The Euro

So the storys... by Stone+Rhino · 2002-01-01 06:00 · Score: 1

Are from Ireland and britain... Both are countries not using the euro!

--

Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.

Re:So the storys... by Majix · 2002-01-01 06:11 · Score: 2

The countries using the euro are:

Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain.

Also, some small states like San Marino, Monaco, the Vatican etc. will be using the euro, and Cuba (the government at least). Major chains in the UK will also accept the euro.
Re:So the storys... by the+bluebrain · 2002-01-01 06:18 · Score: 1

Austria - check, France - check, Germany - check, Italy - check, the Netherlands - check, Portugal - check, Spain - check.

damn I've got a lot of left-over currency to swap. Good excuse to go on a round-Europe trip :) ?

--
yes, we have no bananas
Re:So the storys... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:17 · Score: 0

In addition Kosovo and Montenegro will use the Euro as the official currency (they used d-mark) before).
Re:So the storys... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 11:04 · Score: 0

you have to hurry up

Simple question.. by dj28 · 2002-01-01 06:01 · Score: 2, Interesting

Why did Britain (the country with the most stable currecny) opt out of using the Euro?

Re:Simple question.. by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-01 06:05 · Score: 2

Partially, I think you answered your own question: the stability of the pound, and the fact that it often outperforms the dollar, makes it easier to maintain as a separate currency.
Also, there's a lot of political resistence to Europeanization in the UK. Many there seem to still think of the Continent as chaotic, unreliable, and irrational. There is an ongoing political pressure to slow down the UK's entry into the EU.
Ireland, on the other hand, has done extraordinarily well with European integration, and the Irish pound has been replaced by the Euro.
Re:Simple question.. by steeph · 2002-01-01 06:06 · Score: 1

Because actually the Pound has been the most UNstable currency?
Anyway, the britons always have been a bit different. Guess they want to keep it that way.
Re:Simple question.. by NoOneInParticular · 2002-01-01 06:07 · Score: 4, Informative

Not really, before the euro, the deutchmark was the most stable currency. Remember 199x (x &lt 5), when the British pound was forced out of the EMU (monetary union) by Soros (amongst others). At that time, which was not too far in the past, the pound was the weakest currency, a state they shared with the Italian lire.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:12 · Score: 0, Funny

We fought Jerry in the beaches, the air, the water and we beat them.

And the rest of the continent was no help.

I lost a leg and an arm to Mustard gas in WW I and I can tell you that as a home guard during WW II, the british are strong, and the rest of the continent is weak.

When the Euro fails, they'll be rallying around her majesty's currency like they did in 1914 and 1939.

I suppose the Americans will have to save us for the first time in this century as well.

Oh, and its bad form to call jerry "the hun", or "those frigging Nazi's". Hardly any Germans are nazi's anymore. Just the ones with no hair and who sing "deustcheland uber alles".

Bloody krauts!
Re:Simple question.. by MrBandersnatch · 2002-01-01 06:13 · Score: 1

If I recall correctly the main reasons bein given were that we [ the UK ] would be surrendering control of our economy and ability to control interest rates/ fight inflation by addopting the Euro. However, the real reason is as has been said is that there is a lot or irrational resistance to becoming integrated into Europe to this extent.
Re:Simple question.. by cscx · 2002-01-01 06:13 · Score: 1, Funny

You try successfully using a currency calculator after downing 2 pints of Guiness...
Re:Simple question.. by LordNimon · 2002-01-01 06:17 · Score: 1

Many there seem to still think of the Continent as chaotic, unreliable, and irrational.
Yeah, but at least they don't have bad teeth. That should count for something, right?

--
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
Re:Simple question.. by mESSDan · 2002-01-01 06:19 · Score: 3, Insightful

The fact that Ireland has done extraordinarily well with European integration is probably NOT why it is using the Euro. Ireland has had more than its share of problems with the English, and probably welcome any changes that lead it away from English dependence.

--

-- Dan
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:23 · Score: 0

That's was the girl's club you played.

Our men's club is considered too powerful for you guys.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:24 · Score: 0

Becuase we don't like to be like everyone else on the planet, we are different thank god and proud of it.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:27 · Score: 2, Insightful

The UK opted out of joining the party back in the early 90s while the Conservatives were in power. The current 'New' Labour government has promised a referendum - they want us to join the Eurozone but prefer to leave it to the voters to take the blame for either joining or staying out.
The UK government's policy right now is that we should join the Eurozone "when the time is right" and "when certain conditions are met". The media are now bored with asking what the conditions are, because Blair refuses to state the conditions, just in case we happen to meet them, and then he'd have to make a decision.
Personally, I think Blair will wait about 6 months so that we can see that the Euro hasn't blown up in French and German faces, and then he'll set a date for the referendum.
Current opinion polls suggest us Brits don't want to adopt the Euro. However, I'd guess that 90% of the public are clueless about the implications, and all they see are rabid tabloid headlines that make it look more like a Martian invasion than a currency change.
The primary objection from those in the know is that losing the pound means losing control over setting interest rates. The primary objection from those without a clue is the change from pounds and pence to using Monopoly money.
Re:Simple question.. by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-01 06:28 · Score: 2

The Republic of Ireland as a political entity has reasonably amicable relations with the UK, and its monetary policy is almost certainly not dictated by a need to distance itself from London. Ireland's current economic success depend partially on a very well-educated but less expensive English-speaking workforce, and some good economic policies. Ireland could have maintained its old currency and still have not a whit of dependence on the UK - it might, however, have lost its strength as a bridge between the European and the US economies.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:31 · Score: 0

"However, I'd guess that 90% of the public are clueless about the implications"

A slightly sarcastic question here:

Which side of that percentage are you on?
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:31 · Score: 0

Really? So whos economy is still forcast for growth in the first quarter of 2002? Whos monetary policy has helped to keep inflation and interest rates at sensible levels, consistently driving the growth of the economy?

Hint: It ain't Germany, France, Italy, Spain, Ireland....
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:36 · Score: 0

I'm well informed, so I understand the *anticipated* implications :-)
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:39 · Score: 0

Thitd world countries have always a higher rate of growth than developed countries
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:41 · Score: 0

It's very hard to reply to such a simple question with a simple answer.
Simply because there is non.
The fact that the rest of europe is switching to the euro, especialy Germany and France means that trading with these countries will get a lot easier and, not unimportant, cheaper.(we all like that word :P )
Thus switching to the euro would be a very good idee.
Also the more european countries in the euro the better the whole system works.
If you want more detailed info on these subjects you should read one of the many reports that were made. :)
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:44 · Score: 0

The Brits still drive left.

Before joining the Euro they will have to behave like all inhabitants of civilized nations and start driving on the right side of the road.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:48 · Score: 0

Yeah, just look at Germany after the Berlin wall came down!

O.K, maybe thats not the best example...
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:26 · Score: 1, Insightful

Simple, because they were given the choice.
In many countries (including Belgium, my own) people were considered cattle that had to be herded towards the Euro. If referenda were held, like in Denmark, people held back. The press then commented that perhaps they would need some more conditioning. Over here they simply did not make the mistake of allowing a referendum, although our prime minister wrote in his pre-electoral campaigns and political treatises how he worshipped the referendum on every possible political issue.
This is why I abhor a common Euro-state: from an economic point of view it might make sense, but we're trading it for civil liberties. Europe is slowly sliding to a social-democracy (social as in "socialist international", and "democracy" as in "we don't execute dissenting opinions yet but we sure as hell will make life hell on them using political correctness"). If people think I'm exaggerating, consider Austria's treatment after they democratically formed the "wrong" coalition in the eyes of the socialist parties of the majority of Euro-countries. To whom still thinks Austria's ordeal is related to harsh immigration standpoints: the social-democrats in Denmark were far more misoxenic in their election campaign yet met no such aggression.
Returning to the Euro-point. Britain is wise because they now get a free test ride to see how the Euro will evolve. If they like what they see, they can jump in because all the other countries are eager to see this bastion of resistance cave in. If the Euro devaluates instead, they have a lot to gain.
Re:Simple question.. by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 07:43 · Score: 2, Informative

As a Briton, even I would have to say that the D-mark was the strongest currency in the EU by FAR, possibly with Sterling coming second. In purely economic terms, Germany outranks the UK easily. Go ask the OECD, UK and France are fairly even with Italy and Spain next. For comparison purposes, the Spanish economy is around the same size as Mexico's. If you think of European states as you would American ones, then Germany, the UK and France all outrank California or NY.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Simple question.. by Silent+Johnny · 2002-01-01 07:52 · Score: 1

You're absolutely right in your Euro-sceptical view. It's the same situation over here in the Netherlands (I especially agree on your remarks on 'political correctness').
However, Britain is NOT wise. It may SEEM wise, but the true reason for being kicked out of the European Monetary Union in the first place, and not joining it again in the 90s was because they're just plain conservative.
And indeed, as someone pointed out, the Pound is heavily over-valuated. Currency markets are built on sentiments....
Re:Simple question.. by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 08:07 · Score: 1

That's nonsense, with the exception of the issue of Sellafield (a British Nuclear power station) the UK and Irish governments have NO major policy clashes. Even Northern ireland isn't really a point of controversy, as both governments seem to accept that NI should determine it's own destiny if at all possible. Sure, there are elements in each state that have different opinions - but the actual goverments of the UK and Eire are a pretty reasonable and pragmatic bunch - as you'd expect in a couple of successful democracies.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Simple question.. by Jabes · 2002-01-01 08:41 · Score: 2, Interesting

As the Chancellor said in his October 1997 statement, the Five Economic Tests will define whether a clear and unambiguous case can be made. The Five Tests are:

* sustainable convergence between Britain and the economies of a single currency;

* whether there is sufficient flexibility to cope with economic change;

* the effect on investment;

* the impact on our financial services industry;

and

* whether it is good for employment.

