'Is it time to ditch the pound?' poll results/discussion

MikeH99

willysoft wrote: »

Couldn't agree more, Ruth63. It gets very tiring listening to deluded tabloid readers expressing their bile and xenophobia against our neighbours in Europe while conveniently forgetting that we are Europeans too, bound up inextricably with Europe's history and culture.

We've been far too close to the greed and madness of the US in recent years: any country whoe people believe that their liberty depends on Jesus and firearms is obviously dangerously unbalanced.

What a pity it is to see the apparent euro fans on this thread resorting to mud-slinging rather than answering some of the very good, pragmatic economic and democratic points being made about the value of having our own currency and economic policy.

While the idea of a 'strong Europe to balance against America' might be superficially appealing, it is a fantasy - devoid of a recognition of Europe's diversity that all true enthusiasts for Europe (rather than merely outdated superstate ideas) would appreciate.

MarkLS12

This poll is bogus as it biased by using the word "ditch" in the question.

I needs to be something neutral, such as "Should the UK replace the Pound with the Euro"

MarkLS12

neblett wrote: »

I lived in Germany as a regular citizen just after the Euro was introduced. My husband, who is an American citizen, but lived and worked (as a citizen) in Germany for over 25 years, pre and post Euro. He saw his wages go from 2,500DM to 1,100€ per month literally overnight when the Euro was introduced, but ALL prices went from i.e. 10DM to 10€ (try working THAT one out).
.

That's an often repeated urban myth.
German inflation was under 2% each year for the period from 1999 to 2006.

Sage99

teddyco wrote: »

For those posters who don't think there are any good reasons why Britain should stay out of the Euro, I will list a few for your reading pleasure: (etc etc etc see below)

Finally, Winston Churchill once said "The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter."

I think that quote could be applied to this debate too.

"British families have more of their mortgages in floating interest rates than people on the continent,"

....a highly undesirable practise as it makes it very difficult for people to plan ahead. It also makes it easy for swindling lenders to tempt people in with a low rate and then constantly increase it until they are at their financial limits, and I do not see how this is an argument for the retention of the pound. Explain please.

“We have a much bigger financial services sector,”

....than the whole of the Euro zone? I find this difficult to believe, and again I do not see how this is an argument for the retention of the pound. Explain please.

“More of our trade and investments are denominated in U.S. dollars.”

Yet again I just do not see why this is an argument for the retention of the pound. Justify please.

“All of these factors mean that the right level of interest rates set for people in Greece, Germany or Italy is not necessarily the right one for us.”

Surely if it is the right level for mainland Europe, then it is the right level for the UK also. Do not forget that our economy is closely tied to that of mainland Europe. Japan, which imports nothing from us and sells us a great deal is a considerable loss to the UK economy and our economic relationship with the US is very much one way.

"Giving up our currency would mean we would lose a vital tool for trying to run the British economy in the interests of the people of Britain - and that means an unacceptable loss of the independence of this country."

But we would be in a position of influencing the Euro, which we do not at the moment, and can act in the interests of the British people by using a far more powerful tool, especially over the next century as Europe unites into one of the most powerful areas of the world. I am also rather doubtful about the rulers of Britain having any concerns with regards to the people who populate the UK, given what happened in the 1920s and 1930s, and as for the 1910s and 1940s!

“The lack of any coordination between European monetary policy, emerging from a committee of central banks, and European fiscal policy, emerging from a committee of finance ministers, will further lessen the possibility for alleviating local economic difficulties.”

Which is better... a dictator or a committee. I believe that the general consensus of opinion is that dictators have the advantage in making speedy decision, but committees are far better at making correct ones. Surely the government of a social culture requires accuracy rather than speed? As for the ‘local economies’, the increasing unification of smaller units into larger ones means that the locality will become that of the Euro zone in the near future. Just look at how globilized and interdependant the banks are becoming... and how vulnerable a relatively small independent bank is.

“ This can be shown with the South-North migrations of millions of American and Italian citizens in the early years of their currency unions.”

Is this a bad thing? The easier movement of labour to where it is needed?

“There are economic costs and risks arising from losing the option to devalue the domestic currency in order to restore international competitiveness. This might lead to growing social dislocation and rising economic inequality within the European Union.”

Devaluing the currency is a device that I have always failed to understand. Any gains from increased export competitiveness are quickly lost as the increasing cost of imports causes inflation and the consequential rise in export prices. This then leave only the lasting effect of making the whole population poorer. I remember this happening during Harold Wilson’s era. As far as I can understand, it would be better if the currency was stable and constant.

“There are obvious structural differences within the countries of Europe so, even if EMU begins in a state of convergence, economic shocks, such as crisis of supply of primary products, will lead to imbalances and there won't be a mechanism to restore the balance.”

I assume the differences you refer to are political structures of rule. I would have thought that a uniform currency would actually help to cope with economic shocks as the problem would be much more clearly defined. I do not see how having a separate currency system will help.

“Adjusting to a new European currency will involve substantial costs for businesses and banks. Adjustment to economic divergence by migration of labour or capital will be costly; there is no clear EC commitment to relieving these costs.”

I don’t think the word ‘substantial’, on a national level, is justified here. While I do not have a high opinion of the education system, I really do think you will be pleasantly surprised by the ease with which the people of the businesses and banks adapt, and the equipment costs should be low owing to the volume of equipment involved... and given the level of unemployment, a migration of labour may be very beneficial to the UK economy. Other states, even poor eastern one, have managed and so can the UK.

