UK in the euro

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by vampire_lestat
is it undemocratic (is that even a word?) to want my country to have power over itself, rather than another group of individuals who were not voted on, sounds even more Fachist than what i was saying really.

it all ammounts to a loss of control, meaning that what is best for most europians will be done

rather than what is best for the UK,

and, most importantly, me.

All three of those statements are inconsistent with each other in what you imply. What's the difference between being controlled by a "country" or by a "continent". Everyone prattles on about democracy while ignoring the larger question of whether anyone has the right to ever tell you what to do with your life.



PS Establish your own currency.

[vampire_lestat]

Originally posted by Proteus
Sure you will.

If Tony attempts to make us join the Euro (or make us sign the new EU Constitution for that matter) without a referendum he will be publicly lynched.

no i wont, too young, even though i would probably make a more educated vote than more than half the adult population ffs.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
PS Establish your own currency.

I have, and it's based around alcohol.

More of a bartering economy, actually. Other people give me booze, and I drink it.

EVERYONE'S A WINNAR!

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Dave
I can see the Tories next election 'promise' being to withdraw us from this constitution at all cost.

Hardly likely. Not even Don't-Can't Smith is that silly.

He will put forward a 'compromise option' which makes it look like we'll be able to rake back lots of 'opt outs' and that sort of thing, but will actually amount to very little.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by vampire_lestat
no i wont, too young, even though i would probably make a more educated vote than more than half the adult population ffs.

Hah.

As if 'education' would change anything.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
As if 'education' would change anything.

Don't put yourself down, Prof.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Don't put yourself down, Prof.

Heh, I'd forgotten about that.

[edit]

An addition to my 'education' point; knowledge doesn't matter, it's the manner of thinking.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
An addition to my 'education' point; knowledge doesn't matter, it's the manner of thinking.

I would have thought knowledge would still be fairly important.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
I would have thought knowledge would still be fairly important.

Knowledge has no value if you didn't know where it came from, and how to use it.

[edit]

'Information' rather than 'data' if you will.

[wu_trax]

Originally posted by vampire_lestat
is it undemocratic (is that even a word?) to want my country to have power over itself, rather than another group of individuals who were not voted on, sounds even more Fachist than what i was saying really.

so you actually vote who becomes president of the bank of england or wahtever?

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
Knowledge has no value if you didn't know where it came from, and how to use it.

You're still up **** creek if you have no knowledge to begin with.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
You're still up **** creek if you have no knowledge to begin with.

I'm exaggerating for effect.

You know, rhetoric?

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
You know, rhetoric?

If you're going to use rhetoric, then I'll fine you five points.

If you buzz you must answer.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
If you're going to use rhetoric, then I'll fine you five points.

If you buzz you must answer.

Marilyn Paxman?

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
All three of those statements are inconsistent with each other in what you imply. What's the difference between being controlled by a "country" or by a "continent". Everyone prattles on about democracy while ignoring the larger question of whether anyone has the right to ever tell you what to do with your life.



PS Establish your own currency.

the lesser of two evils.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by Insane Badger
the lesser of two evils.

Or create a new option.........

[huh]

Everyone in the know knows that the Euro is just a communist plot to try and destroy the Pound. As soon as we join, the other countries will suddenly adopt their old currencies and we will be stuck with the Euro, which will collapse.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Someone didn't read all of Jonny's post.

[huh]

Huh?

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by huh
Huh?

'I'll delete my post to stop myself looking like an idiot!'

[huh]

If it was there, why didn't you quote it? I'm sure they have laws against outright lying in attempt to slander someone.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by huh
If it was there, why didn't you quote it? I'm sure they have laws against outright lying in attempt to slander someone.

Because it was too ****ing long. And can we stop being silly now.

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
Or create a new option.........

As much as I'd love to do that,it isn't really a viable option right now.

[pablissimo]

I'm not drunk yet.

But I should be by about midnight.

I'll post then.

[Weeks]

Pro Euro if the British MEPs (or whoever as long as they look after the UK economy) are there making sure it works for us.

The other point is i quite like the Pound, i gives me a sense of National pride somehow.

I'd probably be happier if there was more info out there that could be easily accessed. Instead of the Anti-Euro tabloids shouting 'THE GERMANS WILL BE RUNNING OUR ECONOMY'.

I'm not sure why the Goverment hasnt tried to educate the general british population about this more. Unless they are afraid we'll actually learn that the Euro and EU is far from perfect (and still in it's infancy in many aspects), and wont be able to realise if we want it better we have to join and be commited to making it better.

But then we're in a Parliamentry Democray, with the emphasis being on the parliamentry.

[Proteus]

Originally posted by Weeks
But then we're in a Parliamentry Democray, with the emphasis being on the parliamentry.

And here was me thinking we were in a Constitutional Monarchy...

[pablissimo]

The Euro is a great idea, it's that simple. Unfortunately, the implementation was unsatisfactory, and the scale of the initial rollout was over-ambitious to say the least. Managing to synchronise that many large economies was a logistical nightmare, and simply wasn't going to work over the timescale provided. This has been demonstrated by current discrepancies between perceptions of benefit between Euroland members.

Single currency == good, on all sides. 'I want to keep the pound because... well because I like the pound' and arguments in a similar vein are inane, and shouldn't even be allowed to be counted as counter-arguments.