Some comentators have suggested that these conditions are so vague that it would be easy to claim we have met them, or haven't as required. Unfortunately I don't understand the economics enough.

What I will say though, is as a Director of UK software company that exports to Europe, and as a frequent traveller to Europe, the quicker we get the Euro the better.
Re:Simple question.. by Dan-DAFC · 2002-01-01 09:08 · Score: 1

The British people on the whole don't trust the EU. The EU is rife with corruption (I forget the figures but the amount of money it loses through corruption is obscene). Also the British public is much less in favour of European integration than the other EU states. This is probably due in part to geography, we've always been separate from the continent and don't like the idea of being ruled from Brussels. European integration has had many benefits (European Human Rights laws, freedom of movement of labour, relaxed customs rules etc.) but for some people it's going too far. They don't like the idea of the economy being run by unelected officials in Frankfurt, or the fact that we wouldn't be in control of our own interest rates. Member states cannot make local adjustments, there will be one European rate, which is worrying given that there are very different circumstances in different countries. So for you could get a situation where one country has to suffer for the benefit of another because there is a single economic policy. I live in Dover (which for those of you who don't know, is the closest place in Britain to mainland Europe, just 22 miles from France) and what I see is that the British are happy to have better relations with Europe but don't want to surrender any powers to a central government. We are in a position where the government have promised a referendum but will not call one until they are confident of winning it. What this means is that we will probably join up quite rapidly if the Euro is a run-away success and people can see the real benefits, otherwise we will stay out and watch it fail miserably with a smug, superior attitude.

--
Suck figs.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:17 · Score: 0

You do realise that it's imperative to keep the Irish drunk, because when they're sober they're the most intelligent and physically capable race on the planet?
Re:Simple question.. by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 09:17 · Score: 5, Informative

Why did Britain (the country with the most stable currecny) opt out of using the Euro?
Because of the internal divisions in the Conservative (Tory) party.
The history is that the Major government took over from Thatcher after she had been governing the country for 11 years and had become amazingly unpopular. The economy was in a mess and headed for a recession, people were fed up with crackpot schemes such as the poll tax, unemployment was high and the public services were collapsing. In many ways the 1992 election was similar to the 2000 US election, the right won an election that on all political calculations they should have lost. But they did so on a minority of the vote and with a very small majority in the Commons.
One of the reasons Thatcher had become unpopular in the party was that she had become anti-European and had refused to countenance going into the then ERM, a currency board that predated the Euro. When Major as Chancellor finally persuaded Thatcher to let him take the country in the pound was unrealistically high. This then led in part to the economic crisis that would peak a few years later in 1993. a bunch of speculators led by Goerge Sorros realised that HMG could not sustain the pound at its then level in the ERM, it was simply unsustainable. But Major and co refused to countenance a devaluation. Finaly the markets won and the pound fell out of the ERM. This had the immediate effect of ending the recession caused by an over-valued pound. The cost however was the Major government's credibility since they had spent $20 billion trying to sustain the higher level - equivalent to the cost of running the air force at the time.
The longer term effect was that a sizable faction in the Tory party began to use anti-Europeanism as a means to snipe at Major. A hard core of about a dozen rebels lost the party whip, but they had a large number of sympathisers. More importantly they were better organized in the constituency parties which are typically racist and reactionary.
In the 1997 election the Tory party was virtually anahilated, loosing 200 seats. That is their worst performance since universal suffrage. As always in the UK the MPs to loose their seats were the ones in the most marginal constituencies. These were also by and large the ones that were industrial rather than agricultural and as a result the ones most likely to have Europhile MPs.
By 1997 there was no prospect of the UK entering the Euro in the first wave even thought the pragmatic Blair administration supported the idea. That meant that there was no prospect of entering in that parliament. By now the Tory party was virulently opposed to the Euro and had made it practically their only campaign issue. If there was a referendum and the Tory party was to win a No vote it could easily allow the Tories to recover their lost momentum, possibly winning the next election. The political cost of negotiating to enter the Euro was consequently high and the benefit negligible since it could not be completed in one parliament.
The political calculation at this point is rather different. It now makes little difference whether the UK joins in 2003 or 2008, having missed the opportunity to set the ground rules the UK might as well watch what happens. The current Euro exchange rate is absurdly low and so a more equitable exchange rate to the pound and dollar is likely to sort itself out. It is likely that HMG will choose that moment to declare some form of currency peg. Over time the peg will become more permanent leading eventually to the UK entering the Euro.
The political advantage to doing so early remains low, the cost high. This is particularly so since 60% of the UK media market is controlled by Rupert Murdoch, an Austrailian with no particular concern for the UK or its inhabitants but a considerable and justified fear of the European Union curtailing his ambitions through anti-monopoly (trust) regulation.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:30 · Score: 0

The reason the Brits resist Europe is because they still believe in something common amongst slashdotters. Freedom.

Under a federal Europe people will be removed from the desicions processes of a minority unelected political elite. The corruption in the EU will make Russia look like chicken feed.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:44 · Score: 0

IANAEM (I am not an Englishman) but I have spoken to a few and their idea on the situation is that the British people are NOT Europeans. Therefore using the Euro is not an option in that case. From a geographic and technical standpoint, yes they are. Much like everyone North of Michigan and South of Texas are still technically "Americans" beloging to the American continent. Yet when someone says "American" they usually are referring to a citizen of the United States. Its all a matter of personal beliefs probably.
Re:Simple question.. by drsquare · 2002-01-01 09:52 · Score: 1

They haven't opted out, they just haven't opted in. There hasn't even been a refurendum yet. Denmark is the only country which has had a refurendum, and they said no.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:59 · Score: 0

And why was this? Probably because the Pound was growing at such an amazing rate in the 80s thanks to Thatcher, that it was excelling way above the Mark and Franc. This, of course, made it unstable in exchange rate terms.. but was still the most powerful currency of the lot.
Re:Simple question.. by xenocide2 · 2002-01-01 10:01 · Score: 1

As was explained to me by a few europeans (with broken english) over IRC, a lot of people were afraid of tying their currency with that of states with escalating inflation, like Italy and Spain. After all, with a strong and stable Pound or Mark, there isn't a great need for a more united currency. Once again, this is only what I was told, I'm no economical genius and they could be wrong.

--
I Browse at +4 Flamebait
Open Source Sysadmin
Re:Simple question.. by wackybrit · 2002-01-01 10:06 · Score: 1

You said: In many ways the 1992 election was similar to the 2000 US election, the right won an election that on all political calculations they should have lost. But they did so on a minority of the vote and with a very small majority in the Commons.

Initially I thought this was a good way of looking at it, but now I think you're not quite right. The Conservatives won the 1992 election simply because the Labour government of the time (Socialist, blatantly Left Wing) was unpalatable to the majority of the electorate.. many who had made enormous gains in Thatcher's boom period. By 1997, Labour had redefined itself into a more liberal party (with even a touch of right wing values to it) and easily stole the vote.

I wouldn't say this is what happened in the 2000 US election. Infact, almost the opposite. People were becoming sick of a Liberal government that failed to make many changes and the 'conservative' Republicans made enough gains to take them into power.

That said, I think the US government under Clinton was probably one of the best examples of government seen in the West in many many many years, if not ever. They made few changes to laws, and generally kept their nose out of public business (and especially the Internet). Sure, if the government had stuck its nose into the new net economy, perhaps it wouldn't have crashed.. but new industries are rarely formed when the Fed gets too involved.

--
mogorific carpentry experiments
Re:Simple question.. by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:11 · Score: 1

However, the real reason is as has been said is that there is a lot or irrational resistance to becoming integrated into Europe to this extent.

I think the resistance is quite rational. The EU has done nothing but try to screw over the UK and its strengths since before we joined the EEC. Mostly the underhand French.

