Topic: Europe have one big problem the euro currency (Read 554 times)

I don't see any significant problems with the euro. It is a strong currency that has good demand worldwide and good liquidity. Politically, the countries of Europe have a centuries-old and often thousand-year history, so they will always have their own ambitions and various kinds of disagreements. But European countries need each other. Now not a single developed country can produce on its territory all the goods it needs, and therefore economic and financial ties will strengthen and the common euro currency serves as this unifying factor.

The war in Ukraine, although it affects the interests of EU countries, is not a reflection of any internal problems in the EU. Putin's Russia launched a military attack on Ukraine in the 21st century, attempting to take over and absorb the country. In the face of a common looming danger, this should, on the contrary, unite the EU countries and strengthen its currency. I hope this happens.

Exactly. Military strength and fear too..

People wonder why the U.S. were the first to start nuclear bomb testing, or why so many nuclear bombs have been created (and dropped) to date. The reason is simple, power and fear. All of that drives the usage of the USD, so that countries fear their reign and fear building an economy outside of the U S. More military power = more fear of countries subservient to the U.S. (this principle also applies to other super powers of course, except the U.S. is likely to be the seed).

It's sad, however it's the truth. Currently, currency isn't backed at all by love but backed by fear. Fear of military threat, fear of impossible survival, fear of tyranny. "In god we trust"? It should be, "In fear we obey".

Okay, let's talk about Ukraine. Is Ukraine independent? On paper, it looks so but in reality, let's look deep. It's located between EU countries and Russia, both of them have their own interests. Russia wants to expand, EU wants to expand, Ukraine wants to be on its own but Ukraine isn't powerful enough but the powerful ones want to take it over. Isn't it so? Do you really think that West doesn't have its interest in Ukraine? Both, Russia and West have their own interests and there is a war between West and Russia on the field of Ukraine. Ukraine is a war field.

No, this example is not a good example there. Usually, women prefer strong men and if man is a weak, poor and coward, wife will divorce him. Weak man can't provide wife and kids, can't protect them in danger. Man has to be strong to maintain authority over his wife and children. So, yeah, in real life, you have to be strong to be independent, this is the brutal reality.
Personally, I am focused on improving myself, I feel the pressure to be competitive in every aspect of life, so, definitely I'll have an authority on them.

I don't think it will be better if Scotland and Wales were on their own. If Wales, England and Scotland become independent, then they'll have independent currencies, GBP for England and two other for Wales and Scotland. If they want to trade between each-other, they'll have import tax, currency exchange fees, etc.
Ireland decided to stick to it because English is the most beneficial language to own. England conquered the world, a lot of powerful countries, like the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the UK speak English language, at the same time English is an international language. If you want to adopt modern technologies, science, attract talented immigrants and so on, it's better if the whole nation speaks English. I think that was a very wise choice and probably forced choice too, but not bad.

But how exactly is that a problem? If you'll let's say forego Euro and bring different currencies for all the European countries even in that case the demand isn't going to increase for sure right? With an unified country currency you'll atleast have the chance of getting some aggregate demand and thus keeping the value of that currency intact. So how exactly do you propose a solution for this?

I am not entirely sure about that, but even if that's the case Europe already has a lot of rich nations within it and that means they are going to end up keep using it for sure. That's why I feel like it is not going to be that much of a big deal, it is going to end up being a bit difficult but will be better in the end. They are also used in some other nations as well, maybe not as much as dollar, but they are still used and that means they are going to get a good return.

The only funny thing I find about euro is that they have 500 euro bill, the average wages around Europe is about 3 thousand euro in good nations, and much less in other nations, so they have a system where even in the richest nations it is just 6 bills for your entire salary .

What do you mean by "free"? I don't think there's a single self-sufficient country that's not dependent on others, in one way or another, so by that logic no country is free. The entire West is dependent on imports from China, should they just opt to be annexed by it just for the sake of creating ultimate "power"?


Would you like your family to be absorbed by a bigger and more powerful family (in which you'd have effectively no say). Would you let another man have authority over you, your wife and children if it meant more money and safety? Would that make YOU more or less powerful?
Let's not try to paint weakness as a virtue.
A mentor is someone who helps you become competent and independent, not someone who tries to take control over you.


