France favours a "stronger organisation" behind the euro led by "a vanguard of countries", French President Francois Hollande said in an interview published Sunday.
In the past week "the European spirit prevailed" in addressing the Greek crisis, he told the weekly Journal du Dimanche.
"But we cannot stand still," Hollande said, in the interview published alongside a profile of Jacques Delors, the former head of the European Commission.
Delors, a former French economics and finance minister who turns 90 on Monday, is one of the architects of the euro.
"I have proposed taking up Jacques Delors' idea about euro government, with the addition of a specific budget and a parliament to ensure democratic control," Hollande said.…France 24
France favours establishment of euro government
18 comments:
Let him dream on, It is already one big unhappy family. Hollande is presenting Greece's deal as a victory. Even the hawks are quiet now, they don't talk about lazy Greeks any more. This was too much for everyone, apparently not for Hollande. Let the problems start again, this deal is not going to work. It just shows how the political elites in Europe have lost touch with reality. He wants a government so more deals like Greece can be enforced by that government.
http://www.businessinsider.com/europe-worrying-about-revolution-if-greece-goes-wrong-2015-7
A spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of Grexit.
And, as Marx would have noted with a smile if he were still alive, Europe's leaders are now, unusually, openly worrying about whether the high cost of the Greece bailout might lead to "violence" or "revolution."
Hollande wants a Euro government? We already have one: the European parliament to which we vote European Members of Parliament. Perhaps Hollande hasn’t heard of it.
Hollande also omits to tell us exactly what this government will do to solve Greek type problems. The most popular solution is fiscal union, but that would involve Germany and other core countries dishing out even more for periphery countries. If voters in core countries are not happy about the amount they’re currently dishing out, which they aren’t, why are they going to be happy with fiscal union?
Seems Hollande can’t think his way out of a paper bag.
Recent polling shows that a German majority favors Grexit.
German taxpayers don't what to get stuck with Greek debts and they believe they will be.
I've been talking to ordinary people about this and they seem to think that we should help Greece but these bailouts don't help them. If their governments are so incompetent, perhaps we should help them setting up their own currency. There have been 3 governments already who sold Greek people out to troika. even their democratic proccess really doesn't work any more. Who is to say that the same thing is not going to happen again when they would elect a new government? This is the mood I've been getting, no one seems to talk about the lazy Greek.
It's likely that the USA is leaning HEAVILY on Germany/France/Poland/Slovaks, etc, etc .... saying that NOW (or never) is the time to turn NATO into a formidable Unites States of Europe ...
...
[Why?]
... to counter the Russian threat, once & for all.
Many say this is inevitable. 100 years out, most of the 27 state languages of Europe will be gone?
It'll either be Deutchesprache Uberalles ... or Français Toujours.
Or maybe the Queen has a trick up her hatbox?
Germans are very happy for other people of other nations to be "stuck" with public and private debts to enable their export surplus. Their Ordoliberal inspired block-headedness stops them understanding their dependence on such serendipity!
It is their plan for future Europe, seems like an austerity union. They want to transfer more economic control from national governments to Europe, but no permanent fiscal transfers.
http://t.co/YQmsCCEPed
Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union
Various additional sources of financing should be considered.
It will be important to ensure that the design of such
a stabilisation function rests on the following guiding
principles:
• It should not lead to permanent transfers between
countries or to transfers in one direction only, which
is why converging towards Economic Union is a
precondition for participation. It should also not be
conceived as a way to equalise incomes between
Member States.
• It should neither undermine the incentives for sound
fiscal policy-making at the national level, nor the
incentives to address national structural weaknesses.
Accordingly, and to prevent moral hazard, it should
be tightly linked to compliance with the broad EU
governance framework and to progress in converging
towards the common standards described in Section 2.
• It should be developed within the framework of
the European Union. This would guarantee that it is
consistent with the existing EU fiscal framework and with
procedures for the coordination of economic policies. It
should be open and transparent vis-à-vis all EU Member
States.
• It should not be an instrument for crisis management.
