M-13 - The EURO

[Student of Socrates]

I have strong opinions on this subject :grumble: :censored: and I would like to hear the views of our other members.

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.

and for our European members:

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?


Answers on a postcard please :D

[leenielou]

No, no, no no and no. Britain has been a country for millenia, separate to Europe. We are different in most ways.

1) To use the Euro would separate us from our heritage. Kings and Queens have fought to keep our island separate and sacred from foreign rule. Joining Europe would be just the same as joining an Empire.

2) Is nobody else deeply suspicious about this whole Euro thing? To me it just seems to be a good way for the bigwigs in Brussels to control an empire. Financial identicality cant really be all that good. It's risky.

3) Who wants that kiddy paper money?

4) I dont give a **** about UK/US affairs - no offence to you americans out there, but i dont trust our prime minister and your president together. However, the Euro would effectively ally us with Europe, and stronger binds to Brussels that are being indicated (read the Daily Mail) would mean that Britain would be tied to Europe in every way.
The EU didn't want to go to war against Iraq - we did and freed a nation. If we are bound to European decisions in the future, the way to this paved by joining the Euro, we could find ourselves sided against a good cause and a moral obligation.

The Euro - no no no no no no!!!!!

[triki1988]

I think England's desition about joining all of Europe with the Euro would be very...how shall I put this? bad. England hs a very strong economy- enough to shatter my friend's dreams of going to college over there (since each pound is about 2 dollars).

As for mainland Euro adopting this currency, I think it was both a fantastic idea and a bad idea as well. It was good because now Europe has a good, strong economy and if you're going to travel to more than 2 different countries, then you only have to pay a certain amount to get currency used in more than 10 countries.
Bad because well...it was very controversial. I found it pointless at first...but now I jus shrug at it.

[invisablethestral]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?
Europe is ages old and its indivualistic charcter of each nation will not be altered by the change of currency. Its maybe the first step to a more economically united Europe, which i am not in favour of. Its neither the beginning, as europe is already established, nor the end, as we are still individual.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
No. I do not support the Euro as it takes away tradition for me. I personally like individualism and currency is one of those. Secondly, UK has an excellent economy and already trades with Euro's as standard in banks on the international scale. Thirdly, i think the British public would be given a very bad deal on the exchange across, leading to over-inflation on already over priced goods in comparison to mainland europe. We are dubbed "treasure island" for good reason. Lastly, the cost to convert to Euro is massive.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.
The US would still correspond through Britian as it is pollitically tied to the country rather than via its currency. In the finance world, American Dollars and Euros are what are used in transactions. Joining the Euro would not alter the individualistic relationships between the countries which are established through history. Notably the major trading capitals of the world are New York, London, Paris and Tokyo. This would not be altered with a change of the UK to Euro currency.

[daniel4hp]

Regarding the Euro in general...

I am against the Euro. It may just be currency, but its the first step, I feel, in a much more united Europe. To this I am very strongly opposed. The Euro may seem like a good thing at first, but it is, I am afraid, only the begining to a united Europe.

Each of the countries in Europe has its own identity and has been independent for hundreds of years. These countries share different cultures, languages, and histories, and I am opposed to any form of union between them. I'm all for the European countries getting along, but when it comes to economic, yet alone political, unity, I am strongly opposed.

Regarding the UK and the Euro...

I am even more strongly opposed to this. Apart from the reasons meantioned above, Great Britain has been independant from Europe for hundreds and hundreds of years. Situated on an island off the coast of Europe, it has grown up, in many ways, independant of the continent, and while I am all for cooporation, I am against further unions between the UK and continental Europe.

In additions, I have strong British sentiments that make the issue involving Britain closer to my heart than is the case in the other European countries. I dislike the EU, and am opposed to Britain going further to join with this. Cooperation is one thing; union is another.

I am very pleased that when the Euro was first introduced, Britain did not become involved. I hope that that remains, and that Tony Blair will not manage to get the Euro introduced in Britain. The Pound is a part of the British culture and history, and I am unwilling to see it given up. If the Pound goes, only more things will follow.

[Kizz]

Regarding the Euro in general...

I am against the Euro. It may just be currency, but its the first step, I feel, in a much more united Europe. To this I am very strongly opposed. The Euro may seem like a good thing at first, but it is, I am afraid, only the begining to a united Europe.

Each of the countries in Europe has its own identity and has been independent for hundreds of years. These countries share different cultures, languages, and histories, and I am opposed to any form of union between them. I'm all for the European countries getting along, but when it comes to economic, yet alone political, unity, I am strongly opposed.

I complete agree with you in some areas there, but the economies of smaller states: Belguim and the Netherlands for example follow the patterns and the decisions of their larger neighbours anyway, but their histories and the identity of their currency - fair points.

The UK on the other hand is very economically different, we mimic the US and not Europe in our trends, moving against this can't do us much good, and as much as I don't enjoy changing money once a year it doesn't seem like a single currency would benefit us.

In additions, I have strong British sentiments that make the issue involving Britain closer to my heart than is the case in the other European countries. I dislike the EU, and am opposed to Britain going further to join with this. Cooperation is one thing; union is another.

That's also what I dislike - the European countries are unitied, that's good for them, but until this island merges with the mainland (it won't happen guys, we're getting further away) then I can't see any benefits of unity between the UK and Europe, the channel seems wider than 21.75 miles

[Fairydust]

It makes trade a lot more easy for the union. But i think that countries should stick with their own state of currency. i mean, money is sort of like identity. you can tell what country is which by the colour of their money and whatnot. i mean, i'm canadian and wouldn't want to use american currency (even though it's worth more) because canadian money is part of the countries identity. hope this makes sense.

[Silvilocks]

Well, I'm already in a minority and I suspect I'll be staying there as more people comment on this topic.

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?
The beginning, for reasons which I'll explain further in a moment.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
Yes. It is costing British based companies an absolute fortune to trade with Europe now, and many of the benefits these companies should be receiving by being in a single economic community are being lost. British industry has stopped arguing and started acting now - more and more companies are pulling out of Britain and moving to mainland Europe.

The other main drawback most people see to the single currency is the effect on the interest rate, which would probably go up. To me that works both ways. The property owners have done well enough out of interest rates tumbling for a long time now, and not given a :censored: about pensioners who've seen less and less return on their savings, or people like me whose pension is going to be worthless when they get it. It needs changing and a British government won't have the guts to do it.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.

Not sure. Financially, I don't see why ties with the US should be affected. I do believe that the American government (whichever one is in power at the time I mean - not necessarily the current one) would consider that Britain was deliberately taking a step away from America, and wouldn't like it.

The single currency can't be looked at in isolation. The European nations have got to decide where they're going, and if they truly want to be a single community, then yes the Euro is a beginning. Personally, I'm in favour of a United States of Europe. I have to admit the main reason is because I don't like the idea of the world only having one superpower. Since the Soviet bloc has gone, I think a United Europe is the only possible replacement. Britain needs to decide if it wants to be in or out, and stop sitting on the fence. The British government has to realise that it no longer rules an Empire, and it isn't going to be invited to be top dog in any European community. If Britain doesn't start making a commitment to the existing agreements in place in the EU - never mind adding any new ones - the other nations will have enough, and Britain will be kicked out - and to be honest, that will do so much damage to both our financial stability and political standing, that I think we'd be a lot less appealing to America.

The arguments I've heard against the Euro tend to leave me cold. I like other Europeans, I don't feel that I'm losing part of my identity by paying in Euros instead of pounds, and nobody has yet explained to me how a change in currency will affect the culture of a nation. National pride doesn't enter into it for me either - I haven't had in any Britain for years and these days I'm far more likely to say that I'm European than British.

leenielou, there were points you raised that I had to reply to:

1) To use the Euro would separate us from our heritage. Kings and Queens have fought to keep our island separate and sacred from foreign rule. Joining Europe would be just the same as joining an Empire.
With only two exceptions since 1066, all those kings and queens were at least half foreign (usually French or German). And are you saying it was OK when we had our Empire, but we mustn't be part of anyone else's?

2) Is nobody else deeply suspicious about this whole Euro thing? To me it just seems to be a good way for the bigwigs in Brussels to control an empire. Financial identicality cant really be all that good. It's risky. The EU headquarters happen to be based in Brussels. All positions of authority are rotated through all member states. This is why Britain needs to be in there, getting our voice heard other than complaining and starting to use what little influence we still have left.

