Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
That is a very peculiar definition of sovereignity. One which the general public does not share.
The general public is wrong on economics because they adhere to common-sense-conservative frames.
The general public is not ready to hand over power of budgets, taxes, health care and pensions to the EU.
But that's what they have done with the Maastricht Treaty.
It would take that to make EU institutions more powerful than the member states.
EU institutions can break the back of member states and hide behind "markets" as they do so.
As far as power over the ECB is concerned, you need to remember that the member states still hold the ultimate weapon. They can leave the Euro.
Quote me a treaty article allowing Euro exit. Until you do (and you won't be able to), all EU member states can do is leave the European Union altogether.

If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jul 20th, 2012 at 04:27:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The public was told some things about Maastricht and the Euro, which it believed. Unfortunately these things have turned out to be in conflict with reality. And that puts it nicely.
That leads to certain problems. You cannot tell voters that you screwed them and then get them to agree to your newest proposal.

As for leaving the Euro we are approaching a very ugly area. The EU has quite limited means to enforce its treaties. If a member state insisted on leaving the Euro, the EU probably could make it leave the EU altogether. However, it is doubtful that the EU as a political project would survive that. The lawyers would be told to find some way and nobody would look closely at it. A bailout was also supposed to be strictly forbidden once.

by oliver on Fri Jul 20th, 2012 at 04:51:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
You cannot tell voters that you screwed them and then get them to agree to your newest proposal.

You can tell the voters that an earlier generation of politicians screwed everyone. Or you can tell them that other political parties screwed everyone. That's what happened in Greece with Syriza and his 30-something-year-old leader eating PASOK's lunch.

If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jul 20th, 2012 at 05:09:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]
True. It will work sometimes and in some places. Yet even in Greece it took a peculiar electoral system and it was quite close. How could that be enough?
by oliver on Sun Jul 22nd, 2012 at 04:12:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]
No, in Greece the peculiar electoral system was what allowed the Troika parties to govern nonetheless by giving ND 50 extra seats, it wasn't what allowed PASOK to implode.

If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Sun Jul 22nd, 2012 at 04:58:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Wiemarize a country sufficiently and it will discard the gold standard. One way or another. The details will depend on the idiosyncrasies of the country in question, but discarding the gold standard is a constant.

This is the second most consistent historical experience in economics (the first one being that no, this time is not different).

- Jake

Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon Jul 23rd, 2012 at 03:23:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series