Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Da Boss wrote:
Well, if it weren't for the fact that even asking for reparations at this stage makes them look like petulant children, yeah

From where you're sitting it does. But the Greek government is playing to the home crowd here - first the protests against the cuts in public spending etc. that other EU countries wanted in return for bailing them out, now bringing up reparations so they can show that there has been a history of being mistreated. Start to lay the ground work to play the victim and sell leaving the Eurozone to their citizens as the right thing to do.

Old news is realy old?

The Euro was a bad idea.

I also want my guilders back, because that currency had an awesome name.

I have to say, I found this pretty amusing.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Well Reuters is pretty reliable.

At some point the Germans are going to be pushed too far, and they will take their ball (in other words, all the money) and go home.

Then the Greeks will have to spend the next 25 years eating tree bark.

Not going to happen. In several ways, the Eurozone falling to pieces has been one of the best things to happen in Germany this side of the fifties. There's actually been several political and economic studies now on how its enabled Germany to become the main powerhouse of Europe.

Germany was already the main powerhouse of Europe.

It has been one of the top three economies in the world for several decades, and has more foreign currency reserves than anyone. They would probably be even farther ahead if it wasn't for the problems of absorbing the eastern zone.

No gyro bombs then? No hoplite phalanxes marching through Saxony? No 300 meets Eurotrashtechnocrap music?

Frazzled sad now.

Hey I like that Eurotrashtechnocrap!
Makes the world go round...

 purplefood wrote:
Hey I like that Eurotrashtechnocrap!
Makes the world go round...

Like a record baby round round round round...

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
Hey I like that Eurotrashtechnocrap!
Makes the world go round...

Like a record baby round round round round...

You have that song in my head now. Fortunately I can recite Hank Didn't Do It This Away from memory so I have an antidote.

This time baby I'll be...bulllllllllllletttt proooooof

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
Hey I like that Eurotrashtechnocrap!
Makes the world go round...

Like a record baby round round round round...

You have that song in my head now. Fortunately I can recite Hank Didn't Do It This Away from memory so I have an antidote.

This time baby I'll be...bulllllllllllletttt proooooof

This is better anyway

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Germany was already the main powerhouse of Europe.

It has been one of the top three economies in the world for several decades, and has more foreign currency reserves than anyone. They would probably be even farther ahead if it wasn't for the problems of absorbing the eastern zone.

I'm referring to powerhouse in both the sense of national power, and economic power. And Germany has fluctuated in both since the 1940's. I'll extrapolate what I mean though. You may know most of it, but I find it helps to lay things out clearly.

One of the reasons the EU was set up, was to yoke the German state into being so economically tied to its neighbours, there would never be a repeat of the world wars. It was also meant to serve as a political tool in checking any future growth of nationalism in general, and in Germany specifically. Half a century ago, Germany was also at first more or less dictated to at first as to what its economy was geared towards by the Allies. That lessened as time went on, and Germany did begin to come into its own as an economic powerhouse, but not at the expense of the rest of Europe, and it had very little political power over the rest of Europe (The EU being primarily directed by France at this stage).

With the absorption of East Germany, Germany was collectively focused inwards on rebuilding for roughly the decade or so after the Wall came down. Re-unification brought a lot of internal issues that needed resolving, and a tremendous economic drain on the country. As they played a growing part in the EU, it became more of a joint project between the two.


With the collapse of the Euro-zone and the gradual de-industrialisation of Europe over the last forty or so years though, Germany has been left in the position where they basically bankroll Europe. This is in their interests for a number of reasons. Firstly, it means that they can tie economic strings to their aid and bailouts, leaving many other countries in a position of economic dependency upon them. Secondly, it means that they now, as opposed to the French, hold the whip hand with regards to the EU. That puts them in a position of tremendous economic and political influence. Thirdly, it guarantees that other countries are unable to devalue their own currency or undertake many other financial measures (meaning they are unable to compete with German exports internationally, or reform their own industrial and manufacturing bases). Finally, their continued participation in the common market ensures that German manufactured exports are generally the cheapest locally, guaranteeing that Germany's own economy will continue to boom.

There are certain financial risks involved to Germany should the whole thing collapse and various countries renege on their debts, but beyond that? It's more or less win/win for Germany. They are now in a position of unparalleled economic and political prestige and power in Europe. Curiously enough, one of the reasons we entered WW1 was to stop that from happening.

