#1

Some politicans say that Ireland is too small to survive economicaly in a Globalized world without the EU. Look at Norway and Switzerland they've gotten on grand without it. Bigger market doesn't necessarily mean a more prosperous nation look at India, they have a common market with over 1 billion people it's not a rich country.
If we left the EU we could control our own economy without the interference of Brussels who didn't see the crash coming and who consistently get things wrong.
The EU is made up of a varied degree of different economies. It's good when things are going well, but when things are bad it's terrible.

Would people support a confederation of European States with a single Finance minister as I heard suggested last night on RTE news. Sounds like we would stop been a country if that happened.

FreudianSlippers Registered User
#2

A few points. Are you talking about the EU or the Eurozone?
Secondly, Norway is effectively a non-represented member of the EU, they implemented the first pillar completely by their membership of the EEA.

Norway is also a horrible comparison to almost any European country: they have about 4.9million people with a purchasing GDP per capita of just over $52,000; we have about 4.5-4.6million people with a purchasing GDP per capita of just over $38,000.
That's a massive difference. It's also a massive difference because of oil. Norway is probably the biggest exporter of oil not in OPEC, the 5th biggest exporter of oil in the world and the 3rd biggest exporter of natural gas. Norway is rich.

Switzerland is an equally (or perhaps more) absurd comparison; 11th in the world for purchasing GDP, the most competitive economy in the world, the MEDIAN household income is $100,000 annually, their economy grows at 3% per year, and they are largely in line with EU policy to remain competitive. Switzerland is rich.

Ireland is a small country on Western Europe with no money, no utilised resources, no "business plan" for the future. We NEED the EU, we NEED the Eurozone, we NEED to pull our heads out of our asses and stop blaming the Euro for the ineptitudes of the people running this country and the vast majority of the people in it.

41 people have thanked this post
#3

FreudianSlippers said:

Ireland is a small country on Western Europe with no money, no utilised resources, no "business plan" for the future. We NEED the EU, we NEED the Eurozone, we NEED to pull our heads out of our asses and stop blaming the Euro for the ineptitudes of the people running this country and the vast majority of the people in it.


No need to insult me for having an opposing opinion from you.

I think we should leave the Eurozone for our economy's sake.

Ireland has a huge supply of natural gas, but we have pratically given it away to corporations, we can nationalise it like they did in Norway. We also have a large agricultual industry, skilled worforce etch... What would stop us from trading with the rest of the EU if we left it. We still can freely trade with countries!

The ECB gives us money by printing it out of thin air, it's not backed by anything. It's similar to what the Germans did at the end of world war two. They kept printing money and it caused a devaluation of their currency and hyperinflation. They have no plan of their own. They want to maintain a Eurozone, because they want a United Europe. They'd prefer us all to be latened with debt than having control over our own futures.

So what your basically saying is that we should trust the EU more, stop complaining and even give Brussels more power to decide our future. That makes no common sense.

Economists David McWilliams, Peter Schiff and Trends Forecaster Gerald Celente predected the financial crash and a double dip global recession. They also say Ireland has a better shot by leaving the Eurozone, defaulting and creating our own currency. I'll think I'll take their advise over the Eurocrats.

Another country doing pretty well in this Globalized world is New Zealand quite similar to Ireland. Israle. Iceland defaulted as we should have done and are now experiencing recovery.

Barroso said that the Eurozone will see growth in the next year, yesterday. The same day that European shares took a hammering on the stock market. He doesn't have a glue what he's talking about.

Also
FreudianSlippers said:

4.9million people with a purchasing GDP per capita of just over $52,000; we have about 4.5-4.6million people with a purchasing GDP per capita of just over $38,000.


That's not really a massive difference. I think your just splitting hairs because you have no arguement.

I also think leaving the EU would be a good because they inforce ridiculous politicaly correct regulations that hamper freedom and economic growth. They inforced a recent regualtion where in certain factories now you have to have two people surpervising you if you change a light bulb. What a waste of resources. Those types of regulation hamper our businesses competiveness with the rest of the world and could for that reason endanger people's jobs by companies leaving Europe to Asia. Why can't our government decide on things like that. They also have a regulation of road hedge heights... That should be left up to local authorities. Central econmic planning doesn't work, look at the USSR and other socialits societies.

