End of the Euro

[emordnilap]

The British sense of humour used to be wry and eccentric, but it has become largely debased by poor education (few people understand nuance and wit any more) and by increasingly aggressive social attitudes, so that irony has degraded into sarcasm and cruelty.

Two Pints of Lager and Little Britain.

Well, we're always talking about waste of resources on PS, so there's another two. Does the media influence the audience or vice versa? Do I give a shit?

Anyway, if that is popular British humour these days, then it's yet another reason why I feel immeasurably better off over here with no tv.

[extractorfan]

David Mitchell's pretty funny.

I'm trying to think of others.

[emordnilap]

David Mitchell's pretty funny.

I'm trying to think of others.

And you're struggling.

Oh, there are intelligent comedians out there, no doubt. They're always there. It's the eastenderisation of mass 'culture' (sorry) that makes me gurn.

[RenewableCandy]

Bremner Bird and Fortune!

Chris Addison and the MtW bunch...

QI!!!

Spittin' Image (you're going back a while for that, though)

Private Eye

(and from another thread) Rab C Nesbitt...

[clv101]

After reading a dozen articles, listening the speeches from Cameron and Sarkozy, comment from Hague, Peston and Robinson... I still have no clear idea whether Cameron's decision last night was the right one or not. My gut feeling is that it was right, but that a decision either way will end up being fairly inconsequential so no point fussing too much about it.

[DominicJ]

I'd go as far as to say it will bring forward a resolution.
Whether thats good or bad, who can say

EUrope cant play with its "FiskalUnion" rubbish anymore, so has to pick its poison, break up or full Drachmaisation or Markisation (rather than switching when it suits Germany).
Well, they can always come up with another idea that completely misses the point I suppose. But if a significant minority or playing a "no new treaty" card, thats a bit of a dead end.

[RenewableCandy]

It all looks to me like a large and very efficient mechanism for siphoning money from the populace to the banks/bondholders. That can't go on. Sooner or later the whole concept of "bonds" is going to have to be re-thought, because they can't work without growth. Keeping the E. Union may make this easier to do.

[biffvernon]

a decision either way will end up being fairly inconsequential so no point fussing too much about it.

No, I can't quite work out which way would have provided the greater access to cheap oil either. Is there anything else that matters?

[UndercoverElephant]

a decision either way will end up being fairly inconsequential so no point fussing too much about it.

No, I can't quite work out which way would have provided the greater access to cheap oil either. Is there anything else that matters?

YES, Biff

Something you've never quite grasped, and that is the political reality of trying to implement any sort of solution to a serious physical problem like Peak Oil. What you are seeing played out in Europe now is a game where different groups of people's different self-interest clashes in such a way that
agreement becomes impossible. This isn't just a problem for the EU. The same problem exists in the Transition Town movement, and nearly tore the Green Party apart two decades ago.

We aren't all in it together. "We" (Europeans) aren't in the same boat as the Chinese. And the Greeks aren't really in the same boat as the Germans - or at least they don't want to be. What you are seeing now is that when the shit hits the fan, hard decisions have to be made about who gets what power and who takes which cuts in living standards.

What you are seeing is a foretaste of what is going to happen as the shit
hits the fan elsewhere. It's only happening in Europe first because they have a particular set of political problems that don't exist elsewhere, because the EU is in effect a partially-formed federal state. This was always going to lead to serious problems eventually, regardless of peak oil and banking crises. A partially-formed state can survive when times are good, but not when they are bad.

[Lord Beria3]

Well said undercoverElephant.

Whilst I admire Biffs idealism, I have always felt that he was going to be dissapointed when the shit actually began to hit the fan - as it has started now.

Regarding this Euro meeting, as ambrose says in the torygraph, it doesn't provide a solution and without growth the whole Project is going to disintergrate anyway, even if they brought in eurobonds and ECB monetisation (which is what the markets want).

The social-political consequences of a Franco-German semi-dictatorship of European capital imposing permament austority on the European people is going to create the ideal conditions for a massive upsurge of far-right populism, balkanisation of Europe and eventual war.

This is what the European elites want to avoid, but the irony of the situation is that this is precisely where we are heading.

[biffvernon]

YES, Biff Something you've never quite grasped, and that is the political reality...

Whilst I admire Biffs idealism, I have always felt that he was going to be dissapointed...

Sorry guys but I'm quite good at grasping reality and simultaneously maintaining idealism and even a glimmer of optimism despite the almost overwhelming adverse odds.

[UndercoverElephant]

, it doesn't provide a solution

No. It is mainly an exercise in closing the stable door (it's mainly to do with stopping this from happening again, which is all well and good but doesn't fix the existing mess.)