There are several huge disadvantages to a single currency; unrealistic 'one-size-fits-all' monetary policy, short-term lack of consumer confidence in the real value of goods and services, desynchronisation between members. However, in the long term these are wholly outweighed by the advantages of the system, namely a increase in business confidence re: value of raw material imports, greater ease and flexibilty of overseas financial services including credit and insurance, increased potential for consumer awareness of foreign competitors to domestic goods, increased competition in the financial services sector, yadda yadda yadda.

We ain't ready. Yet. And the Euro as it currently stands may not be a feasible future path for any economy, let alone the UK. We've once again been caught with not being involved at stage one of the concept, and then trying to jump in later on having waived our right to an influence on the design. That said, there's definitely a future in a single currency, whether or not the current implementation of that concept lives on or whether it's forced to evolve first is uncertain.


I've been drinking.

[queball]

Originally posted by pablissimo
Euroland

That would be an ace themepark. Ride the frenchie rollercoaster through underground caves where you get sprayed with garlic. Be thrilled by the Ferris Wheel Of German Economy. Lose your lunch at the Irish freakshow.


btw I agree with Dante if anyone cares.

Originally posted by pablissimo
The Euro is a great idea, it's that simple. Unfortunately, the implementation was unsatisfactory, and the scale of the initial rollout was over-ambitious to say the least. Managing to synchronise that many large economies was a logistical nightmare, and simply wasn't going to work over the timescale provided. This has been demonstrated by current discrepancies between perceptions of benefit between Euroland members.

Single currency == good, on all sides. 'I want to keep the pound because... well because I like the pound' and arguments in a similar vein are inane, and shouldn't even be allowed to be counted as counter-arguments.

There are several huge disadvantages to a single currency; unrealistic 'one-size-fits-all' monetary policy, short-term lack of consumer confidence in the real value of goods and services, desynchronisation between members. However, in the long term these are wholly outweighed by the advantages of the system, namely a increase in business confidence re: value of raw material imports, greater ease and flexibilty of overseas financial services including credit and insurance, increased potential for consumer awareness of foreign competitors to domestic goods, increased competition in the financial services sector, yadda yadda yadda.

We ain't ready. Yet. And the Euro as it currently stands may not be a feasible future path for any economy, let alone the UK. We've once again been caught with not being involved at stage one of the concept, and then trying to jump in later on having waived our right to an influence on the design. That said, there's definitely a future in a single currency, whether or not the current implementation of that concept lives on or whether it's forced to evolve first is uncertain.


I've been drinking.

you seem to be forgetting the euro isn't just an economic decision.

Originally posted by Proteus
And here was me thinking we were in a Constitutional Monarchy...

Certainly not. Britain doesn't have a constitution.

[Proteus]

Originally posted by bink
Certainly not. Britain doesn't have a constitution.

Of course it does.

(P.S. Department of Constitutional Affairs)

[pablissimo]

Originally posted by Insane Badger
you seem to be forgetting the euro isn't just an economic decision.

Monetary policy control is the only thing I can think of that gets centralised under the single currency, I could be wrong I've not kept up. Or remembered much.

Originally posted by Proteus
Of course it does.

(P.S. Department of Constitutional Affairs)

Isn't it the collection of thousands and thousands of laws passed over the past millennium, no more legally binding than common laws, as opposed to the post (french-)revolutionary idea of a constitution?

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally posted by Proteus
(P.S. Department of Constitutional Affairs)

(Minister of Administrative Affairs)

[Andy_r]

yes, minister

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by bink
Isn't it the collection of thousands and thousands of laws passed over the past millennium, no more legally binding than common laws, as opposed to the post (french-)revolutionary idea of a constitution?

Are you suggesting that The UK does not, in fact have a recognisable system of government?

This is what claiming a state 'does not have a constitution' amounts to.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Proteus
And here was me thinking we were in a Constitutional Monarchy...

Sod a Constiutional Monarchy. What matters is whether you have a Parliamentary or Presidential system. Whether you have an elected or unelected figurehead under a Parliamentary system matters not one jot.

Talking about 'Constitutional Monarchies' is uneccesarily indulgent and outdated baggage that belongs to more than a century and a half previously.

[wu_trax]

i dont know about the french constitution, but the definitions in our constitution are so wide, that i dont think it makes much of a difference if you have some central document with a general set of rules or not.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri
(Minister of Administrative Affairs)

I don't think Tony would trust Lord Falconer with that sort of thing. He has other people for that. David Milliband etc.

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Are you suggesting that The UK does not, in fact have a recognisable system of government?

This is what claiming a state 'does not have a constitution' amounts to.

No, it means you have no set of laws that cant (easily) be changed, against which all common laws can be tested. A simple majority (half plus one) of parliament could vote away your freedom of speech. Probably because democracy was not 'founded' in the UK, it just sort of evolved over the centuries.

It's not as bad as Israel though, which has no constitution, nor a legal tradition

[Apothos]

The UK doesnt have a constitution.

It does, however, have a department for constitutional affairs.

[Chrism]

The UK doesn't have a codified constitution, we do have a constitution though, simply of a different form to most other countries. Israel's constitution is similar, made up of multiple Basic Laws rather than one single document.