It's easy to brush off people you disagree with as being irrational; try finding a real argument. Oh wait...
Re:Simple question.. by Asic+Eng · 2002-01-01 10:14 · Score: 3, Insightful

No disagreements, just want to add something here: One of the results of having not joined the Euro, is that the European Central Bank is now located in Frankfurt, instead of London.
London is the number one financial place in Europe, it would have been pretty hard for another country to get this institution, if Britain had joined right away.
Re:Simple question.. by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:16 · Score: 1

The Norwegians had a referendum about even joining the EU, and they said NO!

And to all those who claim not joining in the political games of Jacques Delors will weaken the economy, Norway is doing better than almost all of Europe, thanks.
Re:Simple question.. by Unknown+Poltroon · 2002-01-01 10:17 · Score: 1

Yaaaaa, whact he shaid. >hic

--
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
Re:Simple question.. by orin · 2002-01-01 10:21 · Score: 1

Rupert Murdoch gave up his .au citizenship some years ago to comply with US media ownership rules when he took over FOX. Your points still stand though. It would be interesting to see if the EU would be willing to take on someone who is now, for all intents and purposes, an "American Media Magnate" for monopolistic practices - esp given the money that Murdoch funnels into politics around the world.
Re:Simple question.. by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:37 · Score: 1

One of the results of having not joined the Euro, is that the European Central Bank is now located in Frankfurt, instead of London.

There is no reason to believe that at all; and every reason to believe it would always be Frankfurt.

The Germans were very attached to the Bundesbank and wouldn't have settled for anything else. Besides, the Germans and particularly the French are very jealous of London, and have done everything they can in the last 20 years to reduce it's grip. Sadly for them, they've failed, and London is still the financial capital of the world (with the debatable exception of NY; though I think the fact that we own the Bond, Gold, FX, Swap and Euromarkets settles it).
Re:Simple question.. by |DeN|niS · 2002-01-01 10:37 · Score: 1

Norway sits on a huge amount of oil and energy (hydro plants). They have no external debt, and, if you wish to put it that way, are stinking filthy rich :)
For them joining the EU would mean paying for less-rich (basically most) members.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:40 · Score: 0

NY .75 trillion
Calif: 1.2
UK: 1.3
Germany 1.9
France 1.4
Australia .445
Data from:
http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/regional/gsp/
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:40 · Score: 0

That said, I think the US government under Clinton was probably one of the best examples of government seen in the West in many many many years, if not ever. They made few changes to laws, and generally kept their nose out of public business (and especially the Internet)

True, although it has little to do with Clinton. His hands were tied by a powerful Republican Congress and his numerous scandals robbed him of both his political clout and time to get anything done. After Clinton's plan to socialize health care blew up in his face, he was forced to the right, and wound up passing many "moderate" reforms which pleased the center but left righties and lefties with a sour taste in their mouths.

This relative stagnation of the government (the gov't actually "shut down" a few times IIRC) suited the economy just fine. With the 2000 election, it was clear that the new executive would drag things either to the right or left, upsetting this fragile balance. With a Democratic Senate and a Republican president, things are beginning to look like the awkward Reagan years, where the US government grew and ran a deficit despite having someone who is in theory an economic conservative in the Oval Office.
Re:Simple question.. by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:42 · Score: 1

For them joining the EU would mean paying for less-rich (basically most) members.

We British do that anyway. The French have managed to avoid it for 20 years with their usual tactics, and the Germans way overpay. The Irish get way too much, just like the Spanish. The rest seems fair 8-)
Re:Simple question.. by jackal! · 2002-01-01 11:01 · Score: 2

Why did Britain (the country with the most stable currecny) opt out of using the Euro?
Actually, you just answered your own question. One of the biggest reasons for Europe to unite under one currency is larger stability for all. Since the pound is pretty solid, this sales point doesn't mean much to the old Empire.

--
Who moderates the meta-moderators?
Re:Simple question.. by slipgun · 2002-01-01 11:09 · Score: 1

Also, there's a lot of political resistence to Europeanization in the UK. Many there seem to still think of the Continent as chaotic, unreliable, and irrational. There is an ongoing political pressure to slow down the UK's entry into the EU.

Brits are also distrustful of anything which is forced upon them by those who are not elected. The European Union is an example of such an instituion. Those on the continent, not having a history of democracy, have less of a problem with being told what to do.

--
SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works
Re:Simple question.. by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 11:11 · Score: 4, Interesting

Initially I thought this was a good way of looking at it, but now I think you're not quite right. The Conservatives won the 1992 election simply because the Labour government of the time (Socialist, blatantly Left Wing) was unpalatable to the majority of the electorate..
Actually the election was far more finely balanced. The Tories benefitted from an unexpectedly high turnout which was largely due to the weather, it was the first fine day of spring. The margin was very narrow, less than 2000 votes in 20 seats. In fact had the 50 seats with the smallest majorities gone 50:50 to Tory/Labour then Labour would have won narrowly.
The voter perception of Labour policy was largely fuelled by the Murdoch press. What Major offered was a Conservative government minus Thatcher. The mistake the Labour party had made was that by daemonising Thatcher they allowed the Tories to get re-elected simply by putting a new face at the helm. The Labour policy changes from 1992 through 1997 were of presentaion, not substance.
The major change was not in the Labour party but in the Conservatives. Racked with open internal warfare few of the cabinet made any attempt to conceal their contempt for their party leader. The numerous corruption scandals, starting with sex and ending with peculation and perjury erased any remaining vesigest of respect for the party.
The main similarity between 1992 and 2000 is the extent to which a viciously partisan press tipped the balance in favour of the right. Bush was consistently praised despite his obvious deficiencies while every opportunity was taken to attack Gore. So Bush got a bye for lying about driving while drunk while Gore was called a liar for mistakenly saying he visited Texas with the head of FEMA when it was the deputy head, he having visited 19 other states with the head one might think it an innocent mistake. The list goes on.
The relevance to the Euro is that but for the campaign against it in the Murdoch press it is unlikely that UK opposition would be anything like as great.
We will see if the end result is the same, before 9/11 that looked very likely. The ecconomy was in recession, the administration had lost control of the Senate due to crass political judgement, the California energy crisis caused by blatant market manipulation by Bush's texas cronies at Enron. Of course the hil Bush now needs to climb is that the press loves nothing better than making history repeat. So just as the Clinton years were spent trying to repeat Watergate, the press will now be trying to tie Bush II to the script of Bush I.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:Simple question.. by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 11:14 · Score: 2

Rupert Murdoch gave up his .au citizenship some years ago to comply with US media ownership rules when he took over FOX
Actually he acquired US citizenship and through political chicanery was able to keep his .au citizenship, thus allowing him to keep his vast .au holdings.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:22 · Score: 0

Because traditionally, Britain has done all in its power to avoid being considered part of Europe. This is just another chapter in this silly little battle they fight.
Re:Simple question.. by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 11:25 · Score: 2

Sadly for them, they've failed, and London is still the financial capital of the world (with the debatable exception of NY; though I think the fact that we own the Bond, Gold, FX, Swap and Euromarkets settles it).
I would agree, except that due to the timezone differences, the London markets are more complimentary to the US rather than competing. The trading day starts somewhere in Asia (once Tokyo, someday soon HK as a proxy for Bejing), transfers to London and from there to NYC. To be a major player you have to be in both London and NYC.
The argument that the UK should go in for the sake of the city is specious however. In the first place the city will use any currency they care to, the commodity markets may well switch to the Euro without parliament. But the city will always have to use the dollar and the Euro until there is world government and a true single currency.
The city will do fine with or without the UK in the Euro. If the govt. were to do anything for the city, getting rid of some of the culture of old bufferism would have greater effect. Of course we all believe in self regulation until we have a lloyds style catastrophe, then we go to HMG for a bailout.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:39 · Score: 0

As did Switzerland, which also said no.
Re:Simple question.. by Tony+Hoyle · 2002-01-01 11:40 · Score: 4, Funny

In general the majority of the british population see the 'foreigners' as either peasants/pig farmers or 'militant french farmers' (who for some bizarre reason every time they have a problem with their government they blockade calais... I suspect they don't like us either...)

Also one of the most powerful countries in the EU is Germany. British people don't trust germans - even the under 30's who you wouldn't think would bother about a war fought 60 years ago have this inherited distrust from their parents and grandparents.

And, well, *everybody* hates the French :-)

Personally I can't see it happening in my lifetime. Heck it took us 200 years to decimalize...
Re:Simple question.. by -brazil- · 2002-01-01 11:50 · Score: 1

The EU parliament is elected democratically by the citizens of all member states. Go take your "euroskeptic" propaganda and shove it where the sun don't shine.

--
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
Re:Simple question.. by astar · 2002-01-01 12:07 · Score: 1

Euro stable?

