Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Currencies and the Global Capital Markets -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3206)	1/3/2002 1:38:54 PM
From: Ahda	Respond to of 3536

But that being said, sometimes it's necessary to force this ind of "discipline" upon these governmental bodies so that their economic policies take into account the need to facilitate corporate profits and investor returns. This is so true but when the whole thing becomes to iffy due to fragmentation of laws that the corporate world must comply with, you are increasing the chances of socialism due to the probability of default as laws becomes less meaningful to fact. It's obvious that it would not be feasible without wage and prices being standardized around the world. This is not possible.

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3206)	1/3/2002 1:48:36 PM
From: maceng2	Respond to of 3536

Hi hawkmoon, I'd like to thank Darleen Shurgot and yourself for picking up that loose ball I threw out there -g- There is a tendency for a world wide central bank to occur. All those bankers "know one another" through various ways. The link in Darleen Shurgot's post is a good example. Loaning more IMF funds to Argentina, just means more (and bigger) trouble down the road unless they really do work some economic miracle. Economic efficiency does include both health and education as well as "lack of bureaucracy" and taxes. Having lived on both sides of the Atlantic, I have positive feel for both systems (imho). A successful euro could be the start of that trend (possibly).

To: Hawkmoon who wrote (3206)	1/10/2002 9:32:10 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3536

Pesos and Euros Will Europe go the way of Argentina? John O'Sullivan, an NR Editor at large Januray 2, 2002 8:40 a.m. nationalreview.com Excerpt: Which is where the euro comes in. As columnists like Stelzer and William Rees-Mogg in the London Times pointed out, the euro is an Argentine currency board on a much larger scale, uniting the currencies of twelve European nations from Finland to Sicily. This currency union also has a "one-size-fits-all" monetary policy on the Argentine model. Which means that no monetary policy set by the European Central Bank can possibly suit both Germany (whose economy is faltering and needs the boost of low interest rates) and Spain (which is inflating and needs the correction of higher ones.) In the United States, we solve or at least ameliorate this problem of regional economic variations by labor mobility. When California hits a slump, some workers uproot themselves to move to the job opportunities in a part of the U.S. that is booming. In some of the individual European nations now in Euroland, they have traditionally responded with regional cross-subsidies, taxing the booming North of Italy to finance grants to the depressed Mezzogiorno. And so on. But the European Union can resort to neither remedy to the degree necessary: Germans are unlikely to move to Spain in the numbers that would restore equilibrium in both countries; and Italians are even less likely to vote for large subsidies to Greece or Belgium. Because America is a nation as well as a currency union, its people are prepared to make these kind of sacrifices for each other in hard times; because Euroland is a collection of different nations in a monetary straitjacket, its peoples see no reason to bail out their neighbors from troubles they darkly suspect may be well-deserved. What this ultimately threatens is that Euroland, like Argentina, will be rocked by perennial crises, with inflation in one country, long-running joblessness in another, and instability everywhere. Journalists are supposed to notice that kind of possibility. Why did they not do so? Most reporters lack passionate opinions on exchange-rate mechanisms. They do not root for the crawling peg, nor abhor "the snake in the tunnel." So the celebratory tone of most coverage — which concentrated either on the sheer excitement of the launch or on the "historic" nature of the event — is best explained as an expression of elite conformity. Conventionally minded bankers, politicians, corporate officers, foundation executives, and Ivy League reporters all know-without ever having really thought about the matter-that the European Union is a Good Thing. And, by extension, the euro is a Good Thing too, a step forward, you know, historic, an insurance against future European wars, the fulfillment of an idealistic dream, that kind of thing. The collapse of the same dream next door did not suit that scenario. To draw attention to it might have seemed grudging, or party pooping, or anti-European, or the vulgar triumphalism of an American provincial. So it was passed over in discreet silence. [snip]