3 people have thanked this post
FreudianSlippers Registered User
#4

I don't have time for a full reply at the moment, but I take issue with some points off the bat.

mickthemick said:
No need to insult me for having an opposing opinion from you.
I didn't "insult" you in that post. I think if you can somehow see that in your post you're being hyper-sensitive and need to re-read what I wrote.


I think we should leave the Eurozone for our economy's sake.

Talking point which really doesn't mean anything. You think we're staying in purposely to have a bad economy, or you think that our economy is going to get magically better if we leave the EU and incur massive costs?

I'm actually being serious, what does this mean? How does having a different currency actually help us?
Do we switch up all of our policies to do the exact opposite of the EU?
Do we change the stuff about the EU/SEC that works?
Do we expect Germany to just forgive all the money they've pumped into this country in the "good times"?

I said it before, those who say "leave the EU/SEC/Eurozone have a gaping hole in their logic, it's underpants gnome logic at it's finest:

Step 1: Leave the Euro
Step 2: ????
Step 3: Profit

I'm not so pro-European that I don't believe that there are benefits to non-membership, but not for Ireland... Ireland benefits net from membership more than it is hurt. That's a fact.


Ireland has a huge supply of natural gas, but we have pratically given it away to corporations, we can nationalise it like they did in Norway. We also have a large agricultual industry, skilled worforce etch... What would stop us from trading with the rest of the EU if we left it. We still can freely trade with countries!

We've already given it away, so... how exactly do we get it back and how exactly does this have anything to do with membership of the EU or Eurozone?

Other than the long debunked theory that the EU forces us to privatise these things.


The ECB gives us money by printing it out of thin air, it's not backed by anything. It's similar to what the Germans did at the end of world war two. They kept printing money and it caused a devaluation of their currency and hyperinflation.

And how do you think the Federal Reserve does it? Are you implying that the Euro is the only currency that prints paper money that is not backed? The "gold standard" is long dead.

They have no plan of their own. They want to maintain a Eurozone, because they want a United Europe. They'd prefer us all to be latened with debt than having control over our own futures.

Complete Euro-phobia nonsense. There is really nothing to support this at all, it screams of appealing to emotions rather than intellectual concepts. Europe wants to do something to Ireland? We're the victim? We have no "control" over our futures? Come on... seriously? ONE scrap of evidence for this would be amusing.


So what your basically saying is that we should trust the EU more, stop complaining and even give Brussels more power to decide our future. That makes no common sense.

Nope, that's actually not at all what I said. What I said was the premise of your argument is intrinsically flawed due to your comparisons being flawed. Norway and Switzerland are simply NOT Ireland and to state otherwise is incorrect... simply incorrect.


Economists David McWilliams, Peter Schiff and Trends Forecaster Gerald Celente predected the financial crash and a double dip global recession. They also say Ireland has a better shot by leaving the Eurozone, defaulting and creating our own currency. I'll think I'll take their advise over the Eurocrats.

I haven't read their work in depth, perhaps if you provided links or quotes I could comment, but I think "predicting" recessions is a different thing than knowing the path forward. Think about it, you can predict anything... someone will always be correct. People "predicted" September 11th, it doesn't mean that they had insider knowledge or some amazing insight.


Another country doing pretty well in this Globalized world is New Zealand quite similar to Ireland. Israle.

I don't follow.

Iceland defaulted as we should have done and are now experiencing recovery.

Iceland is also a VERY different example for numerous reasons.

Barroso said that the Eurozone will see growth in the next year, yesterday. The same day that European shares took a hammering on the stock market. He doesn't have a glue what he's talking about.

Ok, can you not see that this is also an apples and oranges argument?

That's not really a massive difference. I think your just splitting hairs because you have no arguement.

If you actually think that a PPP GDP difference of almost $14,000 is not a massive difference and is simply "splitting hairs" then I'm not exactly sure why you're so worried Mr. Moneybags


I also think leaving the EU would be a good because they inforce ridiculous politicaly correct regulations that hamper freedom and economic growth. They inforced a recent regualtion where in certain factories now you have to have two people surpervising you if you change a light bulb. What a waste of resources.

