Is the Eurozone now becoming a single state?

60% of domestic food consumption is produced locally by 0.6% of our population. Were it not for waste and over consumption that figure could be 100% if we needed it to be. But why would we need it to be? Financial services is a skilled industry, far more skilled than growing coffe beans. Why shouldn't we import coffee beans from Columbia really cheaply while exporting highly skilled manufactured goods and services?

As for manipulating currencies, yes that's possible. And as we have an independent currency it can either freely float or be manipulated as we require.

I'm not convinced those food consumption/production stats are placed in proper context, are you? I'm under the impression that the UK can't meet its own dairy needs, let alone fruits and meats, and needs to import quite a bit. Even if the UK could sustain itself on domestic food products, you can't fuel your economy on domestic energy products. You'd still have to import petrol, coal or natural gas to transport British products to other Brits.

Coffe beans don't require "skilled professionals", but it does require a certain environment/climate that can't be found--or replicated--in the UK. You also can't grow your own tea leaves, even though you're a nation of tea-lovers and rely on exotic imports, you can't dispatch the Queen's Navy to...oh, never mind that tangent. :p

Modern Financial Services are an education-based, expandable and transferrable service industry. Trying to call it a necessary 'commodity' for the UK doesn't make it so. There's no reason to believe that British financiers have stronger national alliances than American financiers do....when the only goal is to make money by trading money, and using emerging markets to make money.

I'm not sure why you think a UK currency is "independent" because it's based on a basket-of-goods....when those goods are pegged to other currency values, and how they trade in a global market.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

98% of people not being employed in agriculture seems about right.

Dutch export figures/import are often a bit funny due to the Rotterdam-Antwerp effect.

---

Another of those typical eurohaters lies; Dutch export figures are not 'funny' or distorted at all. But even if your lie were true, then it would only mean that a bigger proportion of our exports are in that 'third-world' sector of the economy than the 20% I quoted. Most of our trade is with Germany in the first place, and besides that, logistics are an actual service, adding to the GDP.

Which explains too why Dutch people are in favour of a real free trade zone as opposed to British Tories who only profess to being in favour of a free trade zone, but are not willing to accept that free trade only is possible if you have an organisation that stops national governments from imposing barriers in violation of those rules. One could point at the French refusal to import British beef, one could also point at the illegal levies on imports for personal use of spirits and tobacco that the British government imposed.

Finally, Antwerp is in Belgium, which has been a separate country for over 150 years now. What explains your not knowing this?

Don't get so touchy.

The Rotterdam-Antwerp effect is mis-used by eurohaters true but I didn't use it in that context to say anything anti-EU did I? In fact the EU wasn't even in the conversation. All I said was the Dutch figures are a bit distorted, I don't know how that distortion works. Either way I suspect that a far lower proportion of Dutch workers work in agriculture and lower proportion of total Dutch exports come from Agriculture than is the case in the third world.

The Rotterdam-Antwerp effect is to the best of my knowledge acknowledged as a known distortion by the EU Commission, the UK and Dutch governments. I am not aware of any definitive answers as to how big a distortion is causes, just that it is a known one. I don't particularly care too much.

I am aware that Antwerp is in Belgium, I never said only the Netherlands was affected did I? Belgium is also affected by it.

Since you come from a country that doesn't really believe in free trade I guess I have to tell you this; goods traded are goods traded, no matter how long or short they stay in your country.

The Dutch government also sticks to that adage, so there is no reason to accomodate outlandish notions that somehow trade is of a lesser kind if you re-export it to another country. Quite to the contrary.

Short of this thread turning into a Freee Trade tangent....

I'd like to ask Rand to meld the questions if Italy is the next failed Euro state, and if the Eurozone is becoming a single state. They seem inextricably linked.

Seems the general complaint is about centralized monetary policy, as a form of central economic planning---when there are de-centralized (national) political processes at play that make a union difficult.

Is there any nation that doesn't feel some resentment toward the whole gig during these hard times? When things get tough, the instinct is to fall back onto protective national interests, losing sight of the forest for the trees. The US is a major funder of the IMF, and our Federal Reserve has loaned billions indirectly to the ECB, or directly to European banks.