3) Who wants that kiddy paper money?
:nc:
4) I dont give a **** about UK/US affairs - no offence to you americans out there, but i dont trust our prime minister and your president together. However, the Euro would effectively ally us with Europe, and stronger binds to Brussels that are being indicated (read the Daily Mail) would mean that Britain would be tied to Europe in every way. The EU didn't want to go to war against Iraq - we did and freed a nation. If we are bound to European decisions in the future, the way to this paved by joining the Euro, we could find ourselves sided against a good cause and a moral obligation.
You don't trust the UK and US premiers together - but you don't want us allied with Europe. Are you seriously suggesting that we still live in a world where Britain can stand alone and have any kind of position worth holding. We're currently a second-rate nation approaching third-world status in many respects. I don't think isolationism is really a route to go down. And in the Iraq situation, I'd rather the ties had been to the French and Germans than the Americans.

[FlyingPhoenix]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?

For me is it the beginning of Europa just because now we go closer. Who had ever thought for 60 years that we would use the same money like the france or italy? Nobody. I mean other needed after such a war or better wars 200 years and we (I'm a german) needed 60 years and that is amazing. Not really 60 years because for 1600 years was this a dream. Off course it is difficult nothing jumps up out nothing and works without harm thats kinda stupid to think everything just function like in the USA by the way there did it last long till the USA was really a USA. Just think about the war against north and south. So they had to fight to before it could be really a united state. So I think europe will have to face this fights too in a different way

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?

Yeah, they should. Because now after 2 years EURO this money do proof its do work and I fear if they don't join it might be one day that they not belong to europe but neither to anything else. I know that many countrys wanted stay alone but this way the world don't work anymore. How was it United we stay. That should say something. United europe can change something. By the way as german I wasn't either fount about the idea to lose my D-Mark or to think that the foreign politice might in future come from the EU-parlament but changings do cost things even things I did love but if I get for that an united europe something what could change this world in future I give it and accept that because it can work.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.

I hope that UK start to get there own opinion seperate from US. I mean it don't help if they follow without any questions. Europe had at least questions. Question which weren't that easy to shoot down. If UK join than I hope its to a time where they get its don't gos always there way. There are to many countrys to many voices which might be against that. Its to learn work with each other and not against each other. Even if you didn't agree with the possition off Germany and France they did at once work with each other. Two countrys which had once the most nastys fight, the most highest enemys are now friends that is huge if you keep in mind this fight was through 100 years or even since the time of Napoleon.



What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?

Well, that is difficult because many things if not the most are cost now more as before. I can life with the EURO but I lifed better with the D-Mark but hey I think thats what calls economy. The big one get it from the small. Everybody knew it would happen so I think if we get the old back it didn't change anymore because they did indeed take again more.
Thats life I suppose.

EDIT: About the fears off some UK I don't think germans want rules the world or take away the queen. I did very often read such stuff it isn't new so I believe this aren't real reasons against Europe.
By the way Europe won't lose culture or anything else if you went to poland there where once east-preussia I bet you meet at this very day things which are still german. Or if you take spain the basks? This people have thy own culture or Belgium there are two different groups if you take it exactly whole europe is in the countrys different and this countrys will stay even the language and Yeah the beer and krauts will still stay in germany and not go to italy.
Culture did survive 2000 years of wars the terriblest wars in the world and is still there, still strong so a little United won't take it away.

[leenielou]

silvilocks, i think that you have some good points here. it's a nice change for me to read something from the other point of view that isn't written as propaganda from the government to push the euro upon us.

however, although i do appreciate what you are saying, and agree with many of your points, i still hold firm on my opinions. so in answer to your questions:

1) we may have had french/german kings and queens, but history is ultimately people, and we can all class ourselves as british with ancestors who had a role in our history and traditions, even if they were offshoots of other races.

i never lived when we had an empire. i must say that if i had i would have been uneasy about it. nations should stand singly, but with alliances. nations should be individual. therefore i feel uneasy about a merger with europe - the way to which would be paved by the euro.

2) i don't want Britain to be involved in a Euro empire - as a leader or as a member. and yes, it would be good to get our voice heard. but there are other ways.

3) kiddy money - it was a joke. chill out.

4) i didn't want isolationism. read between my lines. US/UK alliances make me uneasy, and there still is great debate about the justification of the iraq conflict, but it solved the problem (kind of - the people are free). I would rather have a britain allied with the biggest power in the world and still be civil with europe than the other way round. although i know this could be impossible, i'm just stating an opinion.

but thank you for making me think so hard...it's nice to find someone to have a proper debate with once in a while!
lxx

[hesdead-dealwithit]

No, no, no no and no. Britain has been a country for millenia, separate to Europe. We are different in most ways.

1) To use the Euro would separate us from our heritage. Kings and Queens have fought to keep our island separate and sacred from foreign rule. Joining Europe would be just the same as joining an Empire.

2) Is nobody else deeply suspicious about this whole Euro thing? To me it just seems to be a good way for the bigwigs in Brussels to control an empire. Financial identicality cant really be all that good. It's risky.

3) Who wants that kiddy paper money?

4) I dont give a **** about UK/US affairs - no offence to you americans out there, but i dont trust our prime minister and your president together. However, the Euro would effectively ally us with Europe, and stronger binds to Brussels that are being indicated (read the Daily Mail) would mean that Britain would be tied to Europe in every way.
The EU didn't want to go to war against Iraq - we did and freed a nation. If we are bound to European decisions in the future, the way to this paved by joining the Euro, we could find ourselves sided against a good cause and a moral obligation.

The Euro - no no no no no no!!!!!

I'm from the US and I totally agree with everything you just said, especially about the bigwigs in Brussels wanting power. Brussels, is in Belgium, right? What have the Belgians ever done, besides creating propaganda in WWI? At least the English and the French and the Germans and the Spaniards and the Portuguese have been strong countries for most of post Roman history. Why should Belgium think it is so important that it has to force it's ideas about a united Europe onto everyone else?

[invisablethestral]

Why should Belgium think it is so important that it has to force it's ideas about a united Europe onto everyone else?

It is not driven by Belgium, that is just where EU headquarters are. Europeans just call it Brussels.

Silvilocks, you make a lot of good points, mainly based on the economics of changing to the Euro.

Personally, I'm in favour of a United States of Europe. I have to admit the main reason is because I don't like the idea of the world only having one superpower. Since the Soviet bloc has gone, I think a United Europe is the only possible replacement. Britain needs to decide if it wants to be in or out, and stop sitting on the fence.

But superpowers are greedy. Yes greedy. Its mankinds worst trait. You look at the dislike America recieves. Its maybe unjust, but if Europe becomes a One, then it will wage the same ruthless power and over time, recieve the same dislike. Two superpowers ruling Earth doesnt sound very just and equal to me and i'd rather not be a part of it. You look at the trouble USSR got itself into and still struggles as Russia to pull out of. Two superpowers will possibly lead to competiton and friction much like led to the Cold War.

Britian is segregated from Europe, it always has been, even during its Empire. That bit of water makes a lot of difference. You want examples of the political liking of Britian, you need only watch the Eurovision Song Contest to see the lack of unison we have with Europe. Its laughable.

You don't trust the UK and US premiers together - but you don't want us allied with Europe. Are you seriously suggesting that we still live in a world where Britain can stand alone and have any kind of position worth holding. We're currently a second-rate nation approaching third-world status in many respects. I don't think isolationism is really a route to go down. And in the Iraq situation, I'd rather the ties had been to the French and Germans than the Americans.

I dont trust Tony Blair full stop. The Iraq conflict and all the politics that came with it is not really involved in this thread. But if anything, it again highlighted the advantage of free choice of independance. At least we had the choice, even if it wasnt the right one in some peoples opinions.

Britian is far from being second rate. Certain areas are terrible in comparison to Europe but in others it is better. It is still on par with the other major nations of Europe over all. If we are so second rate, why do so many asylum seekers make their way to us? It was a big debate only a week or so ago, but the fact still lies that they come largly to the UK for safety.


For me, economic reason is not enough to go headlong into the possible culmination of Europe.

[daniel4hp]

Personally, I'm in favour of a United States of Europe. I have to admit the main reason is because I don't like the idea of the world only having one superpower. Since the Soviet bloc has gone, I think a United Europe is the only possible replacement.
Europe can be the next USSR. That's a pleasent thought. Yes, those were great times... great times...

