[denphone]

Originally Posted by Chris

You're confusing two competing philosophies within the European Union Osem - Integrationist and Expansionist.

The Expansionists (principally the UK) favour a wider union; the Integrationists favour an 'ever deeper' union. The Euro is an integrationist project whereas eastern expansion is, well, an Expansionist one.

The Integationists, quite rightly, see a single currency as a means to bring about a federal European super-state. If the single currency survives the current mess, there will now be a very powerful argument in favour of introducing some of the mechanisms that keep the Dollar stable across the US, despite the wide variation in economic performance of the States within the Union that use it. Expect to see arch Europhiles renewing the argument for tax harmonization in the coming months.

On the other side, the Expansionists see a wider union as a means of preventing excessive integration, due to the sheer complexities involved. The Euro is, again, an excellent case in point. The single currency is demonstrably unworkable even within the core of nations that originally signed up to it. The chances of it ever becoming the currency of the entire Union are somewhere south of zero right now. That it became the currency of Greece, Portugal and Ireland in the first place demonstrates not how well the Integrationists believed those economies were progressing, but just how badly the Integrationists wanted the project to succeed.

l have to say on this you are talking a lot of sense Chris and we do not generally agree on anything usually.