The participants gave up any mechanism for defending the Euro. It is a pre-programmed diaster waiting to happen. In case you have not noticed, there is a severe world-wide economic disaster taking place and the Euro will go the way the yen is going right now. I think it reasonable that the yen crisis will have to play out a little further before the Euro problems hits the papers, but keep an eye on Poland. Poland can implode anytime now, and the splash back would definitely be noticed in the rest of Europe, even though Poland is not a member of the monetary union.

Reinterating, in our period nations have to be able to implement Hamiltonian protectionist measures to survive, and the Euro intentionally does not have a mechanism for doing this.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:14 · Score: 0

Partially, I think you answered your own question: the stability of the pound, and the fact that it often outperforms the dollar, makes it easier to maintain as a separate currency.
The pound outperforms the dollar? What are you smoking and where can I get some of it? Currency strength is not determined on how small the denominator is (wow 1 pound can buy more than 1 dollar), but rather the stability of the currency. I.e. a dollar monetarily will buy you the same thing $foo years from now. A dollar is subject to the least inflation/deflation. The pound on the other hand, fluctuates much much much more, and thus is much less strong. Recap: Just because a currency has a lower denominator doesn't mean that it's better, it's how stable it is (meaning minimal inflation/deflation)
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:24 · Score: 0

If I recall correctly the main reasons bein given were that we [ the UK ] would be surrendering control of our economy and ability to control interest rates/ fight inflation by addopting the Euro. However, the real reason is as has been said is that there is a lot or irrational resistance to becoming integrated into Europe to this extent.

Those aren't alternatives. There is a lot of (irrational if you like, I'd say emotive) resistance to a transfer of control over economic matters away from the nation state towards European institutions. The reason really is the diminution of sovereignty, which is important to people for emotional/patriotic (irrational if you like) reasons.
Re:Simple question.. by Teun · 2002-01-01 13:15 · Score: 1

It is hours after your question but; When the UK opted out of the Euro the Pound was still reeling after the attack by Soros. In my lifetime I've seen the UK Pound drop (in Guilders)from 12.50 to 1.80 in the latter years of Tatcher and Major and then slowly creep out of it's predicament to the present over-rated 3.65. It is generally accepted the Puon should be no more than 2.20-2.50 Guilders (1.00-1.15 Euro). Until the German reunification the Mark was strong. Even then and especially in the early and mid 90's the Dutch guilder was (a lot) stronger, only strong opposition of the Germans and French prevented it from being revaluated in the years leading up to the Euro. Even now the Guilder would be the strongest currency of Euroland (OK, the Irish Punt would do well too).

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:19 · Score: 0

Sorry,

Are you aware that there is something called European Parliament? A very new and shiny building in Brussels where representatives from 15 countries sit and talk. Let me help you. http://www.europarl.eu.int

Do you remember having heard something about going to vote to elect the members of European Parliament? Yes? So, if you voted, you should know that the European Parliament chooses the European President, which appoints the European Commission (ministers and so) - you may call it the European Government. In turn, each member of the European Commission must get the approval of the European Parliament.

If that is not democratic I wonder which is your definition of democracy. Maybe and European Parliament under control of Westminster?

People should know what they are talking about.
Re:Simple question.. by Menthos · 2002-01-01 13:27 · Score: 1

If you consider that the Italian president is also a media magnate and controls most major Italian media, I think it is unlikely that the EU starts investigating media monopolies any time soon as long as he's still in power. But maybe I'm just pessimistic about this.

--
GNU/Linux. The Freshmaker.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 14:37 · Score: 0

Not to mention how effectively that Gore's #1 political accomplishment (the commercalization of the Internet) was completely negated due to rabid misquoting and a flood of partisan mockery. "Gore Invented It" still gets a Score:5 Funny on slashdot now and again, an audience who should know better.
Re:Simple question.. by Banjonardo · 2002-01-01 16:08 · Score: 1

Heh, they said something about the "historical value of the Pound."
Kinda funny, considering the Greeks were o.k. with the Drachma (a MUCH older coin) going away. Funny, those Brits.

--
-----
Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton
Re:Simple question.. by Banjonardo · 2002-01-01 16:11 · Score: 1

If I remember correctly, the GNP of California overpassed that of France.... Then again, California is the World's fourth economy.

--
-----
Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton
Re:Simple question.. by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 16:13 · Score: 1

Wow! Nice back up. The French/British question (ie who is richer) is directly related to what currency you calculate their respective GNPs in - if you use US dollars, then UK wins but I think the real story is that they're effectively the same size. Out of curiosity - is California the "richest" US state? My previous post assumed so, but, for all I know, Texas or Illinois might be. I'll bet any money you like that Alaska produces more wealth per head than any other US state...

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Simple question.. by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 16:40 · Score: 1

the parliament may be democratic (ish anyway - party lists? very nasty). But the real power in Europe is wielded by the European Commission as you well know. They MAY be benign we can't guarantee that, they certainly are NOT democratic.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Simple question.. by SofaMan · 2002-01-01 18:15 · Score: 1

The political advantage to doing so early remains low, the cost high. This is particularly so since 60% of the UK media market is controlled by Rupert Murdoch, an Austrailian with no particular concern for the UK or its inhabitants but a considerable and justified fear of the European Union curtailing his ambitions through anti-monopoly (trust) regulation.

Actually, despite being born in Australia, Rupert Murdoch has been an American citizen, both living and working there, for many many years.

Don't try to make us take the blame for that ghastly media despot; he seems quite happy to count himself a legal citizen of whatever nation offers him the greatest financial advantages. He'd happily backstab the Yanks in a second if he thought there was a quid in it.

--
SofaMan -- Occasionally Battling Evil With His Mighty Powers Of Indolence.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 20:09 · Score: 0

Lol... the EU, democracy indeed.

Didn't they also have elections in communist Russia? They must have been democratic then.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 20:49 · Score: 0

Just so I can blaspheme on /.

Read the book of Revelation...

Anyway the Brits wanted to keep control of their currentcy.. could you see the US handing 66% of the reigns on the Dollar over to Canada and Mexico? I think not.
Re:Simple question.. by CheeseMunkie · 2002-01-01 21:33 · Score: 1

Because, simply put, it's more profitable for them to use the pound.

You know how stock works, right? Each share you buy is a corresponding piece of the company. Currency works roughly the same way -- each dollar you have is a share in the company that is the US economy; each pound sterling you have is a share in the UK economy.

When you merge currencies, such as the Euro taking over several other currencies, you create in effect one big company with the averaged share prices of all the component companies/countries.

Just as the stock price of a company is affected by many factors, so too the worth of a currency. One of the chief factors is national debt. Incidentally, this is why the dollar is always so low against the pound -- the brits have virtually no debt, while the yanks have several trillion dollars to pay back. Italyis another enormous debtor -- they have several grillion lira to pay back, which is why there are 0.000323954 lira to the pound. Yes, that's right, 0.03 pence per lira.

Now, back to the euro thingy. It's quite simple -- the UK has the high performing part of the company; why would they want to bring their stock down by merging with the low performers? t would be something like Amazon of 1999 merging with Amazon of today. The high performer, the UK, would end up in effect underwriting Italy's national debt. (Italy actually had to pay off a not insignificant bit of its debt before the other countries would let it join.) Actually, since it's the high end of the spectrum, the UK would effectively be backing all the other countries' debts, along with Germany and some other rich countries.

The net effect of the single euro currency will be precisely that of a merger, but without the concomitant passage of power. Kind of makes it a bad deal for the rich countries, while the poor ones make out well, which is precisely why the UK and Scandinavia refrained. Same reason Norway has stayed out of the EU entirely.
Re:Simple question.. by bigboard · 2002-01-01 21:47 · Score: 0

Perhaps you could tell me when we were given a choice? Have I missed something?

--
Cynicism is the natural defence of the romantic.
Re:Simple question.. by rp · 2002-01-01 21:57 · Score: 1

The Labour party is just as divided on Europe.

The British pound has been doing very well in recent years, but it hasn't always, and I doubt that the strong pound is a major factor in Britain's decision to pull out of Europe.

One major reason for the Euro is political. Most countries are prepared to sink billions of Euros into compromise if this is what it takes to avoid another "World" War, or Cold War. We've had enough of that already.

Another is that with the infrastructure improving all the time, those petty national borders and differences are becoming more and more serious obstacles to trade, in particular for the big and the powerful. Every step towards the freedom of trade and unity of language enjoyed in the USA is welcome.
Re:Simple question.. by frost22 · 2002-01-01 22:06 · Score: 1

Brits are also distrustful of anything which is forced upon them by those who are not elected. The European Union is an example of such an instituion.
Huh ? The deciding institutions of the EU are

The council of ministers - which consists of the very much elected national government ministers (typically those in charge of the topic at hand)
to a lesser extend, the European Parliament, which is very much elected.

The real issue is that the brits don't like any bloody foreigners influence their domestic policies. A notion that is - as they will find out rather sooner than later - mostly unrelated to the Euro - EU policies will affect them with pounds as well.

f.