I don't particularly like the US acting as the world's lender of first resort (any more than I like being the world's military of first resort). Especially since our "wealth" includes debt owned by other nations (like China). All sovereign debt is political. But I'm not quite sure what Rand sees as the major threat to the UK, or what he proposes as an alternative.

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hazir

Since you come from a country that doesn't really believe in free trade I guess I have to tell you this; goods traded are goods traded, no matter how long or short they stay in your country.

The Dutch government also sticks to that adage, so there is no reason to accomodate outlandish notions that somehow trade is of a lesser kind if you re-export it to another country. Quite to the contrary.

---

It's not, but it doesn't give an accurate picture of local production either. All the trade you're transshipping, reexporting, etc. distorts that picture which is generally derived from local consumption plus exports minus imports, and local production was what Rand and GGT had been discussing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

It's not, but it doesn't give an accurate picture of local production either. All the trade you're transshipping, reexporting, etc. distorts that picture which is generally derived from local consumption plus exports minus imports, and local production was what Rand and GGT had been discussing.

---

Exactly. I don't particularly care where things get produced generally as I believe in free trade - I no more believe the UK needs to produce my food than I believe I need to be a farmer myself - but in a conversation about local production its not odd to look at that known distortion. I've never brought up that distortion before (which also happens in the US with certain States, I believe from memory Baltimore especially is one city like that) as I'm not a "made in the UK/whatever" kind of person.

Geegee, the US is neither a lender of first resort (that's private companies generally) nor even accurately the "lender of last resort" which is the correct phrase used in this context.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy

It's not, but it doesn't give an accurate picture of local production either. All the trade you're transshipping, reexporting, etc. distorts that picture which is generally derived from local consumption plus exports minus imports, and local production was what Rand and GGT had been discussing.

---

And you based this opinion on what information? God, you really love to get your tongue deep into any british ass that presents itself to you don't you? It would be so cool to even once see you write something that 's not sounding like it came right out of the comments of the Daily Telegraph. Then again, I guess that's too much to hope for with the big chip you have on your shoulders about eurocentrism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Exactly. I don't particularly care where things get produced generally as I believe in free trade - I no more believe the UK needs to produce my food than I believe I need to be a farmer myself - but in a conversation about local production its not odd to look at that known distortion. I've never brought up that distortion before (which also happens in the US with certain States, I believe from memory Baltimore especially is one city like that) as I'm not a "made in the UK/whatever" kind of person.

Geegee, the US is neither a lender of first resort (that's private companies generally) nor even accurately the "lender of last resort" which is the correct phrase used in this context.

---

Again, if that distortion you love to parade about were true then a corrected percentage of agriculture in our economy would be significantly HIGHER than the 20% quoted. And that brings us back to your ridiculous claim that there is something inherently backward about having an agricultural sector of a relevant size.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Exactly. I don't particularly care where things get produced generally as I believe in free trade - I no more believe the UK needs to produce my food than I believe I need to be a farmer myself - but in a conversation about local production its not odd to look at that known distortion. I've never brought up that distortion before (which also happens in the US with certain States, I believe from memory Baltimore especially is one city like that) as I'm not a "made in the UK/whatever" kind of person.

---

What you're talking about has nothing to do with "Freee Trade", but price comparisons. We've talked about sugar tariffs before, but only in a policy context. As a consumer, you'd most likely choose the "cheapest" sugar, even if it came from another nation that subsidized sugar production, and lobbied for no or low import taxes or tariffs.

Local pricing isn't the "distortion". Short term and disconnected thinking is the real problem. ie, it may save millions of consumers and billions of dollars to buy sugar from Brazil, or winter-time citrus from Mexico...but it won't translate into domestic jobs. That's the flaw of globalization that many don't dare to mention. iPads and iPhones are already pricey, and wouldn't be affordable if not assembled in China, with their cheap labor. Many of our manufactured goods operate that way....from athletic shoes to clothing or household goods...to automobiles, and their operating fuel.

