structural problem, which European leaders are not willing to address. Remake or reform, the question is they must do something. I'm very pessimistic on this ground; as long as Merkel continues being chancellor, the approach to a solution will be marked by her particular sense of morality. In any case, she's not the only to blame: there are not leaders in Europe.

I have more or less the same interpretation, but I am quite optimistic. It looks a lot like Merkel will leave at mid-term and Europe will take a new direction at that time. The economy will remain sluggish but we have been in this situation for many years now, and to the surprise of many we're still there (even Greece ). This is not very exciting but the situation will remain the same for two or three years, and we'll go through it.
There will be new leaders, Renzi is an option but still has to prove himself, the socialist leader in Spain or Alexis Tsipras have a lot of potential if they are elected (I am quite confident that Pedro Sanchez will be the next Spanish prime minister, I am unsure about Tsipras).

Merkel is a great leader and I think she did what had to be done. But she knows that at some point new policies will be required and she's ready to step down (which is really a mark of greatness in my opinion). She's the last obstacle to many changes in the eurozone, so we just have to wait for her to go.

[Velasco]

Why do you have so great expectations on Pedro Sánchez? He's just been elected as party leader and it seems that socialists are not gaining traction at all.

[TDAS04]

The euro was a mistake. 

[swl]

Why do you have so great expectations on Pedro Sánchez? He's just been elected as party leader and it seems that socialists are not gaining traction at all.

He's young, charismatic, and not seen as a professional politician. He promises a lot of big things, including difficult ones (federalization of Spain for example). I think he's going to become very popular soon because he represents the change that so many want to see. These days I think that's enough to win in countries like Italy, Spain or Greece.

Like Renzi, if elected he will have to prove himself because many will see as a good communicator only.

[Wake Me Up When The Hard Border Ends]

Should be dissolved, along with the EU itself.

[Niemeyerite]

Why do you have so great expectations on Pedro Sánchez? He's just been elected as party leader and it seems that socialists are not gaining traction at all.

He's young, charismatic, and not seen as a professional politician. He promises a lot of big things, including difficult ones (federalization of Spain for example). I think he's going to become very popular soon because he represents the change that so many want to see. These days I think that's enough to win in countries like Italy, Spain or Greece.

Like Renzi, if elected he will have to prove himself because many will see as a good communicator only.

I don't think he's a good communicator, and it's very unlikely he'll bee our next President. And I say this as a member of the PSOE (who supported Edu Madina).

[Tetro Kornbluth]

You are talking complete nonsense, you do know that, do you?

I avoid the tragedy of the plebs altogether by adhering to modern economic theory about decentralized decision-making. I'm not opposed to public transportation; however, I will mock people for making normative statements about what society should/shouldn't have. Obviously, we should give people the money, and let them decide what to do with it.

The possible exception is insurance funding models, which may require full participation to be cost-effective. Even then, a mandate is less problematic than one-size-fits-all government services.

Oh so you are a troll, why didn't you say?

[BaconBacon96]

The Eurozone is a proven failure, it should be abolished.

[Beezer]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water...

http://fortune.com/2014/12/09/crisis-returns-to-greece-as-pm-gambles-on-bailout-endgame/