I am entirely opposed to a united Europe, whether that merely be an economic union, or if it goes as far as a political union. As I said above, each of the European countries has their own identities. Each has been a separate nation for hundreds of years, and there is no reason to change this. Uniting countries that have different histories, different languages, and different cultures is not, in my opinion, a good idea. Each of the nations of Europe should remain independant, a sovereign state that, while it cooporates with its neighbors, is not united with them.

Regarding the issue of a world superpower. As Invisiblethestral said, superpowers are not always a good thing. And having a United States of Europe to match the United States of America will only lead to conflict. I, for one, would rather live in a small country. Certainly being an American has its advantages, but there are many disadvantages to a world superpower as well. In any case, I see no reason to have a united Europe. The countries are inherantly different, and there is no need for them to unite.

Britian is far from being second rate. Certain areas are terrible in comparison to Europe but in others it is better. It is still on par with the other major nations of Europe over all. If we are so second rate, why do so many asylum seekers make their way to us? It was a big debate only a week or so ago, but the fact still lies that they come largly to the UK for safety.
I totally agree. The UK is not, a second rate country, yet along being close to a third world country.

[Student of Socrates]

This has been great, the responses are fantastic, and I thank you all. :D

I have another little thing for you to think about:

Europe fought 3 major conflicts to stop European unification and a single currency over a period of about 150yrs, yet now we are standing with open arms and embracing it.

Why is this different to say Napleons plan for a united Europe under a single govenment and single currency. *scratching my head*
He even had plans for a tunnel linking Europe to the uk, and what do we have now?

I am not sure if many of you are aware of this but about 20 miles away from the adminstrative centre of the EU is where Naploeon's dream was destroyed. at Waterloo.

[Silvilocks]

I like it here. It’s one of the few times I’ve been able to give my views on this subject and haven’t been asked if I’m sorry that Hitler lost the war.

Leenielou, I appreciate your comments. I’ll debate any subject going with all due respect for everybody’s opinion, but as you can imagine this isn’t a subject where my views are met with much tolerance. Thanks.

FlyingPhoenix, I agree completely with every word you said. You make a lot of sense. If you ever think about standing for the European Parliament, let me know and I promise I’ll move to Germany and vote for you.

Two other points from previous posts are slightly off topic so I’ll keep it short (although this is why I said you can’t discuss the Euro in isolation.)

Superpowers – I said I don’t like the idea of the world only having one superpower, which isn’t saying I like or support the idea of superpowers per se. The trouble is man isn’t content to strive for his greatness as an individual – he wants it for his nation as well. That’s fine in moderation, but it doesn’t stay there. Superpowers are going to exist as long as there’s human nature. Now I can see an ideal solution in the current global situation, whereby the USA splits itself roughly into four, and creates four completely autonomous nations. Result – no superpower left. But that’s as realistic as the opening chapter of Book Six describing a group hug between Harry, Snape and Malfoy. The USA is a superpower – financially, politically, militarily and in any other way that counts. I think there has to be a counterbalance to it, and I don’t see a viable alternative at present other than a United Europe. In this connection, I was interested by a lot of comments I saw from Americans earlier this year (when relations between certain countries were a teeny bit strained) that suggested that Britain should withdraw from the EU, and form a Union with Canada, Australia and New Zealand, based on our links from the Commonwealth. I’d tell you what the Canadians etc said in reply, but I’d get banned.

Two superpowers ruling the earth doesn’t sound just and equal to me either, but I prefer it to just one doing it.

Britain second-rate? Compared to the Britain I grew up in to the age of 20-ish it is. It’s also a fact that we fail to meet standards in certain areas that are set and achieved by third world countries.

Takes deep breath and promises to stay on topic next time. Although if I find the time either of these points would make good starters for threads.

Student of Socrates I've just seen your second post. I'll come back on that one later - but I must get some work done first.

[FlyingPhoenix]

I am not sure if many of you are aware of this but about 20 miles away from the adminstrative centre of the EU is where Naploeon's dream was destroyed. at Waterloo.

Napoleon didn't work because he did it against the will off the people. You need to know the time whan its happen. To that Time there where people who had a dream that they have at least an own country. Italy didn't exist, Germany didn't exist, england was again to bussy to keep they empyer.
This wasn't the right time for this. The people didn't want to be ruled ny one country in that case france they wanted to see they have something to say. So it couldn't work

Europe can be the next USSR. That's a pleasent thought. Yes, those were great times... great times...

I disagree for that europe need to take controll over the countrys against they will and turn down they culture. This just did never happen in europe. If you look at poland or all other east-european countrys they voted to join the EU. So it wasn't against the will.
USSR was the enemy of the USA and of west-europe. But the EU will be a partner for the USA.
You need keep in mind that in future there will be more problems come over the worlds and I really doubt USA can or even want face this complete alone. But if they have a strong partner on they side, not only strong but intepentend, than the USA might work much better with the world.
This say this take away this police-part of the USA. Something what people are tired off. The EU can take away hate and create understanding because the EU works different as the USA. Here isn't like we act and than think. Here is it first debatte and than move. This is because EU has this history, had this wars and has a country which cost the most suffering in a life time (I mean Germany) So there will it more look out if there are different possibles. This can say that the EU can take away the dynamic off the USA and take it slowly and more carefully.
Like a libra the EU can change this and create understanding between east and west.
For example EU has good contact with Russia, China even Iran. This are countrys where the USA have difficluts with but with help off the EU this can be solved.

I totally agree. The UK is not, a second rate country, yet along being close to a third world country.

UK isn't a second rate country. If you wanna know it is one of the seven most rich countrys on this planet. But this don't has anything to do with EU.
Though if UK join the EU you need to know that in the EU are three off this seven countrys if UK join it will be 4. That say EU will be very if not extrem powerful in an economy way.
The economy is already cooperating with each other in EU with UK.

This is than something what not even USA has there in EU the 3 or 4 country work together but the rest 3 countrys over the world don't do it like that. They make it more difficult for each other. Like The US stop foreign iron because its better and not that expensive.

Silvilocks thank you but I just add my opinion because you did already say it much better as I could

[Silvilocks]

I am not sure if many of you are aware of this but about 20 miles away from the adminstrative centre of the EU is where Naploeon's dream was destroyed. at Waterloo.
Please Sir, I knew that!!! :clap: Is there a prize?

(Pulls self together and stops acting like a six year old)

I’m not sure that you can make this comparison, because as you’ve pointed out you’re talking about unification involving physical conflict. Europe isn’t going to be united today by force (unless you believe some of the British media….). It’s possible to speculate whether unification could have been worked towards earlier than it has been though. When you consider how "inter-woven" Europe has been historically, it seems as though it should have been possible. The royal families of Europe were all closely related by blood and marriage (dangerously so from Victoria’s reign onwards), and some areas, together with the people living in them, were regularly swapped back and forth between neighbouring states.

If Napoleon had gone to the heads of the other European nations and put forward a proposal for a unified Europe, would it have worked? I can’t see it. At that time, all the European countries were still monarchies, in most cases with a monarch who held a firm belief in their absolute and divine right to rule. There would have been no question of compromise or working together and the idea would never have been taken seriously. You also have to take into account the role the churches still played in state affairs at that time. Neither the Catholic or Protestant churches would have countenanced any form of unification of their country, with a country of another religion. Also, France under Napoleon had no religion at all for a time, which would have made the idea of close ties to the French anathema to the Catholic Church.

Of course, a proposal like this at that time would have been purely a matter for the monarch, and in some cases the government. The majority of the population wouldn’t even have known of a proposal, far less had any say in it. Unlike today, where we can at least give our opinions on a subject like this, even if at the end of the day, a government chooses to ignore us.

So between 1815 and 1914, was there an opportunity for closer ties between the European nation. Hardly. Look at European history then. The map of Europe was like a patchwork quilt, with the stitching between the squares becoming more and more unravelled. In much of Europe, you had a head of state, ruling over a gaggle of mini-kingdoms ruled by Grand-Duke-Whosit and the Archduke of Whatever. Everybody was so busy squabbling with their next door neighbour over gaining an extra foot of land here, or a trade concession there, that they were all far to busy to look at the overall picture. I believe this was the overall attitude of all the nations involved, up to the start of the First World War. This at least tidied up the map of Europe, and left it more as we know it today. Between the two world wars, all the nations were (unsurprisingly) up to their eyes in picking up the pieces, and next thing you know up rolls Hitler, with his plan for European unification.