People who buy a <more expensive> hybrid or electric fueled car are betting their nation has cheaper electricity and/or a more advanced lithium battery industry, compared to cars that only run on refined oil/gas. Some upgrade to a great engine that runs on premium gas or diesel, but that's hardly the best foundation for a national energy policy.

Quote:

---

Geegee, the US is neither a lender of first resort (that's private companies generally) nor even accurately the "lender of last resort" which is the correct phrase used in this context.

---

The USD is considered the world's reserve currency. Oil contracts are traded in USD. Foreign currencies are pegged against the USD. Like it or not, that's the way it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

....
Geegee, the US is neither a lender of first resort (that's private companies generally) nor even accurately the "lender of last resort" which is the correct phrase used in this context.

---

Then you'd be okay with the US bowing out of the IMF, or lending USD from our Federal Reserve to the ECB?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

...All sovereign debt is political. But I'm not quite sure what Rand sees as the major threat to the UK, or what he proposes as an alternative.

---

Awaiting your reply, Rand. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Then you'd be okay with the US bowing out of the IMF, or lending USD from our Federal Reserve to the ECB?

---

I think it'd be a shame (the former) as the IMF does an important job IMO, the US is just one of many lenders of last resort to it. An important one though, if you pulled out I think so would others. As for lending directly, no I have no problem with that whatsoever. In fact I suspect the US already does somewhat.

Quote:

---

Awaiting your reply, Rand. ;)

---

A disorderly collapse of the eurozone would have a devastating effect on financial markets and would need almost dictatorial restrictions on any nations that planned to withdraw due to bad conditions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

I think it'd be a shame (the former) as the IMF does an important job IMO, the US is just one of many lenders of last resort to it. An important one though, if you pulled out I think so would others. As for lending directly, no I have no problem with that whatsoever. In fact I suspect the US already does somewhat.

---

Yes, our Fed loaned money directly to some British banks. With no strings attached to de-leverage or restructure (asaik), same thing they did with our own banks.

Quote:

---

A disorderly collapse of the eurozone would have a devastating effect on financial markets and would need almost dictatorial restrictions on any nations that planned to withdraw due to bad conditions.

---

A disorderly collapse would be bad for everyone, not just the UK.
Watching you and Hazir argue made me wonder what your alternative is? :confused:

I doubt there is any alternative other than higher taxes. Austerity for the money makers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

A disorderly collapse would be bad for everyone, not just the UK.
Watching you and Hazir argue made me wonder what your alternative is? :confused:

---

Alternative to what?

Typical Being :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

Alternative to what?

Typical Being :rolleyes:

---

Excuse me, what's Being got to do with my question to you? :confused:

You were vehemently disagreeing with Hazir, on everything from the Eurozone as a shared trading coalition to the Euro as a shared currency, defending Cameron's decisions for the UK as a nation-based policy that *some* see as protectionist, or contentious to the overall success of the technical Eurozone.

As I read it, you're taking both sides of the argument, for and against monetary policies. Pro when it comes to anything English, anti when it comes to anything Euro. Yet you want to import/export with the Eurozone, using eurodollars, and! impact their trade and currency policies....while not being part OF it? :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GGT

Excuse me, what's Being got to do with my question to you? :confused:

You were vehemently disagreeing with Hazir, on everything from the Eurozone as a shared trading coalition to the Euro as a shared currency, defending Cameron's decisions for the UK as a nation-based policy that *some* see as protectionist, or contentious to the overall success of the technical Eurozone.

As I read it, you're taking both sides of the argument, for and against monetary policies. Pro when it comes to anything English, anti when it comes to anything Euro. Yet you want to import/export with the Eurozone, using eurodollars, and! impact their trade and currency policies....while not being part OF it? :confused:

---

Gosh, the first time an American seems to get what the British european position really is; they want to have a say in how WE run our politics but are not willing to have the outcome applied to themselves.

Funny by the way how the future of the United Kingdom all of a sudden is more in question than the future of the European Union.