Any critical analysis of the 
eurozone crisis does not have                         
an obvious solution beyond that 
of greater fiscal and political 
integration. While this may indeed 
come to pass, it would not address 
the disparity in productivity 
between the countries of northern 
and southern 
Europe. 
In the absence of a cultural change 
in the work ethic, which  is hard to 
imagine, the inevitable consequence 
would be Germany keeping the 
southern states on extended  
financial life-support.
accelerating social cost, until such
time as the German economy ran
out of money. The strategy will
merely prolong, perhaps for a
generation, the misery to which
millions will continue to be
subjected.
The only practicable way
forward is for insolvent
eurozone members to rebalance
their economies through the
re-introduction of their former
currencies.
This would, of course, be
extremely painful in the medium
term. However, exhange rates
reflecting competitive performance
rather than a single currency, would
enable tourism and other activities
to flourish and economies to grow.
Such an outcome would not satisfy 
the federalist deciples of Ardanauer, 
Monet and Schuman, the founding 
fathers of the EU. It would, however, 
bring hope to those countries that would prefer economic and political
self-determination with all its initial
pain, to a slow but remorseless
descent into even more dystopian
misery.
David Cameron's speech at Davos
articulated the need for change. The
EU has 7% of the world's population,
generates 25% of global GDP, but
spends 50% of GDP on welfare, which
is unsustainable. The question is does
the EU have the political and economic
will to change, or will reality impose
change upon it?
 
No comments:
Post a Comment