It’s even more difficult to draw comparisons here with the current situation, and I’m not going to try. Let’s just say a United Europe under Hitler wouldn’t have been good and let it go at that.

So on balance I’d have to say there was no earlier time when a United Europe could have been considered a feasible suggestion,

What’s changed and why is it feasible now? Two main factors I believe. A lot of ideas like nationalism (imperialism where appropriate) have gone. There are a lot of people today (not enough though) who are capable of looking at a broader picture. They don’t just look at what is best for them as an individual, or what is best for their country, but what is best for the majority of people, and in many issues, they look at the case globally. Many people honestly believe that a United Europe is good for the whole world, not just the little bit of it they happen to live in.

The other factor that has changed is communication – ordinary people, not just heads of state and politicians can discuss ideas now in a way that was impossible even 20 years ago. Look at the way we can discuss things here, share opinions, and get other peoples perspective on a subject. OK, we're not in a position to change anything at government level (unless Morgoth is really a President or Prime Minister in disguise) :wow:, but we can argue (coolly, calmly and rationally of course) and we can learn (hopefully). Over a period of time, and I mean years, with luck that attitude will spread, and people will become more receptive to at least discussing new ideas and maybe even start putting some of the good ones into practice one day.

Most of all I’d like to think it’s a proposal that can be considered seriously today, because people have reached a point where they can accept that it’s unreasonable to go on holding a grudge against the people of any nation because of something their ancestors have done in the past.

This probably isn’t as coherent as I’d have liked, but trying to argue a case of what-if going back 200 years, when you’re constantly being interrupted by a boss going on holiday isn’t easy. I hope having to do this in instalments hasn’t stopped me getting my thoughts across.

Student of Socrates, you’ve raised really good points here. But if you think of any more to add, pleeeease keep them on hold until later!!!l

[DsX Phoenix]

It seems the main problem people have with joining the EU is that they fear losing their country. I am from America, so I really don't care if Britain joins the EU or not, but I will say this. America was first created from 13 independent nations (sort of), and while the states have lost quite a bit of power in politics, this lost power or unity among states has not caused the destruction of each states' cultures or beliefs. We are all Americans, but we are equally Virginians, Goergians, New Yorkers, Southerners, and Yanks. Every state has its own identity, just as I am sure every country in Europe will maintain its own identity.

And, truthfully, currency is nothing. It is all just play paper money. It all changes constantly. I mean, doesn't British money change everytime the King or Queen is replaced? Something more important to cultural separation is language. To illustrate this, most people consider America an English speaking nation. Because of this, while a latino may be spending U.S. dollars, he is still separated from other Americans because of his language. In many respects, he is not American. And, when you look at America's biggest allies, or closest countries culturally, it is Canada, Britain, and Australia. Why? Because they are all English speaking nations (the majority...I know about the French-CAnadians). So, joining the EU would not result in a loss of British culture.

As for being ruled by someone in Brussels, I could be wrong, but aside from the economic connection, isn't the EU basically just like NATO...more of an alliance than a nation? Again, it may become more in the future, but that would not be until all of the nations in the EU were ready and willing.

Finally, the reason the EU is being embrased while Napoleon was considered evil, is because Napoleon invaded these countries to take them over. In the EU, every country joins willingly, not forcefully. It is merely a choice.

[Kizz]

And, truthfully, currency is nothing. It is all just play paper money. It all changes constantly. I mean, doesn't British money change everytime the King or Queen is replaced? Something more important to cultural separation is language. To illustrate this, most people consider America an English speaking nation. Because of this, while a latino may be spending U.S. dollars, he is still separated from other Americans because of his language. In many respects, he is not American. And, when you look at America's biggest allies, or closest countries culturally, it is Canada, Britain, and Australia. Why? Because they are all English speaking nations (the majority...I know about the French-CAnadians). So, joining the EU would not result in a loss of British culture.

As for being ruled by someone in Brussels, I could be wrong, but aside from the economic connection, isn't the EU basically just like NATO...more of an alliance than a nation? Again, it may become more in the future, but that would not be until all of the nations in the EU were ready and willing.

I agree with you DsX, NATO's military, and although there have been calls for a European rapid reaction force of some kind (to send troops in to protect civilians) the EU is about economics and raising the standard of living - quite a few measures that are now in UK law come from Brussels and we should be thankful, despite new directives that could make the internet illegal...:scared: I doubt we'll ever see a European super state, but we will see a more uniform Europe - which means less working hours.

Our currency is undergoing more changes at the moment (new tenners), but what it looks like doesn't matter, it's the value and all the rates. Great post Silvilocks.

[dncrgrrl]

It makes trade a lot more easy for the union. But i think that countries should stick with their own state of currency. i mean, money is sort of like identity. you can tell what country is which by the colour of their money and whatnot. i mean, i'm canadian and wouldn't want to use american currency (even though it's worth more) because canadian money is part of the countries identity. hope this makes sense.

I completely agree with you on your point about money being part of a countries identity. I'm American, and I would be crushed if our money changed any more. I hated when they changed what the bills looked like! I think the Euro is a bad idea. Having one form of money may sound good on first hearing about it, but if you look into it more, it's not that great of an idea. It throws off how things have been done for hundreds of years. Every country should just keep their own currency.

[daniel4hp]

It seems the main problem people have with joining the EU is that they fear losing their country. I am from America, so I really don't care if Britain joins the EU or not, but I will say this. America was first created from 13 independent nations (sort of), and while the states have lost quite a bit of power in politics, this lost power or unity among states has not caused the destruction of each states' cultures or beliefs. We are all Americans, but we are equally Virginians, Goergians, New Yorkers, Southerners, and Yanks. Every state has its own identity, just as I am sure every country in Europe will maintain its own identity.
Well, there may be some cultural differences between the states, but for the most part, I think that most Americans think of themselves just as Americans, and moving from one state to another doesn't make a huge difference.

And in any case, I don't think that you can really compare the 13 American colonies to the nations of Europe. The nations of Europe are independant nations, while the 13 colonies were all just that -- colonies. Each of the European nations has a strong identity, which can be seen in the culture and language. If Europe became politically united, I'm sure that each of the countries would try to maintain their own character, but ultimately, as I see it, the united Europe would either break apart, or the countries would lose their identity. They can work together as independant countries, or they can become one country and slowly lose their identity. At least, that's what I see coming...

And, truthfully, currency is nothing.
In and of itself, it may be very little, although in many ways, it does help give each country their own identity. But really, as I see it, this is only going to lead to a Europe that's further united, which I don't want to see. It's one step in the wrong direction.

[FlyingPhoenix]

And in any case, I don't think that you can really compare the 13 American colonies to the nations of Europe. The nations of Europe are independant nations, while the 13 colonies were all just that -- colonies. Each of the European nations has a strong identity, which can be seen in the culture and language. If Europe became politically united, I'm sure that each of the countries would try to maintain their own character, but ultimately, as I see it, the united Europe would either break apart, or the countries would lose their identity. They can work together as independant countries, or they can become one country and slowly lose their identity. At least, that's what I see coming...

You can compare it because all people who came to this new land were all europeans and they all get together and USA was born. Now in Europe its just the same we go together and start to be Europe. Where is the problem? There is no different.
As much I do know the 50 states in USA do work very much intependant. Have different laws, strong gouverment and can choice and move nearly free. Now back ro Europe it won't be different.

Just try Germany. Shall we? Right what I have in my country? 16 states and 16 different cultures that for sure. There is Hamburg or Bavaria or just the rhinecountry or Berlin. Shall I try and tell a bavarian he is just a plain german without any independant culture. What dos he say? Are you insane? What is with our dance or beer or october-feast or our language or our history? We aren't just german we are baverian.
Now to Berlin. Do you know this history? How special this city is? It was seperated for nearly 40 years and they did fight. If I say yeah you german. They don't agree because they are more. We all more.

Like a US from Texas don't say I'm plain american. He says I'm a texan-boy or from the south. You hear it in his language and he tell you something about his culture and his life.

Its like in Europe. Yeah we are european but than again I'm german and again I'm from cologne. So where you decide dos this stop?
You can't make all this little differents. You don't lose your identy.
As long nobody force me to speak italy and to forget who I'm as long I won't lose my culture, my history and my believing in my town, state, country and not in my continent

[Silvilocks]

Daniel4hp, you make it very clear that you’re opposed to further unity in Europe, but I’m afraid it’s not so clear exactly why. If it's purely this question of national identity, then I think your fears are unfounded. Don’t forget the United Kingdom is literally that – four separate countries united (forcefully at that) into one. I can’t agree that the English, Irish, Scots or Welsh have lost or been deprived of any part of their culture or heritage.With the addition of ten further nations to the Union next year the culture base is only going to expand, and there is no reason to suppose that the culture of any individual nation will be diminished in any way. I also think FlyingPhoenix draws a very good analogy with the comparison to the USA.