Any source for this?

Those types of regulation hamper our businesses competiveness with the rest of the world and could for that reason endanger people's jobs by companies leaving Europe to Asia.

...and you think Ireland defaulting on it's debt, creating a currency that is worthless and leaving the EU/Eurozone is either going to stop the emerging markets competitiveness and/or entice multinational corporations to come to Ireland instead of India or China?


Why can't our government decide on things like that. They also have a regulation of road hedge heights... That should be left up to local authorities.

There is legislation in the UK, not mandated by Europe. Unless you can point to this legislation I have to disagree.

Central econmic planning doesn't work, look at the USSR and other socialits societies.

So there is no central economic planning in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc.?

15 people have thanked this post
BlitzKrieg Registered User
#5

Some politicans say that Ireland is too small to survive economicaly in a Globalized world without the EU. Look at Norway and Switzerland they've gotten on grand without it.


The problem with competing in europe when your not Norway or Switzerland and not in the EU is that you are for the most part competing with other EU member states in the same markets. Leave the EU and you give up your vote and the other countries can essentially vote you out of any industry in europe.

meglome Registered User
#6

mickthemick said:
No need to insult me for having an opposing opinion from you.

I think we should leave the Eurozone for our economy's sake.


It's all well and good to have any opinion you fancy. That won't change what you're suggesting being a disaster for Ireland.

mickthemick said:

Ireland has a huge supply of natural gas, but we have pratically given it away to corporations, we can nationalise it like they did in Norway. We also have a large agricultual industry, skilled worforce etch... What would stop us from trading with the rest of the EU if we left it. We still can freely trade with countries!


If the vast resources people keep talking about actually turn out to exist, and that's still very doubtful at this point, there is nothing stopping us putting taxes on those resources at any time. It'd be pretty pointless to do that now as they are still a big fantasy.

Why should the rest of the EU let us fully into the club if we revoke our membership?

mickthemick said:

So what your basically saying is that we should trust the EU more, stop complaining and even give Brussels more power to decide our future. That makes no common sense.


Of all the things I disagree with in your post (and there are many) I find this funny. You seem to have not noticed that we as a country utterly fúcked ourselves by going crazy with a property bubble and massively overspending. It's kinda boggles my mind that people are still in lala land trying desperately for this mess to have been caused by someone else. WE caused this mess, trying to blame it on the EU is moronic.

10 people have thanked this post
McDave Registered User
#7

The main countries that could be in the EU that aren't are Iceland, Norway and Switzerland. There's no reason why, being prepared to accept the consequences, we couldn't opt out and join their ranks. However, in reality before even contemplating leaving the EU we'd need to consider why those countries are not in the EU.

1. Switzerland: has a long tradition of autonomy and a sustained capacity to generate prosperity. They're truly able to stand on their own feet and benefit from their advantageous geography.

2. Norway: stayed out for one reason only. They have huge hydrocarbon resources and, quite reasonably, don't want to be a net contributor to the EU or to be constrained by EU energy policies. Having said that, the original Scandinavian accession referenda were apparently sequenced because it was felt Norway would probably vote yes, and thus encourage the more sceptical Danes to follow them in. In the event, Norway voted No and Denmark Yes.

3. Iceland: I'm less sure about Iceland's reasons for staying out. But I'd hazard that they feel autonomous enough with their natural resources, and possibly fear being overwhelmed both in size and culturally within the EU. Possibly had Norway joined, they might be more predisposed.

What does this mean for Ireland?

Culturally, Norway and Iceland could provide encouraging templates for exiting the EU. Norway for its autonomous exploitation of hydrocarbons, Iceland for its fishing capacity. Of course, to plough those furrows, Ireland would need a close relationship with those countries, which we frankly don't have. We're more disposed towards the English-speaking worlds and have little in common with Scandinavia. If we had our own substantial hydrocarbon resources, we could forge bonds with Norway. But I suppose we could do that inside the EU too.

Culturally, we have nothing in common with Switzerland.

