On democracy

[Naso]

 

Originally posted by Udie:
Do you guys have to spend so much time on European polotics?  I mean isn't the O'club for talkin guns and the US presidential race?

 Show some respect people!


                             

Udie

LOL Udie, good one   !!!

[arhurb]

 

Originally posted by RAM:
Coño, Pepino, no sabia que hablaras chino  

al menos, suena chino a mis oidos    

hehehhe <S>

LOL!!  

Pura envidia de los ingenieros aeronáuticos de la BBS...  

Por otro lado, toda argumentación en economía tiene su contraria....casi siempre tan válida como la original. Ahhh! las ciencias sociales....


-------------------------------------------
Translation:
Pure envy about aero engineers around this BBS.  

On the other hand, any economic theory has its opposite...most often as right as the original one. Ahhhh! Social sciences...
------------------------------------------

Saludos,

Pepino.

[Animal]

yo no entiendo tres carajos la situacion con lo del Euro. Creo que tengo que dejar la novia y ponerme a leer  

por un momento llegue a pensar que era algo bueno, pero aparentemente mucha gente no esta de acuerdo.

me podrian informar de los pros y contras?
estoy interesado.

[arhurb]

Before you can talk about Pros & Cons, you have to talk about requisites:

• Unified monetary policy: This means single central authority to design and execute monetary policy. There is a some level of debate wether this authority (i.e. European Central Bank, or ECB) should focus on inflation control (there is also debate on what magnitude should be the objective when talking about inflation control: M3 control, liquid assets control, Monetary supply control...), currency stability or growth. IMHO, inflation should be its main concern, since low inflation is a precondition of currency stability and growth.
• Freedom of Capital Flows: This means no restriction whatsoever (of course given they are legal ones) for money transfers.
• Unified Fiscal Policy: Tightly linked to Monetary Policy. It is essential to avoid competitive advantages among countries (i.e. unfair competition).
• Removal of commercial barriers: Freedom of commerce. This means no customs among countries, no special taxation on trade in the unified area.

Pros:

• No currency risk among countries in the unified area (better for commerce and financial safety for both providers and consumers)
• Currency no longer a country's commercial weapon (no competitive devaluations)
• Price transparency improves (better for competition).
• Greater market scoop (Means more consumers, more demand, increased competition)
• Stronger position against third parties (Better trade agreements, in general)

Cons

• Loss of sovereignty (dunno if that's the correct word). Each country renounces to control tools (currency quotation, interest rates, fiscal policy) in their individual commercial relations with the world in favour of some ethereal supranational organization (currently). Also to counter economical cycles, where they rely on the ECB for monetary policy matters and on the central fiscal policy maker (yet to be created in Europe, shoud it ever might be).
• Loss of regional focus. As the size increases, local problems are less and less evident, and, thus, solutions are kind of "coffe for all".
• In Europe, we have lots of very different cultures. Perhaps the most evident one is southern vs. northern countries. These disparities are difficult to tame, but, on the other hand, they give you some open mind attitude that I, personally, find very positive. Yet, as to economical integration, it's a hurdle.

From my point of view, the pros are far more important than the cons but, again, these are not mathematical concepts but social ones and, at the very end, all depends on people's attitude, since the baseline decissions are taken on a poll basis. And people tend to be very emotional when you talk about your country (go ask RAM, for a good example).

Cheers,

Pepino.

[This message has been edited by arhurb (edited 10-06-2000).]

[Animal]

Thanks Pepino.

I think I'm not gonna try to make a strong opinion about the matter. It is a very interesting change that can and WILL affect Europe drastically, and obviously, the rest of the world.
But I dislike people who make really strong opinions about matters that do NOT concern their country and doesnt affect them directly, and dare to argue with the people who will be affected directly.

However, I'm gonna say a few things about this, correct me if I am wrong of course:
The change sounds beautiful and very romantic, but if it bombs, it can be a potential catastrophe for many European countries. I believe a united Europe is possible without countries losing their individuality (this will NOT happen) dont try to compare to the US wich was formed by states that most were not even 100 years old, and had no history going back millenia. However, a strong sense of patriotism will make people reject the Euro (isnt this whats happening) because of the feeling that they are taking something away from them.

Overall, its a change that can be a GOOD THING of executed correctly by the book (something that rarely happens) and it can also be a disaster.

This is what I understand so far (under the influence of alcohol, mind you).
I will not make strong opinions on the matter.

animal

[AKDejaVu]

 

#3 is one of the reasons why I dislike religions.

Don't underestimate the government's role in this.  And don't underestimate the role of the "educated" in this too.  Does the name Pol Pot ring a bell?

 

Non voters would have any role, except as voters. As it is now.

Is a voter that chooses not to vote the same as a person that is not allowed to vote?  Are both simply "non-voters"?

When you remove the right of an individual to vote, you remove his right to be a citizen.  Welcome to the class structure.  Welcome to a revolution.

AKDejaVu