Yes, the euro is a major first step towards European unity. Logically, in a single market, you need a single currency. But on the cultural aspect, the EU already has its own flag and anthem. No member nation has been required to give up their own flag or anthem, nor will they be required to. Currently, the European Parliament is considering legislation to give all member nations the same number public holidays each year – but nations won’t be told which days to add. Europe Day will probably become a holiday in each country, but other than that they can choose appropriate days to honour their own national heroes, events etc. On a broader scale, Shakespeare is translated, read and admired worldwide. That isn’t going to change because I pay for my shopping in Euros instead of sterling.

[roz]

It seems the main problem people have with joining the EU is that they fear losing their country. I am from America, so I really don't care if Britain joins the EU or not, but I will say this. America was first created from 13 independent nations (sort of), and while the states have lost quite a bit of power in politics, this lost power or unity among states has not caused the destruction of each states' cultures or beliefs. We are all Americans, but we are equally Virginians, Goergians, New Yorkers, Southerners, and Yanks. Every state has its own identity, just as I am sure every country in Europe will maintain its own identity.


The UK is in the EU and has been since the 1970's. The EU is the European Union. The currency is called the Euro.

As a Brit living in Germany I have to say that on a personal level my life has been made alot easier by the Euro and would be made easier still if the UK joined. I travel within Europe a fair amount and not having to worry about currency has made my life alot easier.

On the downside there was a jump in the prices of things when we converted. Eating in a resturant for example is much more expensive that it was when we paid in DM.

As a Brit thinking about the UK joining from a longer term perspective I do know one thing for sure. I do not think that we should enter the Euro without a refferendum. Gordon Brown's "four economic tests" are all very well but this is bigger than a purely economic decision. We are handing over a lot of power to Frankfurt (Frankfurt not Brussels is where the decisions will be made as it is the home of the European Central Bank) which currently resides with the Bank of England. I do not feel that a yes vote when the question was about us joining the common market (not a political union) gives a mandate for us joining the common currency.

Personally I would probably vote yes but I feel that I sould have the chance to have my say.

Roz.

[Artichoke]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?
To me it is neither the beginning, this would most likely be the creation of the EU, as for the end I don't think so but then what do I know?

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
I don't really know. Economically, UK doesn't need it but I wouldn't mind if they changed cos it'd be much easier for poor tourists like me. Hum.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.
As I know very little about the UK/US relations I don't think i'm able to judge the effects that euro would have.

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?
The prices have increased quite a lot because of the change. I can't say I'm happy with euros but it'd be completely stupid to change back to our old currency now so we'll just have to get used to it. Besides this is not the first time we change our money here in France, my mom still speaks with old francs from time to time, so it's not really a bid geal.

[invisablethestral]

Logically, in a single market, you need a single currency.

In the single market, the UK already trades in Euro and American Dollar. The pound is no longer used in financial trade on the single market.

If it's purely this question of national identity, then I think your fears are unfounded. Don’t forget the United Kingdom is literally that – four separate countries united (forcefully at that) into one. I can’t agree that the English, Irish, Scots or Welsh have lost or been deprived of any part of their culture or heritage.With the addition of ten further nations to the Union next year the culture base is only going to expand, and there is no reason to suppose that the culture of any individual nation will be diminished in any way. I also think FlyingPhoenix draws a very good analogy with the comparison to the USA.


The UK lends itself to culmination a lot more than Europe. Yet even in its small network, strains show, which you and I know perfectly well. Now on the table for unity, we have: the same currency, the same language, centuries of inter-related heritage and history. Yet even with all these massive plus points, there is still a large will to be seperate. These reasons are largely pollitical. You move that unity into a much larger scale of a united Europe, then strains will become much worse and Europe a good step closer to fragmentation that it stands just now. There are already some poor relations between countries in Europe.

Admittedly, as One (united Europe), we have too much history and heritage to loose our integral identity. At least not short term. In the long term, i think people would move away from saying "I'm Scottish and proud of it" to "I'm European and proud of it". I know of a co-worker already that classes himself as a European rather than a Scot.

On the downside there was a jump in the prices of things when we converted. Eating in a resturant for example is much more expensive that it was when we paid in DM.

I made this point earlier, that the change over to EURO in the UK lends ourselves perfectly for over-inflation on already overly priced goods. Setting all European nations on the same currency level will not alter the variation in prices of identical products across Europe. Admittedly, it makes international travel amongst Europe less hassel, but what sense of adventure lies in a hassel free life? We keep trying to cut corners in our lives, soon we'll have nothing but straight lines. How very dull. But thats getting OT.

As a Brit thinking about the UK joining from a longer term perspective I do know one thing for sure. I do not think that we should enter the Euro without a refferendum. Gordon Brown's "four economic tests" are all very well but this is bigger than a purely economic decision. We are handing over a lot of power to Frankfurt (Frankfurt not Brussels is where the decisions will be made as it is the home of the European Central Bank) which currently resides with the Bank of England.

I agree wholeheartedly, yet impressions made just now would mean good ol Tony the Tiger Blair would love to jump straight in and avoid a refferendum that he probably knows will go against him, but the four tests told him its not possible for the UK to join. The public have complete right to say yes or no for it, just as it should in the EURO debate. There would be uproar, which is very unusual for the UK, if it were agreed behind closed doors. I personally would vote no. As a member of the UK it is largely imbedded in us to stand alone. Its a natural feeling given our status as an Island to do so.

[daniel4hp]

I totally agree with Invisablethestral. Well said. :tu:

I would also like to restate what you said about a refferendum. Blair would certainly like the UK to join the Euro, and I wouldn't be surprised if he forced it through "behind closed doors." But certainly, this is an issue that the people need to decide. I don't think that it would pass if it was up to the people to vote on it, and knowing that, Blair will quite likely try to force something through without any refferendum. But that would certainly be a pity.

[LadyofthePensieve]

Long live the P(r)ou(n)d,

down with all these sucking Euro countries.

Go(o)d severe the single Currency

[Amadeus]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?
Well, it does save time and energy for a lot of people, but I was sorry to know that the difference monetary systems will be gone; so much culture and characteristics of one country is passed down through money. It definitely is a plus time-wise... and economically, it may be both plus and minus for the countries using Euro.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
No; UK has always felt as a half-europe, half-its own world sort of country.... (probably because of all its history and geographical location as a non-main land nation.) I would be sorry if I had to see UK join the single currency along with other European nations.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.
I don't think it would effect the ties.... UK still is a European nation (as it is right now)... And I don't think UK will join any type of single currency unless almost every other nation in the world is using it.

[Pucko]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?
It's definitely not the beginning...but probably not the end either. Let's just call it a bump in the road. There could be more bumps coming. Or it could be smooth sailing from now on. Nobody knows.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
Honestly, I don't knopw a lot about the UK, but I know they have a strong economy and a strong monetary unit, and when all us lowly little countries join, the UK will probably be better off alone.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.
I dunno nada about UK/US relations...so I can't precisely answer well.

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?
Sweden is voting on whether to adapt the Euro on Sunday. I don't think we should cuz if it's bad we can never change back. However I'm not an expert...all I know is not to believe every word either side says, because they both lie and assume and present guesses as facts.

[You-Know-Who]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?

It's neither, it's hardly end Europe will never die no matter who conquers it (haha I'm showing patriotism, something I hate most how ironic). Nor is it the beginning, it's a chapter in the post Second World War European history where Europeans for the first time in their 2000 years history Europeans decided instead of being patriotic, nationalist and arrogant (well most Europeans, it appears that most British and some Europeans are still in this state, oh well, life goes on) they decided to put aside their differences and work together.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?

Depends if the people agree to it (which will never happen, I already stated the reason) ,if there are good political and economical reasons joining the single currency then they should.
If not they shouldn't. Countries should never be forced into it.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.

I don't care.

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?

Prices in general speaking more expensive but I don't blame this on the Euro I blame this on the greed. For one thing prices would have gone up without and another thing people are rounding the prices up. Oh well greediness wins again.
Another thing I noticed that I don't lose money when I exchange my money into another European currency so it's alot easier.