Economically, Ireland needs more than the hydrocarbons that even optimistically are at our disposal and the seafood we could turn into cash. Our population while not huge, is substantial enough, and we can see from our current state just how much dosh we need to function as a state and society. The Norwegian and Icelandic models combined won't satisfy our needs.

Economically, we are nowhere near close to Switzerland's capabilities. There's no point in even going there.

Politically, we are close to the UK and the US. Our national perspective is much more outward looking than Norway or Iceland. Switzerland isn't on our political radar.

* * *

Comparisons with these countries are regularly made by those who might prefer to see Ireland commit to relative autonomy. Personally, I don't think aspirations of this nature are realistic. Leaving the EU at this point would require a capacity to endure a level of relative material discomfort Irish people would not be willing to risk.

It might be a different ball game if over the next decade or two Ireland displayed a sustained ability to convert material, human and financial resources and into hard net exports - e.g. renewable energy, food, services. All the while acting with political and economic prudence. Say, by 2020, Irish people felt it would be worth going it alone outside the EU, that might be a point at which we could seriously entertain an exit.

But in all honesty, not before then.

7 people have thanked this post
FreudianSlippers Registered User
#8

+1 to McDave's whole post. But just to add to that, we have substantial natural renewable resources but nobody wants to utilise them. There is so much objection to wind, water, tidal, etc. - we should be harnessing this and selling it to the UK.

A lot would need to change in Ireland to even consider being autonomous. We've proven that we're an extremely financially incompetent country as well as a country that is incapable of practising non-partisan politics.

Lockstep Boondock Saint
#9

FreudianSlippers said:
A few points. Are you talking about the EU or the Eurozone?
Secondly, Norway is effectively a non-represented member of the EU, they implemented the first pillar completely by their membership of the EEA.

Norway is also a horrible comparison to almost any European country: they have about 4.9million people with a purchasing GDP per capita of just over $52,000; we have about 4.5-4.6million people with a purchasing GDP per capita of just over $38,000.
That's a massive difference. It's also a massive difference because of oil. Norway is probably the biggest exporter of oil not in OPEC, the 5th biggest exporter of oil in the world and the 3rd biggest exporter of natural gas. Norway is rich.

I've tried bringing this point up with Eurosceptics in the past and they inevitably fall back on the "But Ireland has massive oil and gas fields" argument. Every time.


Also OP, how do you propose we stave off the Dutch Disease ?

#10

FreudianSlippers said:
I don't have time for a full reply at the moment, but I take issue with some points off the bat.
I didn't "insult" you in that post. I think if you can somehow see that in your post you're being hyper-sensitive and need to re-read what I wrote.


I'm not been hypersensitive. I'm interested in a discussion but you seem to just personally insult people for having different opinions from you. Like "getting my head out my ass." No need to say that. I totally respect your opinion, I just don't agree with it.

FreudianSlippers said:

Talking point which really doesn't mean anything. You think we're staying in purposely to have a bad economy, or you think that our economy is going to get magically better if we leave the EU and incur massive costs?

I'm actually being serious, what does this mean? How does having a different currency actually help us?
Do we switch up all of our policies to do the exact opposite of the EU?
Do we change the stuff about the EU/SEC that works?
Do we expect Germany to just forgive all the money they've pumped into this country in the "good times"?


No we're staying in the Euro, because our politicians and Eurocrats want to to maintain a monetary union for political gains. Why have power over 4.5 million people when you can have influence in the governance of half a billion. Quite simply the Eurocrats want a Superstate and turn the EU into a debt union before they let it split up.

Of course our economy isn't going to get magically better when we leave. But it will get a better a lot quicker if we pull out. We need to default, drastically cut the size of government/public expenditure in the first year and have control over our own currency where we can control the interest rates. We have a different type of economy from Germany and Greece. We can't have centrally planned monetary policies coming from Brussels. there needs to be different policies for different regions.

However the way to get around that is to have a culturally and economically homogenous EU superstate. However I don't like the idea of that and that scenario doesn't necessary mean Europe would even be rich.

Those German and French banks that leant us money in "the good times" took a risk while doing it. They made a bad bet. They should take a hit.

