Eurozone will collapse...

Originally Posted by Osem

I don't think what's going on today is comparable to Nazism either for what that's worth. However that doesn't rule out a German desire to 'run' Europe and I don't think we should overlook what's been going on for years and the resentment that's now building in Europe now either. There are huge potential dangers ahead for us all.

Britain should engage with the EU and provide more opposition. If Germany are really causing resentment then that might be our chance. They can only get their way if they have some leverage and they don't have much against the larger countries, Greece maybe but what are they going to do?

I really don't think there is a danger there. It's just normal politicking at the moment German strength seems to be their ability to bail everyone out. This is causing resentment in Germany and making it difficult for their Government, hence the pressure on Greece.

Germany don't want to run Europe. They just want other governments to do deals that are advantages to them. As we all do. They will find out like the rest of us that it's not that easy to do.

[Osem]

We are where we are and the EU won't accept our influence unless we're part of the Eurozone which we clearly don't want to be. Are you saying we should join the Euro in order to bring it down?

What evidence do you have that Germany don't want to 'run' Europe? Their massive influence in Europe has brought them huge benefits, why wouldn't they want more? If they're having nightmares about how much influence they have, why not just stop influencing policy? Why wouldn't they want more control over the likes of Greece (which you've criticised for not running their affairs properly) and therby lessen the risk to Germany eh? Why wouldn't they then want to have more control over countries like Portugal and Spain which pose even greater risks to Germany? That'd be stupid wouldn't it?

Anyway, they're doing it already aren't they by pulling the strings when it comes to the Greek bailout and I really don't understand how you can accept that they're doing it in Germany's interests but at the same time claim they don't want to have more control in Europe given the much larger risks to Germany via Spain and Italy.

Originally Posted by Osem

We are where we are and the EU won't accept our influence unless we're part of the Eurozone which we clearly don't want to be. Are you saying we should join the Euro in order to bring it down?

I was talking about the EU. You said 'Europe', I presume you meant the whole thing.

What evidence do you have that Germany don't want to 'run' Europe? Their massive influence in Europe has brought them huge benefits, why wouldn't they want more? If they're having nightmares about how much influence they have, why not just stop influencing policy?

I can't prove they don't want to run Europe. It seems to be that since you're making the assertion it's up to you to prove it. I can't prove they don't. That would be impossible.

Why wouldn't they want more control over the likes of Greece (which you've criticised for not running their affairs properly) and therby lessen the risk to Germany eh? Why wouldn't they then want to have more control over countries like Portugal and Spain which pose even greater risks to Germany? That'd be stupid wouldn't it?

Why would that be stupid? That's the point I was making. Big difference between having conditions attached to bailout money and 'controlling' a country. I think it is perfectly reasonable for the Germans to demand the Greeks balance their budget before giving them money, why bother otherwise? You would be throwing away money.

Anyway, they're doing it already aren't they by pulling the strings when it comes to the Greek bailout and I really don't understand how you can accept that they're doing it in Germany's interests but at the same time claim they don't want to have more control in Europe given the much larger risks to Germany via Spain and Italy.

They are only giving the bailouts because otherwise they would be in trouble themselves. Germany are only doing what they are forced too as a result of the current circumstances. It's not evidence that they want to run Europe, that implies are far greater control than in evident so far.

I am saying that German actions so far are evidence of a country protecting their economy from further damage, not evidence of a country that otherwise desires greater control on the internal affairs of a country. I think 'run' Europe is a very broad definition and one Germany certainly cannot do. Would they like to favour their own economy? Of course, but they will face opposition from other countries as we all jockey for leverage and influence. France and the UK would do the same. We could easily be having this conversation about France now, if their economy had been stronger over the last few years.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

I was talking about the EU. You said 'Europe', I presume you meant the whole thing.



I can't prove they don't want to run Europe. It seems to be that since you're making the assertion it's up to you to prove it. I can't prove they don't. That would be impossible.