Now my comments to some of the things said here:


I am entirely opposed to a united Europe, whether that merely be an economic union, or if it goes as far as a political union. As I said above, each of the European countries has their own identities. Each has been a separate nation for hundreds of years, and there is no reason to change this. Uniting countries that have different histories, different languages, and different cultures is not, in my opinion, a good idea. Each of the nations of Europe should remain independant, a sovereign state that, while it cooporates with its neighbors, is not united with them.


Why? Why shouldn't Europe be united? So that European countries can destroy each other in wars? (I don't think I need to give you examples), so that the entire regions, cities are devasted because of wars (again I don't need to give examples), so that an entire group of people are being slaughtered just because of their religion or their nationality, for the third time I don't need to give you examples just pick up an history book to any given time before 1946 to give you examples.
Are you perhaps supporting all of this?

[Silvilocks]

Nor is it the beginning, it's a chapter in the post Second World War European history where Europeans for the first time in their 2000 years history Europeans decided instead of being patriotic, nationalist and arrogant (well most Europeans, it appears that most British and some Europeans are still in this state, oh well, life goes on) they decided to put aside their differences and work together.
I couldn't agree with you more, and I just wish this attitude would spread more through Britain. I'm sick and tired of living in a country where the majority of the population either think we should become the next American state, or those who'd like us to sever all ties with Europe (and probably go back to living in caves). Britain seems to have retained many of its worst characteristics such as arrogance, nationalism and inate (unjustified) air of superiority, and lost whatever trace it ever had of tolerance and an open approach to new ideas. I'm just waiting for a time (hopefully in the near future) when we can move to mainland Europe. I don't pretend it's perfect, but it's better than anything I can see being on offer in Britain in my lifetime.

[Chrysalis]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?
The beginning, I think. After a long history of warmongering and patriotism Europe is finally united.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
I don't really have an opinion on this, but the attitude of most opposing Brits seems to be rooted in arrogance. Britain is part of the EU, yet Tony Blair would rather spend his time talking to George W. Arguments such as 'the pound is part of our culture' are rooted in emotions and sentimentality rather than rational arguments. One would think that the British would want to become the 51st state of America. Sure, a currency is a nice thing if you've had it for so long, but it's time to move on.

EDIT: maybe the Euro might even be for the better in Britain, if it makes everthing cheaper, you pay £2.50 for a freakin' cup of coffee! However that is another discussion.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.
I don't know.

and for our European members:

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?
Well, the prices have skyrocketed. What used to be the price in guilders is now the price in euros. Personally I'm not too happy with that. The greedy government and companies and stores are rounding the prices off.:td:

To those 'concerned' Americans who oppose the EU: if you are so fearful that all our identities will suddenly vanish, come and take a look. Even now things are not going smoothly because all countries disagree with each other and there is a lot of bickering. This has probably been one of the longest peaceful periods in the history of Europe. What would you rather have, Europeans slaughtering each other in wars?

[Dru Malfoy]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe?
Good concept in theory. But it seems as if no-one had thought that the countries joining in the financial union should be equally strong economically. This, unfortunately, is not the case - so... bad idea - YET!

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
For Europe: yes, they should. The UK is part of the European Union so it should have the Euro as well.
For the UK: People, if you're smart, you do everything to keep the Euro out of your country and stick to your pound!! I mean, everything is extremely expensive already in the UK - no need for the Euro.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.

I'll take the other question:

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?

Everything's become much more expensive (for many things you now pay twice what you would have payed before the Euro. I am definitely not happy. As most people aren't. I guess going back to our old currency would not work and would cost us even more than the Euro already has.

[Wab]

No, no, no no and no. Britain has been a country for millenia, separate to Europe.

Bollocks.

Two millenia ago England was a Roman colony.

After the Roman pull-out Britain was a mess of battling warlords.

1066 England became a French possession.

Britain only entered its modern cocncept when the English brought the Welsh to heel and GB when they formed the act of Union with Scotland.

Strictly speaking the Welsh and Scots held their national identities longer than England ever did and have more reason to secede from the UK than England from the EU.

At least you enetred the EU through referendum rather than invasion and genocide.

[Liselle]

Ok I'm a little sleepy at the moment so these answers aren't as full as I would like them to be.


1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe? End of one stage and beginning of another. The idea behind the european coal and steal community as the EU originally was was for european nations to be interdependant on one another and to lessen the liklihood of another war. I had my doubts at first but I think its great for ease of travelling....I'm Irish and European

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency? Yes, get off your high horses :lol: I think that the UK needs to make a decision and stop sitting on the fence. You're either for Europe or against it, you can't just pick and choose on such matters and, refuse and then still expect to have say on everything else that goes on. (just my point of view!)

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly. I don't see how this would impact on the relationship, we could have put up the same arguments as this, Ireland is a major hub for American and other transnationals. I think that this is a moot point

and for our European members:

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?

I'm happy....it was a bit weird for a very long time (honestly I'm not sure I can tell the 10 cent from the 20 cent :lol:) but I'm used to it. Plus I like seeing the different member states coins...like earlier on I found a spanish euro coin in my change :lol: I'm easily amused that way

Prices seem to be a wee bit more expensive alright though something I'm not so happy about....but when you calculate it out (from punts to euro) there's usually night that much of a difference....it just looks wrong!

[Wab]

Of course if the UK doesn't go euro (possible) or pulls out of the EU (extremely unlikely) Ireland would be sitting pretty as a gateway as one of only two Anglophone (since Malta's ascession) countries in the eruozone.

[Liselle]

Thats true but we'd have lost what is arguably our largest and most important market. That couldn't be of benefit to us.

[Morgoth]

Why? Why shouldn't Europe be united? So that European countries can destroy each other in wars? (I don't think I need to give you examples), so that the entire regions, cities are devasted because of wars (again I don't need to give examples), so that an entire group of people are being slaughtered just because of their religion or their nationality, for the third time I don't need to give you examples just pick up an history book to any given time before 1946 to give you examples.
Are you perhaps supporting all of this?

You've put words in someone's mouth here. A united Europe is Germany & France's answer to the past, but it's not what a lot of people desire. As a continent, a trading state, Europe is good and competitive, but it's not a nation, it cannot work on the same level as a sovereign state.

As for past problems, the EU or common market was set up to unite people through trade and disable barriers between states so we could all travel through Europe easily. We've become far more unified than would have been possible under either Napoleon or Hitler, but that doesn't mean to say all of us want to embrace a constitution that would centralize a lot of policy.

I like the EU as it is.

[Revolution]

1) This is definantly not the end of Europe. It's a great beginning for most of us Europeans. I live in the Netherlands and the Euro is very handy for us, because we travel a lot around Europe and now we don't have to keep changing currencies.

2) Yes. I have this feeling that the people in the UK are arrogant. They don't want to admit to an idea which would help the whole EU.

3) I don't know much about the US and the UK together so I can't answer...

What have you noticed in your country since joining the Euro. Are you happy or do you want to return to your old currency?
No, I'm very happy with the Euro. It just makes things a lot easier. And at the moment the Euro is also very strong.

[Tane]

1) The single currency: The beginning or the end of Europe?

In many ways yes and no, that depends up on whether or not wages are to be increased at the moment to support such a high exchange rate as the Euro is too strong and could affect many businesses as is already happening in Europe. People are turning to countries out side those who currently have joined the single currency for a better deal on merchandising and holidays, you just need to look at Spain's tourism trade now compared to what it was before they joined the single currency and it is not great.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?

No not until the Euro comes down in price, it is too risky for the above reasons already mentioned in question 1.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK, if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.

No not at all, what it will do is strengthen the US as most of there produce and trade will be cheaper than our own European counter parts.

[Spikey]

Why would the UK want to exchange its currency for one worth half as much?. and it will just get weeker as more of easten europe joins. We have enough meddling form burssles as it is with out them controling our money as well.

[Mundungus Fletc]

Firstly I'm very pro European and I would like to see Britain distance itself from the US. But having said that it would not be sensible to join the Euro now - our economy is to a different cycle to the rest of Europe. Mainly because we are so dependent on the world economic situation - the City of London continues to oil the wheels of world trade as it has done for the last two hundred years.

When the economic conditions are right I will certainly vote yes.

As for those who think a united Europe and a single currency will make wars impossible I've only one thing to say - Yugoslavia.