--
...and here I stand, with all my lore, poor fool, no wiser than before.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:30 · Score: 0

But.. but... How can you know that?
Re:Simple question.. by SpinyManiac · 2002-01-01 22:37 · Score: 1

Sellafield is a reprocessing plant for used nuclear fuel.

It used to be a nuclear power station until the core caught fire, but it was called Windscale then.

--
It's never too late to have a happy childhood.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:59 · Score: 0

It's not quite as simple as "the pound is strong" the economic trend in the UK is the opposite to the european, the economic policies are too.

If UK would go to the euro, they'd have to use the european economic policy, which would mean raising intrest rates, when they should be lowered in the UK.

It could mean the collapse of the UK economic system etc etc.
Re:Simple question.. by biglig2 · 2002-01-01 23:04 · Score: 2

True. The point is that we didn't elect all of them. Analogy for the Americans: The distinction between Federal and state government. I imagine most of you prefer stuff to be decided at the state level, rather than Federal, so that the decisions are made as close to you as possible.

I must take issue with your statement that increased federalism is unrelated to the Euro.

Firstly, membership of the Eurozone prevents governments using certain financial controls to run their economy. So already theres a loss of sovreignty.

Secondly, shared currencies are bound to lead to tighter integration. It's a small step to, for example, harmonizing tax. (actually already on the way - but the euro makes it a simpler proposition)

--
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Re:Simple question.. by Jon+Peterson · 2002-01-01 23:14 · Score: 2

Hmmm, let me see, we vote for an EU parliament, which then chooses a president that then chooses a commission. So, the comission is already two steps away from democratic accountability.

Now, if the commission were a purely operational body that would be fine, but IT IS NOT. The EU commission is THE MOST POWERFULL PART OF THE EU POLITICAL MACHINE. Isn't that scary? Doesn't it worry you that ALL EU policy initiatives must originate in the Commission, a body which, in case you've forgotten, had EVERY SINGLE ONE of it's commissioners resign a few years ago over a corruption scandal.

That's a bit like every single head civil servant and the entire cabinet of a country resigning simultaneously. Isn't that scary? Doesn't it terrify you that we (Britain) are handing more and more power to these people?

Jeez.

--
----- .sig: file not found
Re:Simple question.. by berta · 2002-01-01 23:56 · Score: 1

Exagerating it is. I can only guess why you sympathize with Haider. We all know the previous nazi regime entered the democratic system via democratic ways ( elections ).
For the nonsence about socialism, you should know the biggest european party is the evp ( european volks party ) a conservative, religion based club.
Re:Simple question.. by Liet · 2002-01-02 00:09 · Score: 1

Kinda funny, considering the Greeks were o.k. with the Drachma (a MUCH older coin) going away.
Actualy the British Pound goes all the way back to the Roman empire (around the 320's) whereas the Drachma was born in 1832 when Greece became independant of Turkey.
Re:Simple question.. by jlennon · 2002-01-02 00:20 · Score: 1

>The Brits are distrustful of anything which is
>forced upon them by those who are not elected?

So why don't they abolish monarchy?
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:14 · Score: 0

It's the same situation over here in the Netherlands (I especially agree on your remarks on 'political correctness').
Well, as an American, I can say that 'make life hell on them using political correctness' is still much better than 'execute dissenting opinions'. For instance, in the days after Sept. 11, people like Rev. Jerry Falwell made some questionable statements (on the liberal end included many college professors), and though the government cannot legally take action against these people, individual? citizens did, by 'make life hell on them'. Nowadays, you don't hear much from them in the public.
Re:Simple question.. by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 01:19 · Score: 1

The real reason is that the British are distrustful of anything foreign. Most of our history involves beating the crap out of these very same people who we would be sharing our currency with.

There is a strong emotional attachment to the Pound Sterling, it's one of the things that makes a country feel like home. You know you're back from a trip abroad because you can read the signs in the airport and you can tell at a glance if the taxi driver gave you the right change.

As regards the monarchy, it doesn't need abolishing because it has no effect on political life in Great Britain. It's just there to help us fleece American tourists and provide our cheaper newspapers with something to write about.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Simple question.. by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 01:43 · Score: 1

I'm British too, and I'd say I'm quite well informed. The problem is that both sides put out their vision of the consequences of being in the Euro, but most people (including me) do not know which consequences are the ones that will come true.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:51 · Score: 0

Drachma was recreated 1831 by the kingdom of Greece, but it really is one of the oldest coins in the world.
During the Alexander the Great's time drachmas were used even in India.
Re:Simple question.. by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 02:02 · Score: 1

The other problem with those tests is that to properly test some of them needs quite a long time. e.g. the convergence test can only be done by observing two economic cycles in Britain and Europe. This could take 10 years bearing in mind we are definitely not converged at the moment.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Simple question.. by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 02:05 · Score: 1

California is the richest state by far. I think the US (obviously), Germany and Japan are the only countries with bigger economies.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Simple question.. by Annnoying+Coward · 2002-01-02 02:51 · Score: 1

a state they [pound sterling] shared with the Italian lire

This must have something to do with the monetary symbol "£", which of course originally means lire. Wasn't the turkish Lire also very unstable?

--
sigh
Re:Simple question.. by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-02 03:16 · Score: 1

nope, both the UK and France are marginally bigger according to US government stats. Having said that, what is the population of California these days? - I'm guessing around 40 million, which shows up impressively against the 60-odd million that both UK and France have and the 80-odd million Germans. Anyway, now that China has overtaken Italy, we can anticipate Calif, France, UK and Germany falling behind them also in fairly short order - just shows how urgent the need for democracy is in China.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Simple question.. by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-02 03:22 · Score: 1

excuse my ignorance - I thought there was a second reactor installed at Sellafield since the Windscale disaster? I've never been there myself - sounds like maybe I should...

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Simple question.. by tdye · 2002-01-02 03:54 · Score: 2

That said, I think the US government under Clinton was probably one of the best examples of government seen in the West in many many many years, if not ever. They made few changes to laws, and generally kept their nose out of public business (and especially the Internet).

Whoa... where were you? Clinton started in '92 with the Clipper chip, then went on to CDA and several other laws they proposed and argued for in the Supreme Ct... DMCA for one, but there were many others. Clintons proposed a national health system which was rejected, and they practically went to war against freeing crypto for export. It's only because of Gingritch and the coalition he put together to block net sales tax that it didn't happen.

Clinton's administration spent 8 years trying frantically to drive things to the left with only limited success (because of the GOP congress), and waged war against freedom on the internet the entire time.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Simple question.. by davidmb · 2002-01-02 04:00 · Score: 0

Because actually the Pound has been the most UNstable currency?

Have you heard of a country called Italy?
Re:Simple question.. by RFC959 · 2002-01-02 07:19 · Score: 2

...the monetary symbol "£", which of course originally means lire...
No it did not. It comes from the Latin "libra", which probably is also the origin of "lira", but the £ does not /mean/ lira.
Re:Simple question.. by Banjonardo · 2002-01-02 10:11 · Score: 1

Ummm.......read the Euro page, under the Greek National Coins.
One of them is modeled after a fourth century b.c. drachma from Athens. The NEW Drachma has been around since independence.

--
-----
Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton
Re:Simple question.. by xelah · 2002-01-02 10:26 · Score: 1

You know how stock works, right? Each share you buy is a corresponding piece of the company. Currency works roughly the same way -- each dollar you have is a share in the company that is the US economy; each pound sterling you have is a share in the UK economy.
I'm not sure if this post was serious or not....but I'll answer anyway.
This analogy seems completely wrong...with stock what you own is an entitlement to part of the future revenue stream of a company plus whatever is left after liquidation. Money doesn't entitle you to anything of the sort from the economies which use it.
Just as the stock price of a company is affected by many factors, so too the worth of a currency. One of the chief factors is national debt.
The worth of a unit of currency is whatever you can buy with it. It's not directly related to national debt (which is just another name for government debt). Government debt only affects exchange rates because it affects interest rates: more government debt => greater demand for money => higher interest rates => capital flowing in to the economy => higher demand for the currency => currency appreciation.
Exchange rates (well, freely floating ones anyway) at any particular time will depend on a lot of things but it seems that market exchange rates can't get ever further from purchasing power parity exchange rates (to be precise it has been found that market and PPP exchange rates are cointegrated). For an obvious example consider what would happen if prices in the UK stayed constant whilst inflation caused all Eurozone prices to double. How many Euros would you expect to get for a pound afterwards? Answer: twice as many.
The high performer, the UK, would end up in effect underwriting Italy's national debt.
Nah. If you lent some money to Italy's government last week then it's the Italian government's responsibility to pay you back this week just as much as it was last week. Consider, though, what would happen if the Italians suddenly started borrowing more and more. By increasing the demand for loans they would tend push Euro-wide interest rates upwards (pulling investment funds away from other investment markets in the process) rather than just their *own* interest rates as they would have done a couple of years ago. Similarly poor management in just one country which would previously just caused inflation in that one country will now cause Euro-wide inflation. The Euro states have become dependendent on each others' good behaviour for monetary stability.
That's one of the biggest reasons why I'm glad that the UK isn't in the Euro - at least not yet. There's just /too much/ national self interest around - especially when there are elections coming up (which within the EU's 15 members is most of the time).
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 11:58 · Score: 0

We fought Jerry in the beaches, the air, the water and we beat them.

