Euro Area

[Sarmatian]

Bull.

"government doesn't rely solely on tax redistribution to transfer funds from one place to another, there are grants, funds, credits etc... "

All this is either idrectly funded by taxation, or underwritten by it.

The government has exactly one real way of generating income - tax. Even things like nationalised defence companies that sell weapons to other countries just fund the home-country's defence bill.

Bollox. First of all, governments have other means of generating revenues, like owning shares or entire companies, bonds etc etc... but it is indeed mostly tax.

Second of all, no one's arguing that tax isn't the prime source of income for governments. What we're talking about once the government collect said income, can it distribute it to other countries without a need for a supranational body. The answer is, yes it can.

Furunculus is stuck because he read in the torygraph that a "transfer union" is needed.

The EU is notorious for corruption, especially of "infastructure" projects, which only generate jobs as long as they are running anyway. Once the project ends, so do the jobs - they aren't a long-term solution to unemployment.

You don't "finish" infrastructure, there's always something else to do, otherwise you'd see big building companies going bust every other month. The added benefit is that other businesses get to use that infrastructure.

Of course, infrastructure isn't the only thing EU's investing in.

It ultiamtely matter not if the tax is "supranational" or collected locally. You still require a central executive and central treasury to take in funds and distribute them, and it must be done at a Federal level because anything less simply takes too long. Look at the stupid time it took to send Greece a relatively paltry sum, why because the various bodies had to agree and it didn't work because there is no central oversight to garrentee more money.

Of course, central treasury and a central executive is indeed the most efficient way but it is not the only way, and since it is off limits at the moment, other avenues should be explored.

The problem with the money lent/given to Greece, ie. it took so long, wasn't that it was complicated to decide and collect the money but because it took so long and it was so hard for Greece to agree to a very strict austerity measures and very strict fiscal rules, which is basically committing suicide in political terms.

The Euro doesn't work - it is a currency union without a fiscal union.

Didn't we went through this already? Even Furunculus moved on and decided that a "transfer union" is now needed.

And you really cannot read, can you?

That, sir, is an insult. Mind you, I was the best in reading in my class in elementary school and was voted "most likely to learn all the letters eventually".

Ergo, you get overborrowing from weak peripheral countries who spent ten years riding on Germany's ticket, using that 'slack' to give themselves nice social-benefits which their developing economies could not support, thus destroying their productivity*, knackering the export potential, and hollowing out their industries.

Exactly, my good man. It started before the common currency and continued with the common currency. Now, for extra points, which two countries hold majority of the Greek debt and what happens with that if Greek defaults?

what is being said that internal devaluation cannot regain external competitivness without causing revolution

Sarcasm off, might be my English but I don't understand what you're saying here.

p.s. no one wants to buy spanish bonds because they just really want to, they buy them because the risk/reward works in their favour vis-a-vis some other contries bonds. at the moment there is very little reward and enormous risk

And your solution to that is to increase the risk and lessen the reward???

And you judge this to be a worse solution to the welfare and wellbeing of the southern periphery than a decade of grinding internal devaluation leading to high unemployment, static growth, and poor services? i question your motives for suggesting this, particularly as a self-proclaimed internationalist..... Surely it is my job as a nasty nationalist right-winger to callously disregard the plight of 'others'?

And this is where you're lost. Southern states would have been much worse off with a return to their former currencies, so the liberal in me has no trouble supporting.

ARE YOU MY FAMILY?

Rinse and repeat until the message has sunk in.

Hold your horse, there. We still aren't sure if Scots are your family.

Let me know when rich europe is willing to underwrite the public-services of poor europe.

Germany, first and foremost, since it's the strongest industry and needs markets to export to. Anyway, most Germans still support the Euro. You, as a self-proclaimed nasty nationalist right winger should rejoice, since it will make German economy weaker and your beloved nation state can profit from it.

Until then i am going to uproarously laugh at every person who continues to blindly defend the failed political model the foundations of which are being undermined by the economic model they believe will bolster it.
Each and every time a disaster occurs i will roflmao! not at their misfortune, but at the foolishness of the people who caused it via their blind faith.

You do that, and refuse to acknowledge any facts that may come in the way of your roflmaoing.