Why would that be stupid? That's the point I was making. Big difference between having conditions attached to bailout money and 'controlling' a country. I think it is perfectly reasonable for the Germans to demand the Greeks balance their budget before giving them money, why bother otherwise? You would be throwing away money.



They are only giving the bailouts because otherwise they would be in trouble themselves. Germany are only doing what they are forced too as a result of the current circumstances. It's not evidence that they want to run Europe, that implies are far greater control than in evident so far.

I am saying that German actions so far are evidence of a country protecting their economy from further damage, not evidence of a country that otherwise desires greater control on the internal affairs of a country. I think 'run' Europe is a very broad definition and one Germany certainly cannot do. Would they like to favour their own economy? Of course, but they will face opposition from other countries as we all jockey for leverage and influence. France and the UK would do the same. We could easily be having this conversation about France now, if their economy had been stronger over the last few years.

Right then to recap - now you've moved away from the notion that anyone who dares mention Germany is dredging up WWII, we agree that the Germans are looking after their own interests as any other countries would do. We agree that they're at the heart of Europe. We agree that their economy has done very well nicely out of the EU and Eurozone and it's undeniable that's because they've had such influence in forming the policies which have enabled their economy to prosper at the expense of certain other countries. We agree that they are exercising more control over bailout funds since it's largely German money at stake.

We only seem to differ on the rationale. My opinion is that the Germans have always had a longer term view and have steered EU policy in a direction which suits their economy as a means by which to further their ambitions, not as a means by which to keep Greeks employed. I feel that they will continue on this path, using the weakness of other nations as a lever through which to secure yet more political control within Europe, thereby effectively ruinning the show in actuality if not in name. You have poured scorn aplenty on any such notion, using the old"memories of WWII" argument to try to rubbish that view.

Neither you or can say for sure what the Germans' long term aim is but what you can't deny is that Germany is effectively running the show already and if that wasn't by design then it's a very happy accident for them isn't it. The fact that they didn't engineer or create the crisis we're in doesn't mean that it can't be used to their further long term benefit even if that 'only' means having more political control in 'problem countries' whose internal policies (in conjunction with the realities of the one size fits all Eurozone straightjacket) have created serious issues for the entire EU.

Clearly the Germans see their future at the heart of Europe and aren't about to leave anytime soon so until you can come up with a convicning reason why they wouldn't want more control of the whole shebang to better secure German interests, I'll be sticking to my view and it has nothing to do with WWII.

[downquark1]

Neither you or can say for sure what the Germans' long term aim is but what you can't deny is that Germany is effectively running the show already

Well Germany at the moment is the only one with the money and confidence to anything, it's no surprise at this point.

Germany actually seems scared to take control of Europe, it's a poisoned chalice. They are opposing eurobonds and I don't expect them to agree to the massive centralisations some people are suggesting.

[nomadking]

It's one thing to want the best for your own country, but it's another when you plan to achieve it at the expense of, and control of, your 'friends' in the EU. This was going on long before the introduction of the Euro, never mind the current Euro Crisis.

Originally Posted by Osem

Right then to recap - now you've moved away from the notion that anyone who dares mention Germany is dredging up WWII, =

Oh the love of...I was replying to that exact scenario.

Originally Posted by Sirius

Far fetched, I bet there were some saying the same thing just before Germany started to kill all those innocent people

Germany has tried twice by force to control Europe, They lost both times now they are trying to rule with a financial fist.

Originally Posted by gba93

That was the reasoning behind "lebensraum" (living room) which led to WWII and as I have said on this forum before there is more than one type of "invasion / occupation".

It's clearly something people have believed. I have not moved away from opposing that because it's stupid. I have actually engaged fairly with your posts and discussed why I do not think Germany are trying to control Europe.

Neither you or can say for sure what the Germans' long term aim is but what you can't deny is that Germany is effectively running the show already and if that wasn't by design then it's a very happy accident for them isn't it.

Happy accident? How is this situation in their interests? They are simply attaching conditions to their bailout money to ensure they don't need bailouts to come. I don't see how giving money to failing European countries is good for them. They aren't getting anything out of it other than protecting the single currency that they depend on.