"We'll fight them in the fields, we'll fight them on the landing grounds, we'll fight them everywhere... we'll never surrender!" - Churchill's speech, AFAIK.

the british are strong, and the rest of the continent is weak.

Don't write this, most Krauts are believing that France won WW II.

I'm writing this as a German with my full respect of your biography. If Britain hadn't been so strong, I'd wear a light-brown or black uniform today.

But I think that the Euro is a real good thing. I'm just a bit angry that we in Gemany weren't asked to join the Euro. We have still a special kind of democracy. 'cause we are or we were "Krauts"...
Re:Simple question.. by Annnoying+Coward · 2002-01-02 22:29 · Score: 1

Hmm, my italian friends explained it a bit differently (or I remember wrong...), but actually this fills in the gap of how the nomination and symbol traveled to england.

I was going ask if there has, at some point some where in history, been equivalence with one pound currency and one pound of some matter, but I then did the reseach my self and found that livre was "A money of account formerly used in France and originally worth a pound of silver".

--
sigh
Re:Simple question.. by gowen · 2002-01-03 02:05 · Score: 2

That's a bit like every single head civil servant and the entire cabinet of a country resigning simultaneously. Isn't that scary? Doesn't it terrify you that we (Britain) are handing more and more power to these people?
I thought you said they resigned? How can anyone hand power to people who have resigned...

--
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-06 08:05 · Score: 0

because they are the only ones still driving the other way round and measuring in libres, inches, pounds, gallons.
anyway England is a small part of a small island with little population, they fight with other villagers there for their religion and putting bombs to each other (like Taleban), they need passports (unlike other true Europeans to travel to the civilized Europe), they need to change to EURO in order to shop (their currency is only good inhouse or in monopoly game), they drive wrong, they drink beer all day long (which they measure in pints or something like that), eat only onions and a strange think called pouting (or something like that) and they speak with funny accent.
They even have kings, lords, etc whom they respect trully (is not folklor title, it is reality there)

There only advantage is that they can suck Americans in their native language.

Example question in order to see their true problems:

how many of these English money does one need to rent a 250 m2 house, 30 km max from London ?

(needs too many English native conversions for anyone to bother)
Re:Simple question.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-07 03:05 · Score: 0

Everybody seems to forget now waht happened in 1992, when the pound was kicked out of European Exchange rate mechanism and devalued by close to 30% against the DEM, as was the lira and other currencies. The FRF survived by strong pressure on and support by the Bundesbank... and that actualy was the decisive step towards the Euro.

Now it is easy to speak about loss of monetary independence, stability of the pound and the glamour of the USD... but without the euro the european single market (of goods and capitals) would simply be impossible to achieve.
Re:Simple question.. by Liet · 2002-01-07 04:18 · Score: 1

Okay... i didn't know. - But who cares; its dead now! muahaha.

Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by EnglishTim · 2002-01-01 06:02 · Score: 2

Read the Story.

Ireland *has* changed over to the Euro.

Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Stone+Rhino · 2002-01-01 06:04 · Score: 1, Troll

The story is from *BRUSSELS*. BRUSSELS is not in ireland. ireland is more or less a part of britain, and follows their economic policy.

--

Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-01 06:08 · Score: 2

ireland is more or less a part of britain
Wow, you could get so very very beaten up for saying that. It would be like saying "Texas is really just part of New York, and tends to follow their policies." Not only wrong, but it would piss off both a lot of New Yorkers and even more Texans.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by dbolger · 2002-01-01 06:09 · Score: 1

Iknow, I know, I'm responding to a troll here, but patriotism says I have to direct this idiot here.

Dave.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by EnglishTim · 2002-01-01 06:10 · Score: 2

Ireland is not part of Britain. It is a completely seperate country which *has* now gone over to using the Euro. Perhaps you are confusing it with Northern Ireland, which is probably best described as a self-governing part of Britain.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by cscx · 2002-01-01 06:10 · Score: 1

ireland is more or less a part of britain
Northern Ireland is, but Ireland is not.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Boandlgrama · 2002-01-01 06:11 · Score: 1

Yoo know the difference between *Northern* Ireland and the *Republic* of Ireland?

The RoI issued the Eure, Northern Ireland still uses the Pound.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Stone+Rhino · 2002-01-01 06:12 · Score: 1

thank you for correcting me. that was my mistake. this was not a troll.

--

Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by squiggleslash · 2002-01-01 06:12 · Score: 2, Informative

The Republic of Ireland, home to the Irish Times, gained independence in 1945, and has (until today) used its own independent current (the punt) since. Northern Ireland is still part of the UK.

--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by EnglishTim · 2002-01-01 06:13 · Score: 1

A pleasure to be of service ;)
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by p3d0 · 2002-01-01 06:14 · Score: 1, Insightful

ireland is more or less a part of britain
Yeah, just like the US is more or less part of Britain.

--
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by number+one+duck · 2002-01-01 06:32 · Score: 1

No, no, just like New Zealand is a part of Australia.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Phosphor3k · 2002-01-01 06:38 · Score: 1

Only the US could kick Britain's ass, Ireland could not.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by drsoran · 2002-01-01 07:26 · Score: 1

Well, for argument's sake, Texas and New York (as well as all the other states use a common currency. To think Ireland would use a different currency than the rest of the U.K. would seem silly. But hey, that's just me. I never understood why you guys still have a monarchy anyway. That's so 18th century. :-)
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:29 · Score: 0

The Irish are too drunk to get off their barstools much less wage a revolution against the British. Give me a break. Those sheep fucking lushes couldn't amass an army to defeat a British football team much less the Royal army.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 07:30 · Score: 1

WTF? The island of Ireland is part of the British isles, but most certainly an independent state. ireland has always been, and to a certain extent will always be dominated to a degree by England/britain, but only because of shared history/population and the relative sizes of the two states. Irish citizens are accorded several special priveleges in the UK that even other EU citizens do not get, and some say that there are as many Irish living in Britain as there ae in Eire (not including NI even). Apart from the obvious problems in NI, all the "British" nations get on with each other remarkably harmoniously - as an English man myself - I wish foreigners would understand this and try to respect the various identites that make up the nations of the British isles - I would particularly appreciate it if American idiots wouldn't fund terrorism in my country - we've all seen now what a nightmare that is.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by stripes · 2002-01-01 07:36 · Score: 2

ireland is more or less a part of britain, and follows their economic policy

Really? Practice this one: "Pesky Canada found to have it's own laws, customs"
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:42 · Score: 0

Ireland isn't in the UK. Do you get this? It's a separate country. Hasn't been part of the UK since 1945.

How can you people be so incredibly dense?
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by jamesidm · 2002-01-01 07:53 · Score: 1

They do and did use a different currency - the Irish punt (Irish punt: 0.787564 - 1 GBP) compared to British Pound Sterling from before the Euro... read the bbc story.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by pmc · 2002-01-01 08:02 · Score: 5, Informative

To think Ireland would use a different currency than the rest of the U.K.

Ireland is not part of the United Kingdom. It's straightforward:

Ireland is a nation. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is a nation. This was formed for seperate nations, principalities, and provinces - England, Scotland, Wales, and Ireland. Most of Ireland left, leaving Northern Ireland. Meanwhile Great Britain is an island, which contains most of, but not all, of Scotland, England and Wales. Ireland is also an island, but doesn't only contain Ireland. The British Isles is an archipeligo, which contains Great Britain and all the smaller islands that go to make up the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and Ireland, and the Isle of Man. The Isle of Man is not part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, but is a dependancy. The Isle of Man is in the Irish Sea. The Channel Islands are not part of the British Isles, but are dependancies like the Isle of Man.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by p3d0 · 2002-01-01 08:25 · Score: 1

Would someone mind explaining to me how my comment (see parent) could be considered a "troll"?

--
Patrick Doyle
I mod down every jackass who puts his moderation policy in his sig. Oh, wait a sec....
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:59 · Score: 2, Informative

BTW, the names of the actual major islands in the British Isles are "Britannia" and "Hibernia".

Hibernia presently has 2 nations on it - The "United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" and "Eire" (The Republic of Ireland).

Britannia has 3 nations on it - Scotland, Wales, and England, together known, rather grandly, as "Great Britain".