“Finally, Winston Churchill once said ‘The best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.’ I think that quote could be applied to this debate too.”

Tch! cynic! But I have to agree with you.

Thank you for your post which I found most pleasurable and interesting in that you have put forward an overall argument in favour of the retention of the pound, and I look forward to any explanations of the points on which I am unclear that you might care to make... and will no doubt be both illuminating and irrefutable.

poppy10_2

^^TLDR^^

Anyway, looks like it doesn't matter what we say, they don't want us anyway:

European Central Bank deems Britain unworthy of euro following the dramatic slide in sterling and the explosion in the UK budget deficit.

WenDee

I just saw an item of jewellery priced at £5 and on the same ticket - Euro7.50. Considering the current exchange rate that makes the item in question 50% more expensive in the Euro market than in sterling. Remembering all the price hikes perpetrated on the numerically confused public in the early 70's due to decimalisation - do we really want to go down this road? Not me - I vote NO!

PadiP

I'm not expert on fiscal matters, but then it's obvius that most posters on this forum aren't either. Most comment seems to be of the order that 'Johnny Foreigner' mustn't be allowed to take control over here in Britain/England. It's a sad comment about the average 'Brit': lacking in education, xenophobic, ignorant and obliquely racist. GeoffW's notion that we could all be living in an English speaking United States of Europe fills me with dread: Not all English speakers are ignorant, and not everyone speaks English, but a fair proportion of those who only speak English have some very dodgy political views that would have done one particular 'European' proud, only he sought to unify Europe with tanks! (And spoke German). Though it seems absurd to those who only speak English, it's actually quite normal to speak other languages, and most English people are actually quite unusual, (abnormal?) in only speaking one language. Most people in the world speak at least teo languages, and in some parts of Africa, it's quite usual to speak four or five. Most Europeans speak at least a little English, so there's actually usually no need to shout if you're holidaying on the Costa - or Prague! It might come as a bit of a shock, but not alll indigenous people in the Islands of Britain speak English as a first language, some of us speak Welsh, Irish, Gaelic or Scottish. And English itself is more like a group of languages, if one considers the various national variations, (US or Australian English, for example) and then there are various dialects of English, that are sometimes quite different from Standard English. Europe is about variety, and long may this remain. The EU is a flawed organisation,but the idea of a common Europe based on a collective set of ideals is something we should all be proud of: anything that prevents us from re-visiting the horrors of 1939-45 should be lauded. As for the various arguments against the Euro, most, other than those transparently xenophobic seemto be based on the notion of losing control of sovereignty or the economy, neither argument stands up to close scrutiny. Sovereignty only really matters if you are actually in control,and most people in the British Isles would actually be freer, and have more rights if the UK was more integrated into Europe. But most Brits seemtobe content with being the 21st Century equivalent of the medieval serf, being 'subjects'of the Crown, and not Citizens, (though T Blair did tinker about with semantics, and now we are 'citizens', but not in the European sense). There are upsides and downsides to economic union. There is inevitably a loss of local control, but this is just as true with the UK's common currency:neither Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland has control of the Pound, which is contrlled and valued according to the economy of London and the South East of England. Yet the economies of all the constituent nations and regions of the UK are quite different, and could, in certain circumstances, benefit from having their own currencies, but at least the Pound ensures transparency - we understand it, so we know that a pint of beer costs more in London than it does in say, Inverness or Wigan. The Republic of Ireland was economically backward, and largely kept that way as its currency was linked to the Pound Sterling until 1979 - to all intents and purposes the UK controlled the economy of a legally independent 'sovereign' nation. It is perhaps possible to argue that had Ireland's economy remained chained to that of the UK the economic miracle that occurred in the 80s and 90s would not have happened. The Republic's decision to adopt the Euro was based on rational consideration that its future lay more with Europe than with the UK. For me, the case for a common currency is a mot point, and I'm not too bothered whether it's the Pound or the Euro, but if I was a betting person, I'd go for the Euro. In the ten short years since it came into being it's done rather well. Initially it did become a bit of a joke, but things have settled down, and it has been a challenge for the US Dollar for some years, (some oil produciing nations actually insist on being paid in Euros now), and now it's challenging the Pound Sterling. Perhaps it's time for subjects of the English Crown to wake up and see the future, which I don't think lies with the Pound, despite it having been around for 700 years. The sooner that the final vestiges of the English/British Empire are gone the better, and small minded Little Englanders and other Brits would be well advised to get some education and a new perspective.

Saucepot

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeffrandall/4177828/Staying-out-of-the-euro-has-spared-us-a-Spanish-style-catastrophe.html

Sage99

"Half-built flats and soaring unemployment show that the boom has turned to gloom on the Costa del Sol. And it's a fate that could easily have befallen Britain."

Could ? This should read as follows...

Half-built flats and soaring unemployment show that the boom has turned to gloom on the Costa del Sol. And it's a fate that has befallen Britain.

Sage99

Saucepot,

"Half-built flats and soaring unemployment show that the boom has turned to gloom on the Costa del Sol. And it's a fate that could easily have befallen Britain."

Could ? This should read as follows...

Half-built flats and soaring unemployment show that the boom has turned to gloom on the Costa del Sol. And it's a fate that has befallen Britain.