FreudianSlippers said:
Ireland benefits net from membership more than it is hurt. That's a fact.


It's not a fact.

FreudianSlippers said:
We've already given it away, so... how exactly do we get it back and how exactly does this have anything to do with membership of the EU or Eurozone?


You're right it doesn't have anything to do with the EU.I suppose I went on a tangent. But our Government and Finna Fail do/did whatever big business wants. The oil/gas companies only have to pay for tax on a licence.

In Norway, where the development of North Sea oil resources has proceeded for decades under direct public control, national ownership has been a great success on every level. The huge profits have been invested wisely, the environmental and safety record in offshore operations has been admirable.

FreudianSlippers said:
And how do you think the Federal Reserve does it? Are you implying that the Euro is the only currency that prints paper money that is not backed? The "gold standard" is long dead.


The Federal Reserve does the exact same as Europe and that's why they have a serious deficit problem and their currency could debase with huge inflation in the next few years if they keep up their printing of paper. Gold has universal value. It always had and always will. Every culture on the face of the Earth knew/know that gold has value. Why do you think the value of gold has skyrocketed the last few years. Because there is a lack of confidence with the paper currency.

If you back a currency with gold, this controls government spending. It always prevent inflation. Why do you think there is such thing as inflation. Because the bigger supply of paper currency, the less value each unit of that currency has. Gold is finite and universally recognized as valuable. You can't just press a button on a machine and create more of it.

Paper currency is great for Big Governments and that's why they stopped using gold, because they could print as much cash as they wanted and fix short term budget problems. However their actions lead to inflation and an increased budget deficit. Take it to the extremes and you have Zimbabwe. Greater inflation also causes a widening gap between rich and poor.

FreudianSlippers said:

I haven't read their work in depth, perhaps if you provided links or quotes I could comment, but I think "predicting" recessions is a different thing than knowing the path forward.


What are you talking about knowing the path foward? Knowing the path forward is knowing how to avoid future problems like recessions or long lasting recessions and depressions. That's how you can live in a more stable and prosperous society.

Here's Peter Schiff predicting the first financial crash and recession (He also supports a return to the gold standard):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

FreudianSlippers said:
Complete Euro-phobia nonsense. There is really nothing to support this at all, it screams of appealing to emotions rather than intellectual concepts. Europe wants to do something to Ireland? We're the victim? We have no "control" over our futures? Come on... seriously? ONE scrap of evidence for this would be amusing.


If you want to see what type of people are running the show look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F1NvIL1jpc

Here is a link to show the ridiculousness of that "working at height" directive:
http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Topics/Work_at_Height/

It actually said not to apply the regulation when sitting on a chair. Talk about no common sense.
Here's another link to show the ridiculousness of this particular directive:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4354584.stm

These sort of directives and regulations really harm businesses and increase prices for consumers. They increase costs and use up resources. Common Sense and the use of more objectivity in our court system would make many of these over the top health and safety regulations pointless.

In all, if we don't start making big decisions soon, our economy will pay for it down the line.

3 people have thanked this post
oscarBravo Custodiam ipsos custodes
#11

mickthemick said:
Gold has universal value. It always had and always will.

[...]

If you back a currency with gold, this controls government spending. It always prevent inflation.
In March 2008, an ounce of gold was worth $968. In November of that year, it was worth $761. In other words, the same ounce of gold could buy 21% less in November than it could in March.

I accept that the trend has generally been in the other direction, but doesn't it give the lie to the idea that gold prevents inflation?

1 person has thanked this post
oscarBravo Custodiam ipsos custodes
#12

mickthemick said:
If you want to see what type of people are running the show look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F1NvIL1jpc
You think UKIP MEPs are "running the show"?
Here is a link to show the ridiculousness of that "working at height" directive:
http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Topics/Work_at_Height/

It actually said not to apply the regulation when sitting on a chair. Talk about no common sense.
I'm not sure what the problem is. Are you proposing that there should be no health and safety regulations regarding working at a height - that I, as an employer, should be allowed to make my employees work on a roof without proper safeguards, for example - or that the regulations should apply to sitting on a chair?
Here's another link to show the ridiculousness of this particular directive:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4354584.stm
Ah, that clears it up. You don't think that employers should have a legal obligation to ensure that their employees are not putting their lives on the line to do their jobs; and you think that if we left the EU we'd be able to rescind our H&S laws and start putting profit ahead of workplace safety.