You have poured scorn aplenty on any such notion, using the old"memories of WWII" argument to try to rubbish that view.

Where in my response to your recent arguments have I said you were motivated by WW2. Show me. When I have been replying to your posts and not the ones that actually did mention WW2 made by others I have been discussing the current situation and why I don't see any evidence of a desire for Germany to run Europe.

Do I need a tin hat to participate in this thread or should it be a tin foil hat?

[mertle]

good time to buy polaris golf home

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...is-homes-crash

Was originally 200,000 euros now struggling sell for 60,000 euros.

I see branson calling for investment for small medium business. You could not argue against his call either.

We need now investment programme. Would go as far saying we need to go beyond london. We need to look to get jobs and prosperity to northern towns. they decimated been underfunded by central government for years.

If the government aint careful not prepared to invest further it will become serious tinderpot scenerio. Wonder if those towns if possible could become militant by witholding taxes spend it in there own towns. There few towns where the government must raise quite bit tax revenues from major businesses like ports/oil/chemical. Those towns have had poor investment from government despite having major businesses which raise significant taxes. If this re-invested or proportion raised towns would become prosperious.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...est-businesses

To get that growth, we need to get behind the small and medium-sized businesses that are the engines of any healthy economy. They need investment and finance, and that comes from the big banks. The politicians talk of encouraging lending; we need action to match that rhetoric."

Originally Posted by mertle

good time to buy polaris golf home

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...is-homes-crash

Was originally 200,000 euros now struggling sell for 60,000 euros.

I see branson calling for investment for small medium business. You could not argue against his call either.

We need now investment programme. Would go as far saying we need to go beyond london. We need to look to get jobs and prosperity to northern towns. they decimated been underfunded by central government for years.

If the government aint careful not prepared to invest further it will become serious tinderpot scenerio. Wonder if those towns if possible could become militant by witholding taxes spend it in there own towns. There few towns where the government must raise quite bit tax revenues from major businesses like ports/oil/chemical. Those towns have had poor investment from government despite having major businesses which raise significant taxes. If this re-invested or proportion raised towns would become prosperious.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...est-businesses

I think you are letting your up imagination run riot, mertle - try and think that hypothesis through, eh, and the implications.

What about income tax, NI, and VAT - would they withhold that, and how?

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Hugh

I think you are letting your up imagination run riot, mertle - try and think that hypothesis through, eh, and the implications.

What about income tax, NI, and VAT - would they withhold that, and how?

which means its impossible to do fair enough.

I know there lot ressentment that what taxation in certain towns raised in they not getting fair deal back.

Think this why the anti london feeling coming from.

Which questions should we change how government funding done.

Say set % raised goes back in counties/towns where it came from the rest goes into national purse to deal national issues.

This means prosperity evened out more we then see better programme where money gets better used.

sure this would aid to close north south devide and social mobilty

[nomadking]

I thought it was taxes from London and South East that was 'propping up' the likes of the North etc. It is the South that should feel hard done by.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by nomadking

I thought it was taxes from London and South East that was 'propping up' the likes of the North etc. It is the South that should feel hard done by.

nope london and south east grew due to migration and stavation of investment in industrial north.

Old article 2004 warned this was issue which was ignored.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...s-6166410.html

We need to invest back in these towns to grow the economy.

We then will see the housing shortage be eradicated as that the real reason for housing issue too much population in one small part of the country.

Would say 60% population england live in one area spread it more we have less issue such water shortages.

We must be one most imbalanced countries in europe.

That's not what that article states - 'unusual' interpretation on your part....

[Derek]

Ahem, the credibility of that article got put to one side for me at this point.

Perhaps the strongest competition comes from Dublin, the fastest growing city in these islands, which has been extremely astute in building an economy that is a mini-version of London and the South-east

Remind me how the economy of Dublin and the ROI is doing right now, you know the one in the euro zone, going through austerity measures and having had to bail out its financial sector.