The European Stability Mechanism (ESM) already
performs that function. Instead, its role should be to
improve the overall economic resilience of EMU and
individual euro area countries. It would thus help to
prevent crises and actually make future interventions
by the ESM less likely.
Such
Looks like the same recipe for failure.
Also we can't forget. If a Greek leader were to successfully, or appear to be close to success, of breaking Greece out of European domination, that leader very well could end up dead. You can't let a small country exercise independence and risk having them be successful, it's the mafia principle. Prime example is Cuba (except Castro has a backbone, no one in the contemporary left does).
It'll either be Deutchesprache Uberalles ... or Français Toujours.
If it ever comes to that, I'll take French -- for one, it's pleasant to the ear, and two ... it's the language of love ;)
The original DMark to Euro conversion rate when the Euro was set up was not right. The German trade surplus shot up just after it adopted the Euro.
Ralph:but that would involve Germany and other core countries dishing out even more for periphery countries.
No, it wouldn't, not in real terms. To think that is thinking in a false, automatic full-employment, neoclassical frame. In the real world, it would make everyone better off. Part of the problem is the terminology - "fiscal transfers". As Wray, says, they're fiscal, but they aren't transfers. Swiftly rising standards of living for all would be what makes a fiscal union popular, if it happens. Greece has other problems, but the primary one is that it is in an austerity zone, which turns common colds into pneumonia.
Calgacus
"As Wray, says, they're fiscal, but they aren't transfers. Swiftly rising standards of living for all would be what makes a fiscal union popular, if it happens."
you are talking in a sense that if a country or even city has fiscal tranfers as a currency union then this doesn't mean someone is worse off. In that sense I understand you, this has to be one society, then it works. Let's say I lived alone one a big island, I would be better off economically if there were thousand more people and fiscal transfers taking place. So it is more of a political thing really in Europe the resistance is not even about economics that much or lazy Greek. It is just about Europe being as one. It doesn't seem to be though.
The existing fiscal unions are becoming extremely unequal and concentrated. Without management you end up with everybody living on top of each other and a concentrated black hole appears sucking in everything from around it.
How many examples across the globe do we need before we realise that probably isn't the nicest way to live.
The French rejected further integration (undemocratic and unaccountable) some years ago, with the anti-EU sentiments rising, how can Holland think that it's going to be different this time?
They have to stop drinking the kool aid.
That's the thing about the left Ignacio, "thing could be fine". Soviet Union apologisers had the same point in principle. Yes, It is not a democracy and we have problems, but we are building communism, that's better future. They had materials floating around describing how a regular citizen was living in the future. going to a street and using a car he found there that his comrade had left there for anybody to use. There was no money any more etc.
I think he probably sees this emerging degradation of the previous European social welfare starting already in France and is somehow blaming this on "the Euro"...
If Airbus has to slash prices on its aircraft by 20% to compete with Boeing globally and accordingly has to throw thousands who currently work there out of their jobs, that is not the fault of "the Euro"...
Kristjan: Yes, but it is worth pondering this, to see why this phrase rubs Wray the wrong way so strongly. Godley did not use the phrase "fiscal transfer" in his LRB article predicting all this - he used "fiscal equalisation" which is much better. What happens in a normal country like the USA is not a "fiscal transfer" either. When you buy a loaf of bread, are you performing a "fiscal transfer" to the lowly baker? It is just as crazy to call fiscal operations that would sustain Greece in a sane Eurozone "fiscal transfers". Sane people are asking for directed spending, for a reason, not the extend & pretend BS of the eurocrats.
Also, it is child's play - and historically common - to set things up so that on any sane view, the regions that appear to have the "fiscal transfers" directed toward them are in actuality "subsidizing" the parasitic, monetarily wealthy areas. This is something like a country mouse vs city mouse dialectic. If the city mouse is doing something like building universities in the city, country mouse is a dumb bumpkin to criticize his bro. If city mouse is building an advanced financial sector, country mouse is one smart cracker, right to call BS. Looking at money is not enough, you usually have to look at what it is spent on. (The exception, only for some purposes, being deep depression economics.)
Post a Comment