Are Scotland or Wales powerful at all? They're part of the UK but what power do they each have? Does any of them have any real impact on the decisions in the UK? Both countries decided to keep their own parliaments for some reasons though, unlike England, which doesn't need one as it controls the British one. About half of Scotland wants independence from the UK, but they're still reliant on whether or not the British parliament let them have another referendum on that.

Not sure how's the language relevant, but it's not quite like Ireland chose to speak English out of their free will, did they? It was forced on them under the British occupation and they decided to stick to it. On the contrary, much smaller Wales still have their own language and they'd teach it to their children in schools, with English being the second one.

See how good you are, and you found the information. Question - why didn't you read it in full?

I know very well about these events. But let's get back to the FULL story:
"A new international monetary system was established by delegates from forty-four countries at Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, in July 1944. Delegates at the conference agreed to create the International Monetary Fund and what became the World Bank Group. The system of currency convertibility that originated at Bretton Woods lasted until 1971."

Nothing here confuses you ?

And one more question - ok, only 44 countries were initiators, then who FORCED the other 150+ countries to adopt this scheme, if it is so inconvenient, and only works in favor of the US ?

I would be glad to hear your reasoned clarifications ?

The Euro is the world's second largest reserve currency. The combined reserve of the currencies of the rest of the world except the United States is equal to the euro. It is used by 20 countries of the euro zone.  But analysts call 2022 the worst year in the history of the euro. They say, the relevance of the euro is decreasing. The currency has lost 16% of its value against the dollar in the past year. The European monitoring union will be under more pressure if the inflation crisis leads to a prolonged economic recession, a period of rising inflation and falling domestic incomes that could lead to a breakdown of the EU if member states' political differences widen. In that case, the Central Bank of the European Union should bring it under control. In that case, the central bank has to increase the interest rate and it has to be implemented very quickly. Since there is no other way to curb such inflation, reforms or productivity can be thought of, digitization of the economy can be promoted. Even if it is fully successful, the EU still has a long way to go.

You want to sell your Euro with what currency? USD?, I think it's the same situation when you convert back your fiat into another fiat. Sure, you will calm down after that, and you will be comfortable it temporarily, because, on the other side, Fiat will be connected with others, and will get the same result as before. because fiat has a central bank to control another fiat even stand in another country, It's a different situation when you convert your Euro into Cryptocurrency. maybe it could be profitable, it depends on what cryptocurrency you have invested.

You have no idea. If we count from the end of the Civil War it would be 158 years, so "hundreds" is not very accurate, more like a hundred and something.


So what? Neither Russia nor Ukraine is part of the European Union or the Euro, which is what we are talking about.


I give your opinion the same credibility as a child giving me lessons on shaving, because not all EU countries use the Euro to begin with, and your arguments in the post couldn't be any poorer.

The biggest problem for the euro is the EU itself, what I mean by this is that the political union between the countries is weak, the US has been a united country for hundreds of years, so even if there are differences between some regions of the country about a polemic topic they will keep the US together no matter what.

But the history of Europe is full of conflicts between each other, with the most recent conflict being the war at Ukraine, so I do not think the political union will last for long, and once it is broken the economic union and the euro will be gone too.

Well, all fiat currencies are problems. They just differ in degrees. They're all slowly crumbling down. They basically share the same doctrine. The euro is relatively younger, though. And while you are criticizing it as one big problem, if we compare the euro with other fiat currencies in the world, it's actually doing much better. Even if some member countries of EU itself don't like the euro and even prefer to use another currency, the euro actually remains widely used. It's the second most used currency in the world.

This is exactly correct. I see this misconception about USD a lot. USD is backed by commodities plus military strength. The U.S. is years ahead every other country in military R&D, with China being behind them, and that puts high value on USD for stability reasons. It's why oil prices can collapse and USD can still main resilient. The U.S. economy can have trouble and it still won't send people running away from USD entirely.

Venezuela's currency is entirely backed by oil, and when oil crashed, so did their economy. You cannot merely have a currency built upon a commodity.