Note that up until the 10th century, confusingly, the nation on Hibernia was called "Scota Major", often mistranslated as Scotland, and the nation presently called Scotland was "Scota Minor". This situation arose because some of the ancestors of the present-day Irish living on Hibernia, the Scot Gaels, invaded Britannia and settled in Scotland (alternately killing/displacing/marrying, the previous inhabitants, the Picts). So, while the English later invaded Hibernia and inflicted Northern Ireland on the Irish, the Irish had already inflicted Scotland on the English... :-).
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:03 · Score: 0

Except that the Irish ALREADY HAVE waged a war of revolution against the British, and won, kindof - at least, 26 of the 32 counties on the island of Ireland have been independent from britain for quite a while now...
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:06 · Score: 0

It's not a troll. It's been mismoderated, the analogy is reasonably accurate (except that Britain isn't still holding on to 6/32 of the U.S.) -

The US was once part of the British Empire, now it isn't. The Republic of Ireland was once part of the British Empire, now it isn't, after a somewhat similar (but much more painfully drawn out) fight for independence.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Stone+Rhino · 2002-01-01 09:07 · Score: 1

I know I am replying to my own comment, but let me explain. This was not intended to be a troll. I merely was confused about the status of ireland and britain. please don't kill my karma for a simple mistake.

--

Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 09:25 · Score: 2, Informative

Britannia has 3 nations on it - Scotland, Wales, and England, together known, rather grandly, as "Great Britain". Rather grandly? Great Britain is so-named because it derives from "Grand Bretagne" which distinguishes it from "Bretagne" proper in the Norman mind and tongue. It may not be considered so now, but England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland were all taken by the Normans.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 09:51 · Score: 1

a war?? oh come on! luckily they never had to and never did - look at the atrocities that Cromwell committed in Ireland. No one ever wants to see that kind of nightmare again.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 10:01 · Score: 1

Britain is NOT holding on to NI, the majority of the population of NI simply wants it so. The insanity of the situation is that - within the EU - there's no need for any borders anyway. Ask the majority of mainland UK citizens whether they want NI in the UK and the answer would be overwhemingly no. NI costs the UK a LOT of money and lives.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:17 · Score: 0

The term 'British Isles' refers to the landmass of Britain, and all islands under British Rule. Ireland (including NI - it is not an island) is not included in that definition, and as such, it is politically incorrect to refer to Ireland as part of the British Isles. In fact the word is not part of political definitions anymore, and UK politicians would be killed for using it. :)
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:18 · Score: 0

Perhaps you are confusing it with Northern Ireland, which is probably best described as a self-governing part of Britain.

Northern Ireland is not part of Britain, though it is part of the UK (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland).
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by grammar+fascist · 2002-01-01 10:20 · Score: 1

Wow. Everything is SO clear now.

--
I got my Linux laptop at System76.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:21 · Score: 0

I think you actually got all of that right, which is rarer than you might suppose. Greetings from the Isle of Man :)
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:38 · Score: 0

>How can you people be so incredibly dense?

Yes, you are personally holier than us.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:08 · Score: 0

>please don't kill my karma for a simple mistake.

Too late. The many power-hungry but meatspace-inept moderators combined with the birthday effect have probably nuked you to hell by now.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:25 · Score: 0

Unlike Scotland and Wales, The Republic of Ireland is it's own country with it's own government, flag, constitution, passports, stamps, coins, tax, airline, television stations, radio stations etc, and is therefore a completely independent and soveirgn nation.

Ireland is not even a member of the Commonwealth! You won't find the queen's head on Irish stamps and coins, unlike in Canada, Australia and New Zealand, where you still do.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:31 · Score: 0

No no my friend, Europe is the mainland, not the UK.

It's rather like how the Earth revolves around the sun and the sun not around the Earth, you know...
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:36 · Score: 0

The Irish football has been more successfull than England in the Ireland-England soccer matches of recent history.

The last time the two nations played, Ireland was winning, but the game had to be called off because English football supporters started to riot.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 11:42 · Score: 1

So, according to your definition, the British Isles includes the Falklands and Ascension (and OZ and NZ when they were Imperial possesions?)? Bollocks. the British Isles is the name given to the archipelago including Great Britain and Ireland the Orkney, Shetland, Scilly and Channel Islands.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 11:48 · Score: 1

I wrote "mainland UK" though, didn't I? Mainland is ALWAYS a relative term.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Caligari · 2002-01-01 12:39 · Score: 1

Just to be clear:

There is nothing called the "Republic" of Ireland, a frequently (incorrectly) used term which refers to the nation of Ireland. No where in the Irish constitution is there a mention of the "Republic of Ireland". The nation is called simply "Eire" or "Ireland".

--
The moving cursor writes, and having written, blinks on.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:45 · Score: 0

Why don't you just quit whining like a little bitch. You shot your mouth off without knowing what you were talking about, now your precious karma is suffering. Boo-fucking-hoo.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by ksheff · 2002-01-01 12:46 · Score: 2

The Republic of Ireland has been a soverign country since 1921. Maybe your are thinking of its withdrawl from the British Commonwealth in 1948.

Products in Ireland have had prices in euros and punts on them since at least 2000. Ireland is also a country that several US companies have chosen to be the location of their European subsidaries/offices since the population speaks English, is a part of the EU, and has realtively low taxes compared to the UK. I wouldn't mind living there.

--
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:05 · Score: 0

"ireland is more or less a part of britain"

do you live under a rock ?

REPUBLIC OF IRELAND

look up rebublic under a dictionary
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Prior+Restraint · 2002-01-01 13:24 · Score: 1

"Pesky Canada found to have it's own laws, customs"

It was "Perky", not "Pesky"
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:32 · Score: 0

You little fucking pricks wanted Northern Ireland , now you have to deal with your "province".
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by stripes · 2002-01-01 13:50 · Score: 1

Maybe Canada has its own laws, but customs?

It has been a long time since I have visited, like since the 80s, or even 70s, and I was like 10, so I don't recall for sure...but...the clearly had their whole own kind of bacon, and to me, a people that have their own kind of bacon, clearly must have their own culture to support the bacon.
Plus there was that who Bob and Doug McKenzie thing in the 80s, eh? So take off, eh?
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by stripes · 2002-01-01 13:54 · Score: 1

That explains why I couldn't find it with google and link it to...er, nope, still no happy googling. I'm sure it came from somewhere...
It kinda sounds like The Onion, but it could have been some random stand up I saw...
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Stone+Rhino · 2002-01-01 13:55 · Score: 1

I was thinking of northern ireland when I made this comment. You can stop flaming me for my mistake now!

--

Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 14:25 · Score: 0

When? Do YOU pricks want it now? NI is and was a total irrelevence to the UK - there are more people living in the London Borough of Croydon than NI. It would be as well for idiotic nationalists of all persuasions to realise their place in the world is more or less related to how many of them there are. In the long term, this will be the major factor in determining who has the power. And why the fuck is Ireland important enough to kill anyone over? London is full of Irish - must be fucking wonderful if so many want to leave.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 14:38 · Score: 2

Ireland is not part of the British isles...

And what are these 'special priviles' in the UK granted to Irish citizens? I'm just curious.

To say that Ireland is 'dominated' by the UK , well, thems fighting words.
You seem to speak of Ireland like it's no different than the North, or Wales, or Scotland, or whatnot... but that's just not the case. Or if it is, everyone I met in Ireland forgot to tell me (which is quite possible I guess)
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 15:42 · Score: 1

Citizens of Eire have long had the right of abode in the UK and the abilty to stand as an MP in the UK amongst others. No such reciprocal rights were granted by Eire to UK subjects. Ireland IS dominated by the UK, it's not a political thing it's just that the only state Ireland shares a border with is the UK, Ireland was part of the UK for hundreds of years, there has been major irish immigration into the British mainland for a long time, Ireland has had it's currency pegged to Sterling for much of it's history and, the plain fact is that Eire is a state of maybe 3M citizens sharing the same archipelago with a state of 58M subjects, Ireland is pretty much dependent on the UK for defence - to a much greater extent than the UK depends on the USA. The EU is changing the relationship between the UK and Eire, as is Irish economic prosperity, but hard facts are there to be seen.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by couch · 2002-01-01 21:34 · Score: 0

Mostly correct, but the Welsh, english and scottish have flags as well. And ours (Red dragon on a green field against a white sky) is the oldest still used flag in the world today -- not to mention the coolest looking one... boring geometric shapes pah!
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Chuq · 2002-01-01 22:11 · Score: 1

Yeah, just like Canada is part of the USA.

--
- Chuq
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by biglig2 · 2002-01-01 22:35 · Score: 2

Closer to saying Mexico is part of New York. Ireland is an entirely indepenant country with very much their own ideas of how to run their country.

As an example...let me see... oh yes, Ireland has entered the Eurozone and the UK hasn't. can't get much more fundamental that that.