I've only provided a very rough sketch of the four points above, if you'd like me to go into more depth on any of them, please just specify which one.

 uk_crow wrote:
The Euro was doomed from the start, it makes no sense to have a single currency for a multitude of nations that have totally different countries. How can the northern industrialised nations like France, Germany etc use the same monetary policy as nations like Greece and Spain? Countries like Greece and Spain should never have been allowed to join in the first place. Their careless spending in the 'booming years' were their own downfall. Also i can't see the Germans taking the Greeks very seriously with their war reparations threats as they along with France and the UK provide are the largest net contributors to the EU budget and so are the ones calling the shots. The Germans are the ones being made out to be be the bad ones in this, which is the most disappointing fact.

The biggest issue with the Euro is that you are having one currency, with one value, cover multiple economic systems that have different levels of power.

The poorer systems will drag the more stable systems down and destabilize them. The stronger economies can't support the weaker ones.


Unless all the countries were also politically united the entire idea was doomed to fail.

You could combine some countries together, but not others. Germany, France, Belgium, Sweden, and Denmark could probably make a single currency work. but add other countries and its going to end up with nothing but the rich countries supporting the poorer ones with no growth.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 SilverMK2 wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
Hey I like that Eurotrashtechnocrap!
Makes the world go round...

Like a record baby round round round round...

You have that song in my head now. Fortunately I can recite Hank Didn't Do It This Away from memory so I have an antidote.

This time baby I'll be...bulllllllllllletttt proooooof

This is better anyway

You're a fool.
It is a pale imitation of the original...
Especially the vocals...

 purplefood wrote:

You're a fool.
It is a pale imitation of the original...
Especially the vocals...

I listened to both back to back last night and I preferred that version. But what's meat to one is poison to another.

 Soladrin wrote:
Old news is realy old?

The Euro was a bad idea.

I also want my guilders back, because that currency had an awesome name.

Much as I loved the gulden and how hard a currency it was (mostly due to being tied to the german mark), I don't really want it back. We should have done what the Danes and British did and never gotten the euro, but we got screwed over upon its introduction, and I don't really want to go through that process again.

On topic: Yes, the EU should not have allowed the mass introduction of weak economies. Just about everyone I know said that was a bad idea when the influx of southern and eastern countries began. (Having said that, it does seem as though a couple of those countries are, in fact, getting it together; I haven't heard much badmouthing about the Polish economy, for instance.)
We would have been better off as a northwestern European union that then slowrolled the introduction of weaker economies to pull them up one at a time to arrive later at a much stronger European Union, or at the very least with a minimum standard of economic strength needed to be allowed entry. I believe that was actually suggested at the time.

Still, I'm not terribly worried. Even though the Netherlands have expanded their area of interest to the rest of Europe and are feeling the economic pressure, our economy is still pretty well intertwined with Germany's. As long as Germany thrives, we'll be OK I think.

...

The only thing that stings a bit is that per head, we contribute more to the EU than any other country, and we don't even get a shout-out .

Is the EU future tied to Germany economy and money?

Not solely, I think. Germany is the biggest boy in the playground, but it's not the only big boy. France and the UK are also strong, stable economies.
France less so than the UK, methinks, because a lot of the bad economies' debts are to France.

This is where Germany takes over Europe again, this time via financial warfare. people are begging them to do it.

Bran Dawri wrote:
or at the very least with a minimum standard of economic strength needed to be allowed entry. I believe that was actually suggested at the time.

They did have them in place. The problem was that politicians were aloud to much power. They let countrys fudge things, let them move money or borrow in less than transparent ways so they technically met the requirements, or in many cases let them in on the basis of "almost"or "well, they have promised very very nicely that they would be able to meet those targets in 1 year, maybe 2. 5 tops. Just as long as they can get in now as they have spent so much money already on it". Of course as soon as they get in all the good intentions disappear.

Yeah, kind-of my point. A standard that no one is held to might as well not exist.

So, slight tactical repositioning: countries should have been held to the standards in place with no fudging allowed.

 Ketara wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
Germany was already the main powerhouse of Europe.

It has been one of the top three economies in the world for several decades, and has more foreign currency reserves than anyone. They would probably be even farther ahead if it wasn't for the problems of absorbing the eastern zone.

I'm referring to powerhouse in both the sense of national power, and economic power. And Germany has fluctuated in both since the 1940's. I'll extrapolate what I mean though. You may know most of it, but I find it helps to lay things out clearly.