[Lord Beria3]

, it doesn't provide a solution

No. It is mainly an exercise in closing the stable door (it's mainly to do with stopping this from happening again, which is all well and good but doesn't fix the existing mess.)

Precisely.

The significance of Camerons isolation in Europe is debatable. What is also interesting is whether their proposed eurozone + others treaty is actually legal?!

http://www.spiegel.de/international/eur ... #ref=nlint

Euro-Zone Treaty May Be Illegal

The euro-zone 17 in combination with six other countries quickly began moving forward on their own. But is such a move legal? European Union lawyers have their doubts that the kind of euro-zone fiscal union within the EU would be allowed.

Changes to the EU treaty, after all, must be unanimous. Furthermore, EU officials in Brussels say, because monetary union is regulated extensively in the Lisbon Treaty, reform can only be implemented within the existing legal framework. The legal services experts of the European Commission, the European Central Bank and the European Council, which represents the member states in Brussels, are all in agreement. A treaty concluded only by the 17 euro-zone governments would be illegal, they say.

Individual countries could only issue a "political declaration of intent," in which they determined, for example, how they would decide on the use of sanctions against budget offenders. But such a declaration would have no legally binding character and, as officials point out, could also be revoked following the election of a new government. This is principally a reference to France, where the Socialist presidential candidate François Hollande has already announced that he would not accept any incursions into national sovereignty.

Shortly before the summit, many European leaders were pushing for a quick rescue plan. At the convention of the European People's Party (EPP) in Marseilles, the conservative group which currently constitutes the largest faction in the European Parliament, smaller countries also spoke out in favor of a strong Europe with strict rules.

If it is illegal, than refusing Camerons deal was rather stupid by Merkel. The whole thing seems pretty weak to me? How long can it continue?

I think it could finally collapse by March/April 2012...

[Lord Beria3]

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/1110e46c ... z1g4VvGVTa

Amid all the heated speculation about the European Union summit’s impact on Europe’s economic future and Britain’s role in it, traders are asking a more mundane question: “Has it done enough to get us through to Christmas?” Their answer: probably not.

Traders appear to believe that the ECB cannot backstop banks effectively unless it also backstops governments. They were disappointed that the summit had not produced a strong enough deal to persuade Mr Draghi to weaken his stance.

“President Draghi responded positively to the agreement, but we are unlikely to see a step change in ECB bond purchases in the short term,” said Jens Larsen, chief European strategist at RBC Capital Markets.

“This makes it more likely than not that Standard & Poor’s will carry out its threat to downgrade some euro area member states in the coming days.”

The risk remains that the market will test Mr Draghi’s resolve by attacking a peripheral country’s debt in the two weeks before Christmas – particularly if a rating agency provides an excuse.

In other words, nothing has changed.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/breakout ... 7.html?l=1

As has long been apparent, the crux of the issues are the differing principles and needs of the nations involved. Zucchi says the best solutions require printing money and risking inflation; prospects instinctively horrifying to the member nation with the most sway in the Eurozone: Germany.

Until "the Germans and to a certain degree the French decide to accept inflation, there's no way out," Zucchi tells me, putting a damper on the otherwise upbeat Festivus charity event.

Zucchi notes that Germany's history with inflation doesn't bode well for a comprehensive solution to Europe's woes anytime soon. The country's "DNA is to prevent inflation (and not) repeat the Weimar scenario just like our DNA is prevent deflation and another depression."

Given this inherent fear of inflation and the political impracticality of forcing French or German citizens to bailout the weaker members of the Eurozone, hoping for the best seems unrealistic. That said, Zucchi is guardedly optimistic about Europe's ability to avoid the worst.

"I am somewhat hopeful we are not going to see a violent uprising," he offers. So there's that.

[the_lyniezian]

I don't really know everything about the issue or understand it fully, so correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I gather, it would seem the problem is trying to impose these fiscal ruls upon the whole EU and not just the Eurozone. If you have a single currency, then of course you need a shared control system- otherwise one country's economy affects the value of the whole currency and all that use it. The same effect does not apply to those who do not use that currency, except indirectly.

So if you want a unanimous treaty, then don't let it affect the non-Eurozone countries, simple as that.

Sadly they're so committed to the "ever-closer union" ideal that they don't admit that countries "out" of the Euro are any more than "not yet in"- so they imagine they need rules to regulate economies which might just join the Euro, so as not to affect it when (not if) they do.

Unfortunately this is the real world. It don't work that way. Not everyone wants the euro.