Each to their own, I suppose.

5 people have thanked this post
BlitzKrieg Registered User
#13

mickthemick said:


If you want to see what type of people are running the show look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F1NvIL1jpc



Actually that is as usual from UKIP completely fabricated bullsh*t of the highest order:

THe proposal from the european commision which is currently being developed:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0012:FIN:EN:PDF

If you want an easier read here's the press release listing their suggestion of changes:

http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/11/43&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=fr


You can search all over that proposal and find there is no suggestion by the commission to include the EU flag on national jerseys etc.


BUT


Santiago Fisas Ayxela a spanish MEP put forward a proposal in the European Parliament to amend the above commission proposal with this:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//NONSGML+COMPARL+PE-466.981+01+DOC+PDF+V0//EN&language=EN

where one of the suggestions (number 26) was:

26. Proposes that the European flag should be flown at major sports events held on EU
territory and suggests that it should be displayed on the clothing of athletes from Member
States;



Here is the important thing:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/FindByProcnum.do?lang=2&procnum=INI/2011/2087

Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage


This is nowhere near being pushed as a law.

It has been pushed by a single MEP in the parliament to be amended into another proposal by the commission.

The Commission havnt apoproved of it, neither has any body of the EU.

The UKIP hijacked a Parliament meeting to do a television stunt about something that right now has no legal basis.

They are lying and are using this as publicity scam.

8 people have thanked this post
FreudianSlippers Registered User
#14

mickthemick said:
I'm not been hypersensitive. I'm interested in a discussion but you seem to just personally insult people for having different opinions from you. Like "getting my head out my ass." No need to say that. I totally respect your opinion, I just don't agree with it.


I actually said:
we NEED to pull our heads out of our asses


The whole country has their head so firmly placed up it's collective ass that it's passed the point of being amusing.

No we're staying in the Euro, because our politicians and Eurocrats want to to maintain a monetary union for political gains. Why have power over 4.5 million people when you can have influence in the governance of half a billion. Quite simply the Eurocrats want a Superstate and turn the EU into a debt union before they let it split up.

There is zero proof for this.


Of course our economy isn't going to get magically better when we leave. But it will get a better a lot quicker if we pull out.

I disagree and see no proof of this being the case.

We need to default,

How does that help us? I never understand this argument... how does defaulting actually help this country? Nobody has put forward a common sense plan for how defaulting even would work


drastically cut the size of government/public expenditure

We don't need to leave the Euro for this.


in the first year and have control over our own currency

Our own worthless currency.


where we can control the interest rates.

Worthless currency but low interest rates? pfft.



We have a different type of economy from Germany and Greece. We can't have centrally planned monetary policies coming from Brussels. there needs to be different policies for different regions.

What does this mean. We have a "different type of economy"... not really actually. You also realise Brussels isn't in Germany right? Is our economy different than Belgium?


However the way to get around that is to have a culturally and economically homogenous EU superstate. However I don't like the idea of that and that scenario doesn't necessary mean Europe would even be rich.

Ok. So what?


Those German and French banks that leant us money in "the good times" took a risk while doing it. They made a bad bet. They should take a hit.

So that's what banks do. We're not exactly propping them up.


It's not a fact.

Of course it is, where do you think all of our roads came from? This country was second world garbage before the EU.


You're right it doesn't have anything to do with the EU.I suppose I went on a tangent. But our Government and Finna Fail do/did whatever big business wants. The oil/gas companies only have to pay for tax on a licence.

You think any companies pay tax in Ireland?


In Norway, where the development of North Sea oil resources has proceeded for decades under direct public control, national ownership has been a great success on every level. The huge profits have been invested wisely, the environmental and safety record in offshore operations has been admirable.

They have so much oil that it's ridiculous. I don't see how that helps us at all.