One of the reasons the EU was set up, was to yoke the German state into being so economically tied to its neighbours, there would never be a repeat of the world wars. It was also meant to serve as a political tool in checking any future growth of nationalism in general, and in Germany specifically. Half a century ago, Germany was also at first more or less dictated to at first as to what its economy was geared towards by the Allies. That lessened as time went on, and Germany did begin to come into its own as an economic powerhouse, but not at the expense of the rest of Europe, and it had very little political power over the rest of Europe (The EU being primarily directed by France at this stage).

With the absorption of East Germany, Germany was collectively focused inwards on rebuilding for roughly the decade or so after the Wall came down. Re-unification brought a lot of internal issues that needed resolving, and a tremendous economic drain on the country. As they played a growing part in the EU, it became more of a joint project between the two.


With the collapse of the Euro-zone and the gradual de-industrialisation of Europe over the last forty or so years though, Germany has been left in the position where they basically bankroll Europe. This is in their interests for a number of reasons. Firstly, it means that they can tie economic strings to their aid and bailouts, leaving many other countries in a position of economic dependency upon them. Secondly, it means that they now, as opposed to the French, hold the whip hand with regards to the EU. That puts them in a position of tremendous economic and political influence. Thirdly, it guarantees that other countries are unable to devalue their own currency or undertake many other financial measures (meaning they are unable to compete with German exports internationally, or reform their own industrial and manufacturing bases). Finally, their continued participation in the common market ensures that German manufactured exports are generally the cheapest locally, guaranteeing that Germany's own economy will continue to boom.

There are certain financial risks involved to Germany should the whole thing collapse and various countries renege on their debts, but beyond that? It's more or less win/win for Germany. They are now in a position of unparalleled economic and political prestige and power in Europe. Curiously enough, one of the reasons we entered WW1 was to stop that from happening.

I've only provided a very rough sketch of the four points above, if you'd like me to go into more depth on any of them, please just specify which one.

Overall I agree. I would mention that Germany by the late 19th century was already strong in the kind of manufacturing industries it still leads, though the mix has gone lighter (less shipping, more cars, for instance.) If the Allies directed them towards that area post-WW2 it was building on a history of strength, not refocussing a whole economy.

The main thing is that those kind of industries are focussed on exporting, which is where the artifically low (for the Germans) Euro was an extra help to them internationally.

The downside of the current situation for Germany is that the population as a whole does not necessarily understand their economic dominance and resents being asked for more and more bailouts for countries like Greece and Cyprus.

 Shadowseer_Kim wrote:
This is where Germany takes over Europe again, this time via financial warfare. people are begging them to do it.

Yet they refuse! I don't get Germany anymore.

yeah, I never got why europe bought into the euro in the first place...

seemed like some trumped up idea to make a european "SUPER" power to rival russia/us

I never thought it was a good idea economically, maybe socially it was a nice thought, but in reality, the benifits of the euro just are not there, unless of course you're on the bottom of the EU being supported by those on the top of course

easysauce wrote:
yeah, I never got why europe bought into the euro in the first place...

seemed like some trumped up idea to make a european "SUPER" power to rival russia/us

I never thought it was a good idea economically, maybe socially it was a nice thought, but in reality, the benifits of the euro just are not there, unless of course you're on the bottom of the EU being supported by those on the top of course

If the European government were more closely aligned (how this would happen, I have no idea)... then going to a Single currency is a good idea. It probably would've surpassed the US as the numero uno economy.

However, I think it's plain to see that decoupling the currency policy from a combined government policy is a bad idea.

So.... is the Euro going to die?

1 year? 5? 10?

 kronk wrote:
So.... is the Euro going to die?

1 year? 5? 10?

I'd say at least 5 years, but the value will decrease pretty steeply before then and it will be pretty much worthless within 3. Unless they kick all the poor countries out and realize the Euro was a rich country's experiment.

 kronk wrote:
So.... is the Euro going to die?

1 year? 5? 10?

I don't know, but news like that makes it look like its in critical condition and that surgery might be required.

I say a better veiw will happen when Greece removes itself from EU....and Italy I think is next on the pole? Follow by Spain and Portugal....is that the current line up? I look at Belguim, Luxonburg, Neitherlands, think by sheer location of their countries saving them.

IMO though I think the US actually help out Germany on militry unit relocation. Most combat units went to Grafenwher and logistical/transportation units consolidated around Mannehim, Heidleberg, along with Rammstein. Word is we're suppose to have a JRTC like training ground in Poland which be kool. Polish Battle Groups in Afghanistan. Their NCO's are learning how to be NCO's..along with the Romanians..

But will the poor economies removing themselves from the EU be enough to save it? Or will they only remove themselves after they've sucked the other countries dry?

What is the process for a country leaving the EU? Or is there even a provision for it?