[Tane]

Why would the UK want to exchange its currency for one worth half as much?. and it will just get weeker as more of easten europe joins. We have enough meddling form burssles as it is with out them controling our money as well.At the moment though the Euro is worth more than the UK pound but if you mean it will probably fall in the future and become weaker against the pound that I think your right.

I brought up the tourism in Spain which is on the decline because it's prices have soared due to the introduction of the Euro, people just want to go to cheaper countries that off the same things when on holiday. This is important for the UK as if what the government says is true and they want to improve on tourism in Britain then introducing the Euro looks pretty bad if we look at what is happening with Spain at the moment. I think in the end the loss of tourism in countries that support the Euro might force the price of the Euro down, if not then those countries loose a valuable commodity in leisure and tourism.

[Mundungus Fletc]

Actually the pound is worth more than than the euro. If you follow this link
http://www.travelex.com.au/press/DOC_POTTER_05312004.asp
you will discover that the pound is worth 3 sickles and 13 knuts whereas the euro is worth 2sickles and 11 knuts.

[Spikey]

At the moment though the Euro is worth more than the UK pound but if you mean it will probably fall in the future and become weaker against the pound that I think your right.

I brought up the tourism in Spain which is on the decline because it's prices have soared due to the introduction of the Euro, people just want to go to cheaper countries that off the same things when on holiday. This is important for the UK as if what the government says is true and they want to improve on tourism in Britain then introducing the Euro looks pretty bad if we look at what is happening with Spain at the moment. I think in the end the loss of tourism in countries that support the Euro might force the price of the Euro down, if not then those countries loose a valuable commodity in leisure and tourism.

All rates from http://www.oanda.com/convert/classic with todays currency rates

100 British Pound = 149.995 Euro
100 Euro (EUR) = 66.66900 British Pound (GBP)

The Pound has ALLWAYS been worth more then the Euro.
The Dollar on the other hand USED to be worth more then the Euro but now it is'nt

100 US Dollar = 81.51952 Euro
100 Euro (EUR) = 122.670 US Dollar (USD)

100 US Dollar = 54.36555 British Pound
100 British Pound (GBP) = 183.940 US Dollar (USD)

[Tane]

Well this site (http://groups.msn.com/HogwartsFineSchoolOfWitchcraftAndWizardry/hogsmeadeservicebar.msnw) contradicts it all then.

29 Knuts= 1 Sickle

17 Sickles= 1 Galleon

1 Galleon= $6.46 CND, $4.82 USD

1 Sickle= $0.38 CND, $0.28 USD

1 Knut= $0.01 CND, $0.01 USD

$1 Canadian= 2 Sickles, 19 Knuts

$1 US= 3 Sickles, 15 Knuts

$1 Euro= 2 Sickles, 27 Knuts

£1 British Pound= 1 Sickle, 27 Knuts

According to this the Euro is stronger than the pound.

Edit: Sorry got a little confused with Spain's currancy rate and the UKs but I stand by what I say about the Euro affecting tourism in Spain as the price of everything over there has gone way to high to attract holiday makers.

I'll stick with Spikey's finacial report, thanks for clear that with me, boy I feel like a right cluts now.:lol:

[Spikey]

Edit: Sorry got a little confused with Spain's currancy rate and the UKs but I stand by what I say about the Euro affecting tourism in Spain as the price of everything over there has gone way to high to attract holiday makers.

I'll stick with Spikey's finacial report, thanks for clear that with me, boy I feel like a right cluts now.:lol:

No problem :)

But I do actually agree with you about the euro affecting tourism. I pretty sure I have seen reposts from other countries saying the same thing as well. This is another thing I see happending IF the UK get the euro loads of places will take adantage of the confusion to stick in prices rises.

[Tane]

No problem :)

But I do actually agree with you about the euro affecting tourism. I pretty sure I have seen reposts from other countries saying the same thing as well. This is another thing I see happending IF the UK get the euro loads of places will take adantage of the confusion to stick in prices rises.Yes I think there was a report in the Times this week about how companies are pushing up the cost of items to account for the cost of the change over and it is the consumer that is starting to get the brunt of this. British tourists have stated that they would rather go to countries where there money goes the further and that are why they are leaving Spain because everything is starting to cost more.

There have been reports of some companies increasing wages abroad to account for the rising prices in housing but I doubt that would make much difference in the UK as house prices are too high for a new buyer anyway, though saying that it might dent the holiday home market abroad from British tourists.

[grrliz]

... $1 Canadian= 2 Sickles, 19 Knuts

$1 US= 3 Sickles, 15 Knuts

$1 Euro= 2 Sickles, 27 Knuts

£1 British Pound= 1 Sickle, 27 Knuts... That's some lovely conversion there, Tane! :)

1) The single currency: The beginning or the end of Europe?
The beginning. I don't really see the huge identity problem that so many other people have been brought up (i.e. Countries have their own identities and traditions and languages, they'll lose that as Europe becomes more united.). I admire that Europe is at this stage in it's development, that it's countries can maintain their individuality and still come together and function on an economic and governmental level. It's not like they're taking one country's money and trying to make everyone use it, it's a brand new currency with no emotional attachment whatsoever. I don't really see the problem.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
I never really consider the UK to be part of Europe, to be completely honest. I figure they'll just keep doing things like they've always done; they drive on the left side of the road because they're on an island and doesn't cause problems with other countries, and I suspect keeping the pound will end up working out the same for them.

3) If the UK should join in the next few years would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK, if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly.
Or would it avoid Europe all together? I think, especially after Tony Blair decided to follow Bush on the disastrous Iraq invasion, that Britain should be distancing itself from the U.S., so if entering the Union is one way to maintain it's seperateness (that sounds like it doesn't make sense, but it does), then so be it.

[Bouncing_Ferret]

1) The single currency: The begining or the end of Europe? Not the end of Europe by any means. I actually used to be really strongly opposed to the idea of a united Europe, simply because of the inevitable loss of some culture (such as Greece letting go of the ancient drachma), but now I think it's becoming very important for Europe to retain its high status in world affairs, and the best way to do this is to present a united front. Really, European countries are proud enough of their own individual heritages that they won't just let them slip away because they decided to join the EU, so I suppose the potential further loss of culture and history really isn't that serious a factor.

2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency? This is where it gets tricky for me... I would sincerely love for the UK to keep its own currency, and maintain at least a little distance from the EU. But unfortunately, I can't help but see Britain as having to align itself with the US if it decides not to take on the Euro and become a more active member of the EU. And I would far rather see the UK as a part of Europe rather than a part of America. So when it comes down to it, I suppose I'd prefer to see the UK join the single currency...

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly? It always seems to me that the US tends to use the UK to achieve its own agenda (as it does with lots of other countries as well) and therefore if the UK were to join currencies with the EU, it might hopefully deter the US from using the UK as the 'back door' into Europe. America would hopefully be forced to confront Europe as a whole rather than just consort with the British government, and perhaps that would result in greater diplomacy in world affairs and so forth. It'd be nice, anyway! :)

[tugi]

Hi everyone, this is my first post in this forum.
This thing is going to get longer, but please read my whole post before answering to it ;)

Ok I'll start of with a few quotes I collected on the last 2 pages :

Britian is segregated from Europe, it always has been, even during its Empire. That bit of water makes a lot of difference. You want examples of the political liking of Britian, you need only watch the Eurovision Song Contest to see the lack of unison we have with Europe. Its laughable.

Well, mate, it's note the lack of unison you have, I'd say, it's just because your last three songs sucked.

I like the EU as it is.

I don't. The idea of the "fathers" of Europe was to have a European community of peace and prosperity after mankinds most cruel war that happened to have been raging in Europe - which has always been a battlefield until 1945.
Today's EU is a big entity run by officials and authorities who make the most idiotic laws in the world. I don't want to get into that but I just want to point out to you that the EU would reject every applying country that's applying for membership which has a government that is formed like the EU's with the reason of not being democratic.
Europe's government is formed - not elected - by officials - so called commisioners - sent by the member's governments. Those commisioners can propose laws AND pass those laws at the same time. The European Parliament can't stop these laws, it merely can delay them.
But enough of that, let's get into the discussion.

1) The single currency: The beginning or the end of Europe?
The beginning of a new Europe. A strong Europe. A united Europe.


2) Should the UK Join the Single Currency?
Yep, I'll get into that after question 3)!