The Federal Reserve does the exact same as Europe and that's why they have a serious deficit problem and their currency could debase with huge inflation in the next few years if they keep up their printing of paper. Gold has universal value. It always had and always will. Every culture on the face of the Earth knew/know that gold has value. Why do you think the value of gold has skyrocketed the last few years. Because there is a lack of confidence with the paper currency.

How many currencies are on a "gold standard"?
How do you propose we buy all this gold to base our new currency on gold?


If you back a currency with gold, this controls government spending.
Nope.


It always prevent inflation. Why do you think there is such thing as inflation. Because the bigger supply of paper currency, the less value each unit of that currency has. Gold is finite and universally recognized as valuable. You can't just press a button on a machine and create more of it.

Wow, you're way far off the mark of being even slightly correct. Do you know how volatile the gold market is?

It's absurd to link a currency directly to a volatile commodity, because when gold has shortage, you get deflation and when the market is flooded with gold you get quick and severe inflation.

The government would also never be able to control the value of their currency. Once you link it, you either have to get more gold or you cannot get more currency... plus what happens in the next economic crisis? What does our new gold standard currency do when we have no "money" to pay for a disaster or a need to increase spending.


Paper currency is great for Big Governments and that's why they stopped using gold, because they could print as much cash as they wanted and fix short term budget problems. However their actions lead to inflation and an increased budget deficit. Take it to the extremes and you have Zimbabwe. Greater inflation also causes a widening gap between rich and poor.

So Europe is like Zimbabwe?


What are you talking about knowing the path foward? Knowing the path forward is knowing how to avoid future problems like recessions or long lasting recessions and depressions. That's how you can live in a more stable and prosperous society.

Yeah, and our path forward is not leaving the Euro.


Here's Peter Schiff predicting the first financial crash and recession (He also supports a return to the gold standard):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

I'll watch this later... Schiff is right in a way when you consider the Fed in the US, but they have bigger problems than a return to the gold standard... I disagree with private central banks, which Schiff does not seem to.


If you want to see what type of people are running the show look at this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9F1NvIL1jpc

Here is a link to show the ridiculousness of that "working at height" directive:
http://www.hsa.ie/eng/Topics/Work_at_Height/

It actually said not to apply the regulation when sitting on a chair. Talk about no common sense.
Here's another link to show the ridiculousness of this particular directive:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4354584.stm

These sort of directives and regulations really harm businesses and increase prices for consumers. They increase costs and use up resources. Common Sense and the use of more objectivity in our court system would make many of these over the top health and safety regulations pointless.


I think I can echo the replies to this section above.


In all, if we don't start making big decisions soon, our economy will pay for it down the line.

Yep. It's not leaving the Euro, but we need a full reform of our banking system and practices... we being not only us, but the world. The Euro needs reform, but reform together and stop dangerous banking.

3 people have thanked this post
Foghladh Registered User
#15

Maybe someone here can throw light on this issue that kinda eludes me, that of Irelands future in the eurozone. I'm not of the opinion that membership of the EU is a bad thing for Ireland and I wouldn't advocate for leaving it. However our membership of the euro I'm not totally sure about. I'm aware that at the moment we're being kept with our noses above water by the huge amounts of money being fed to us by the ECB. But in the future, and it's a future I do see happening, we will be out of the crap... and what happens then? The consensus, as I understand it, is that we like a lot of countries had unregulated access to cheap credit. This cheap credit essentially stemmed from the low interest rates levelled by the ECB in an attempt to service the largest economies in the euro. From what I understand this 'credit bubble' could and should have been deflated by tighter financial regulation by our own financial regulator.

My question is; how does that work in reverse? I can see how it may be possible to impose restrictions to make credit unattractive, but what happens in a scenario where the Irish economy is flat-lining and maybe the German economy is booming? How do you regulate against expensive credit? Or indeed can you? It kind of feels like we're very much tied to how the German economy is performing (which I know makes sense regarding the euro) but what does it mean for future Irish economic growth? Do we fervently hope our economic pattern mirrors the German?

I should point out that I am in no way an armchair economist so if I've made any glaring mistakes in my understanding of things... be kind! I'd genuinely like to receive some education on this matter however

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!