It's not like that, there was an agreement of only 44 countries, so not the "WHOLE" world as you say, and the agreement was not about the dollar alone, it was about a USD convertible to gold, which Nixon ended in 1971, fact that is at the basis of the modern economy, the fiat and its massive printing and one of the main reasons if not the main one why Bitcoin was created.

You have to understand one simple thing - the dollar was chosen by the WHOLE world as the universal unit of calculation. It was not the U.S. that forced everyone, it was the world that came to realize that unification of international settlements is convenient and profitable for everyone!
The most understandable example - you have a huge supermarket nearby. It is an analog of the world market - there are products and goods from a huge number of manufacturers and countries. But at the cash register you pay for everything in ONE currency. You do not pay separately, for each product, in a separate currency ! According to the "fighters against the dollar", such a mechanism of convenient payment is evil
Europe did the same thing by unifying payments and the cost of goods and services between geographically close countries by introducing a single currency, the EURO. And it is convenient !

European countries use the Euro directly, but countries outside of Europe do not use the Euro as much as the US dollar. The popularity of the US dollar is due to the fact that the US dollar is the global currency so far. Since you brought up the topic of buying a car, I am telling you that suppose you went to buy a car in a certain country, in that case, you have to pay for the car in the local currency of that country or in US dollars. If you want to pay in euros while buying that car, then never accept Euros for your payment. If the euro is a global currency like the US dollar, you can use the euro anywhere. Another thing you may have noticed is the benefit of a global currency when one's assets are calculated in US dollars.

How would you say so, so as not to injure the mentality
But ... European countries did not depend on the dollar as the currency of the world economy If you at least study history a little - in the countries of Europe, before the introduction of a single currency, they used ... NO, not dollars .. Marks, pounds, francs , pesetas, lyres,...
The reason for the creation of the EURO and the Eurozone is an attempt, and quite successful, to create a powerful, unified economy in Europe in order to obtain greater efficiency in the global economic arena.
Why are there people who believe that the sunrise, the fall of an apple from a tree, the wind in the window, the neighbor singing, the discount on bananas in the supermarket - this is all for the sake of "fighting the dollar"?! 

Why do I say, '' They will no longer have to depend on the US dollar''? Because the dollar has long been considered the sole international trade currency. The US dollar has dominated the financial world for nearly eight decades since the end of World War II. It is still the main currency of transactions. Much of global trade uses USD. Countries reserve USD to maintain their exchange rates, making it the dominant international currency. Today, nearly 60% of foreign exchange reserves held by central banks worldwide are in USD. Globally, USD is considered by investors as a haven asset. Many countries want to reduce their dependence on USD, typically Russia, China, and even countries in the EU.

Europeans don't own leader tech companies, they are pretty back in 90s when it comes to tech companies. Btw Spotify was founded in Sweden. But Europe is pretty good in other things, some of the most famous European companies are: Volkswagen, Glencore, Airbus, Siemens, Nestle, ASML and so on. You are definitely out of your mind if you really say that EU has an uncertain road and their high quality of life is not actually based on hard work and good progress.

Actually, the more educated you are, the less happier you get because you overthink and understand the cruelty of this world. I would say that religious people in poor countries with good social bonds are the happiest people.

There is no free poor country in this world, they depend on big and powerful countries, they are just under an illusion of freedom while getting financial aid and import food/drink/tech from powerful countries and do shit summer jobs in these countries and so on.
That's just my opinion but I think there is nothing wrong with joining a strong and powerful country. If you can't do things on your own and don't know how to do and struggle alone, then you need a mentor.
Would England, Scotland and Wales be powerful on their own? Or does the UK sound better? Even Ireland took English as an official language and changed it's strategy to end poverty in their country.

Point 1 - already fixed. The new German government, after what the Kremlin bastards like Schroeder and Merkel did, managed to break the gas monopoly on gas for industrial production and replace gas from the country of international terrorist with gas from adequate countries.
Oil is also a solvable issue, but it is a bit more complicated, as significant volumes of production and supplies are in the hands of some countries, which, to put it mildly, are far from adequate ) But the world will "cure" this too ...