3) If the UK should join in the next few years, would this effect ties with the US, as she uses the UK as a "gateway into Europe". Would the US continue to use the UK,if it joined the Euro, or would she look to deal with and base itself in Europe directly?
The currency doesn't change that. It wouldn't take away the UK governments authority of deciding anything like being in the Coalition of the Willing of http://home.arcor.de/wan_Tugi/dtfw.JPG freeing the iraqi people. The Euro's idea isn't to bind countries but to bring them together in order to organise their economies in a common way. The Euro would influence the UK's relation with the EU in a positive way and it wouldn't keep the UK from being with the US.

Ok I'm getting back to the UK-Europe thing.

Let's face it: Britain is a part of Europe. Politically, economically, geologically, culturally and genetically. Some British think that god wants them to be seperate and all that but they can't be seperate from the european community which they have been around to shape since more than a thousand years. Also, in a long-term, our small nations will have to stand united as we are to face a future which has almost never have been more uncertain.
Unfortunately, the British media doesn't see that and keeps trying to abet the British people against Europe - with success. They do keep hitting the bullseye with that because there still are anti-european feelings around in Britain. The term "wog-defying sea" says something I guess.

I have always been admiring the British of being careful of keeping tradition and national spirit alive, and I also like British humour and their language.
But such reluctance of joining the cause of having one united Europe, one country for the European people, which always seemed impossible before, and which is nearer as ever before, makes me see that the british people need to rethink. There can be tradition, identity and a little bit of "good fences make good neighbours" for Britain in a united Europe. Britain seems trapped in their glorious past, relucatant to move on and take a step towards Europe and future.

See, before 1871 there never was a German nation.
Before 1871 there were more than 1500 independent countries in the rough area where Germany is located today. They all had different dialects - or even languages, different cultures, different traditions and different money. Yet they have found together, knowing they belonged together, forming a country that could not even be seperated again by the two biggest wars ever fought. And today, even if there's no patriotism or striving for national identity allowed in Germany, every German knows that they have something in common, although there are 16 states with different laws, about 500 dialects and a lot of different cultures.

I really don't know why the British are afraid of loosing so much after joining a united Europe.
The British are fearing a foreign rule but secretly every nation is ruled by foreign powers because their economies are relying on each other and -for example- if you saw Fahrenheit 9/11, you know how extreme damage Saudi-Arabia could do to the US by withdrawing all money they have on their US banks accounts. Also the British are part of the NATO, the UN and other international organisations. These organisations have laws the UK has to follow. Isn't that also some kind of foreign rule with foreign laws?


My point is that Britain has a chance of forming a counterweight to the US with the other nations of Europe and be a part of something history would never have thought to see. A European Country.

I am totally in favour of the United States of Europe, though we might wanna search for a better name cause it sorta looks like a United States of America rip-off! ;)

Thank you for your attention and good night,
Tugi

Edit:
PS: I didn't know how to do this thing : "http://home.arcor.de/wan_Tugi/dtfw.JPG" with the forum so I did it in paint really quick. I hope you dont mind the weird look of it because of the diffent heights :D - I hope you get the point of it, though :)

[Prof.Blink]

Ok... i'm going to focus this post purely on the theoretical economic advantages and disadvantages to joining the single currency.

I'm an economics students, so this might be a little complicated for those who haven't studied it much. I'll try to keep it as simplistic as possible.

Advantages of joining the Euro (from Britain's point of view)

1. An increase in Inward direct investment. This basically means multinational companies may look to euro-zone countries when making future investments. The advantage for them is that they don't have to pay tariffs to trade with Europe if they produce within Europe. This means we could see more factories etc being built, which means more jobs for the British public.

2. Increased competition within Europe. The single currency would make price discrimination difficult since price differences will be more obvious to consumers. To put it another way, all prices will be in one currency, so it will be easier to compare prices with our European neighbours. The Rip-off Britain issue could change as a result. If Brits see the same product cheaper in Europe, they will simply buy in Europe. This will force domestic firms to cut prices in order to keep up with the competition. This means lower prices.

3. Reduction in transaction costs. We would no longer have to pay commission charges to change our currency when travelling. This isn't very significant though. The European commission estimated the the gain is only 0.4% of GDP.

4. Trade. A major reason why we should join the Euro. The will no longer be exchange rate instability between us and the European nations. (At the moment, a strong pound means that our goods are expensive. Europeans have to spend more Euros to buy our goods, something they don't want to do). If our currency is the same this probelm will be avoided. Our goods will no longer be more expensive due to differences in our exchange rates. This could encourage investment and therefore increase competition, which again means lower prices for us!!


Ok... i hope your still with me! Disadvatages of joining the Euro

1. The stability and growth pact. There are restrictions placed on the amount the goverment can spend to offset shocks in the economy. Many of you may have noticed that throughout the Sept 11th economic crisis, Britain continued to grow. It did suffer a major slowdown, but it did continue to grow unlike many other countries. This was partially due to the fact that the goverment increased it's spending (and therefore it's debt) to compensate for the fall in consumption by ordinary consumers. Powers like this would be very restricted under this pact. There are punishments in place for those who exceed the limits in place.

2. Assymetric policy sensitivity: households in the UK borrow far more on variable-interest loans to finance house purchases than those in the euro-zone (renting is much more popular in the rest of the EU). When the European Central Bank (ECB) raises interest rates to combat inflation, consumers in the UK would take a greater burden of the adjustment than consumers in the rest of Europe.

3. The ECB sets interest rates for the average monetary conditions of euro-zone members. From time to time the UK might find itself in a situation that requires a cut in interest rates just when the ECB is raising them. That's why it is so important for the UK to converge to a similar economic condition to the other EU members before joining the euro.

4. The MPC (Monetary Policy Commitee) have done an amazingly good job of looking after Britain's inflation. Until recently, we have enjoyed low interest rates, low inflation and low unemployment, which is quite hard to achieve. Many Euro-sceptics compare the ECB's record unfavourably with that of the MPC.

5.The theory that a single currency will lead to the harmonisation and lowering of prices across Europe seems hard to support. Regional differences in prices are a result of differences in levels of taxation as well as variations in labour, property and transportation costs. The cost of living in different parts of the UK varies considerably, even though all regions share the same currency.

(some information based on students guide for Economics by Phillip Allan)

There are many other factors to consider. Transition costs will be pretty big, but if they do good for our economy in the long run, who is going to complain? Also, taking into account the performance of Europe and the UK as seperate entities so far should also be considered. Take a look at this How to make sense of the euro debate (http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,439386,00.html) if you want to know more!! It has many arguments and counter-arguments, for those of you who are interested, make sure you look at BOTH parts.


Right... they are pretty much the big economic arguments. As you can see, they are not very simplistic. This issue is about so much more than sovereignty and the pound. Yes, of course i would like to keep the pound, (I quite liked the idea of having Prince Williams lovely face on my pound notes in the future :p ), but the issue concerns so much more than our history and heritage. It concerns our future prosperity; big issues like jobs, investment and prices. Unfortunately, i have to admit that i'm on the fence as to whether we should join. The advantages are great but there are too many ''if's'' and ''but's''. The only way to know if this is the right decision for us is to use hindsight, something that we cannot have until we have made a decision.

As you can see the economic issues are complicated enough, bringing in all of the political and social arguments just adds more to the pile. I think the best way to make a decision is to keep a check on what's going on. Read what the Sunday papers have to say about these issues, not just the tabloids. Look out for what Gordon Brown has to say about his five economic tests. His tests concern the bulk of the arguments I have stated above. So far, he has only been satisfied with one out of the five tests, i think.

It's a tough decision.... let's hope we make the right one!

[Athina]

People will always be too proud of their history to completely assimilate. ie) You won't lose your identity if you simply share the same currency its very silly, people are very different culturally and that won't change.
The only problem is that things have gotten more expensive!!

[Mundungus Fletc]

Prof Blink wrote
4. The MPC (Monetary Policy Commitee) have done an amazingly good job of looking after Britain's inflation. Until recently, we have enjoyed low interest rates, low inflation and low unemployment, which is quite hard to achieve. Many Euro-sceptics compare the ECB's record unfavourably with that of the MPC.

Therein lies my difficulty with the Euro. The ECB is essentially a politically run organisation. Big countries (France and Germany) can ignore the rules and get away with it. I remember that when the eurozone was created only two countries in the EU had met the criteria set down for joining - Luxembourg and the UK - but the rules were fudged to allow twelve countries to sign up for it.

When the UK joins we must ensure the ECB is truly independent - allowing politicians to play with the value of our money is a potential disaster.