--
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by biglig2 · 2002-01-01 22:44 · Score: 2

Er... we do have nukes, you know? And we are a pioneer of biological warfare? And I seem to recall us holding Hitler back single-handedly for quite a while...

Sure, you could slap us down eventually, probably by killing all of us, but you'd be missing a few cities and 40% of your population before you were done.

--
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 00:12 · Score: 1

Scotland wasn't taken by the Normans, at least not permanently. The current political union came in to being when Elizabeth I died and the English crown went to her nearest surviving relative who was James VI of Scotland.

Wales was also an independent country for some time after the Normans took England, and Ireland was too.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 00:25 · Score: 1

Things have moved on a bit since Cromwell's time.

There was plenty of violence involved in Ireland's struggle for independence and if you think of the problems in Northern Ireland, there is still plenty of violence going on. You don't think the IRA limited their activities to peaceful demonstrations in the streets do you?

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 00:32 · Score: 1

Don't be stupid. Euro-Asia is an island archipelago off the South coast of England. As evidence, I offer the newspaper headline that once appeared (in the Times I think) "Fog in Channel, continent cut off".

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 00:40 · Score: 0

Yeah, that is just so frigging straitfoward. And I live in the UK.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 00:41 · Score: 1

No, the British Isles is a geographical, not a political entity. It refers to a group of islands off the Northern coast of France. There are two independent political entities on these islands:

- The United Kingdom of Great Britain, Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands
- Eire

The first of these, often shortened to United Kingdom or UK has several dependancies around the World which are the remnants of its once enormous empire. None of these dependancies are part of the British Isles except the Isle of Man. NB the Channel Islands are also not part of the British Isles. Don't ask me why they are in th UK and the Isle of Man isn't, it's probably some historical quirk.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by glacial23 · 2002-01-02 01:56 · Score: 1

Actually, the Norman "invasion" of Scotland
was more through marriage than anything else.
Robert the Bruce was 1/2 Norman - The Bruces came
from the Norman de Brus family.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by elbisivni · 2002-01-02 02:24 · Score: 1

'realtively low taxes compared to the UK'

Urr, no. Not by any stretch of the imagination does Ireland have lower taxes than the UK. Now, what they do have is lots and lots of incentives for business to set up operations there - along the lines of close-to-zero taxes for a couple of years, that sort of thing.

You wouldn't believe how much income tax I used to pay when I lived in Ireland. Dreadful. The only good thing about living in Dublin from a financial point of view was that the Guinness was a lot cheaper than here in the UK.

I know it's fashionable to believe that the UK has higher taxes than the rest of Europe, but a little research proves the opposite.
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 04:16 · Score: 0

Bullshit.
Ireland has a neutral status just like switzerland.... and by definition is not dependant
on the UK or anyone else for defence. Get your
facts straight instead of coming out with the first crap that springs into your head
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by ksheff · 2002-01-02 06:04 · Score: 2

When I checked into it, the income tax hit that I would take wasn't much more than what I'm hit with here in the US (including FICA). I'm not sure if Dublin included their own special set of taxes or not (wasn't interested in that area anyway). The Brits that I talked to in Ireland said they paid less in taxes. According to this Ireland tax page and this UK income tax page, it could be a toss up depending on how much you make. I do know that the petrol taxes are much lower, while the VAT is a bit higher.

--
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by ksheff · 2002-01-02 06:15 · Score: 2

Besides, when does a corporation really care how much its employees have to pay? How much it has to pay is all they ever really take into account. The top guys making the decision already have found ways to weasel out of paying as much as they can, so they don't care.

--
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:52 · Score: 0

Quick translation of a Russian joke:

The UN poses the following question to the assembled representatives of different countries: "Please state your opinion about the lack of sufficient food in other countries."

Many of the representatives ran into insurmountable problems:

* No one in Africa knew the meaning of "sufficient food".
* No one in Western Europe knew the meaning of "lack".
* No one in Eastern Europe knew the meaning of "opinion".
* No one in the US knew the meaning of "other countries".

Ben Okopnik
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 14:09 · Score: 0

Don't be so fucking naiive. What did Ireland do in WWII? Face it, a state too small to defend itself properly can trot out some bogus neutrality crap, but if the Nazis had taken Britain - do you really think they would have left Ireland alone? Nice to have the luxury of neutrality when you exist in the lee of nuclear power though, isn't it?
Re:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-03 05:10 · Score: 0

Further proof that 99% of americans are so up their own arses it defies belief...Ireland did kick britans ass by gaining independance from them while being their neighbours...and you thought those pesky al queda were annoying...

Is it that Americans think they're the only nation on the planet or something...Ireland is a completly seperate nation from the UK...I thought America would know that, they send over enough fucking annoying tourists to us....

So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by jellomizer · 2002-01-01 06:04 · Score: 1

On the modern Sun Keyboards there is a Euro Symbol next to the $ but I never got it to work.

--
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.

Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by steeph · 2002-01-01 06:09 · Score: 1

ALT-(numeric) 0128 on my WinKeyboard
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by laurens · 2002-01-01 06:10 · Score: 4, Informative

I think it's alt+numeric 0128: Yup :-)
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:17 · Score: 0

Replying to self: on my Windows laptop, ofcourse... YMMV.
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by am+2k · 2002-01-01 06:25 · Score: 1

The Euro-symbol ( - hope you can read it) is only part of the character set ISO 8859-15, which is an extension to the well known ISO 8859-1.
US Mac users can access it by using opt-shift-2.
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by core10k · 2002-01-01 06:28 · Score: 0

That looks like a T with an o right beside it...

--
Go Kathryn Thurber!
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by cscx · 2002-01-01 06:32 · Score: 1

-- If you try setting your default country to a 'Euro' country, WinXP seems to automagically know that the is your currency! I assume that the respective keyboards will have it already on their keys...
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by J'raxis · 2002-01-01 06:36 · Score: 1, Informative

It doesnt have an ASCII value ignore the nitwits below you, as ASCII is only 7 bits (127 characters maximum), and theyre giving you the Windows-specific 8-bit value 128. For example, on Macintosh, it has a different location: 219 (Option-shift-2).

Its Unicode value is 0x20AC, which is a standard. It can be written as € in HTML/XML, or € for the few browsers that support the symbolic name (mine doesnt seem to).

--
Liberty in your lifetime
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:45 · Score: 0

it replaced 'Currency' at 128 of iso8559-1, new 'western' standard is iso8559-15 with 'EuroSign' at place 128. as written, no ASCII at all.
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by reynaert · 2002-01-01 07:47 · Score: 2

I've heard that's the international symbol for currency. It means you're using the ISO-8859-1 charset instead of ISO-8859-15.
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by mawis · 2002-01-01 08:30 · Score: 1

Codepoint 128 is only true for the Windows Codepage.
The currency symbol in Latin-1 (ISO-8859-1) is at codepoint 164.
The Euro-Symbol at Latin-9 (ISO-8859-15) is at codepoint 164.
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by torako · 2002-01-01 08:46 · Score: 1

On fairly new keyboards here in Europe is in the lower right corner of the E key (AltGr+E) and support for the Euro symbol has been there for quite a while now.
Windows 98 was the first OS to support the symbol in all fonts that shipped with it, Win95 did it with a patch and Linux has had it for a while too.
Anyway, I'm excited and will try to find all those D-Mark coins I've lost behind cupboards, my desk etc.. to get them all exchanged into new, good-looking Euros :)
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by dryeo · 2002-01-01 11:51 · Score: 1

Hmm, here under OS/2 it is alt-213, alt-128 is a C with a comma under it.
alt-128 Ç
alt-213
Dave

--
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by NutscrapeSucks · 2002-01-01 15:41 · Score: 1

Interesting, the 8851-1 chart I have has nothing for 128. The generic currency sign, is at 164 (¤). I wonder if core10k is using an old version of Win95 or something.

(You might need to enlarge your font to see it properly -- a circle with spokes sticking out.)

--
Whenever I hear the word 'Innovation', I reach for my pistol.
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 16:54 · Score: 0

cscx -
We have been observing your posts for a few days now. We like what we see. Your essays are hilarious and respected among us. Join us, but don't post logged in. Just sign your UID at the bottom, like this:
--sdem
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by aoeuid · 2002-01-02 05:09 · Score: 1

I don't know what the hell you guys are talking about, because all I see are question marks. Netscape 4.78/Mandrake 8.1.
Re:So what ASCII value will the Euro be? by isorox · 2002-01-02 13:54 · Score: 2

That looks like a T with an o right beside it...

Commonly known as the word "to" :)

Euro coins by dbolger · 2002-01-01 06:05 · Score: 1

While January 1st sees the Euro becoming legal tender in the Eurozone states, we (at least here in Ireland) have had coins available since the middle of December as part of our governments "Get Ready for the Euro" scheme. IMHO the coins are too small and "fiddly" compared to the old Irish coins I'm used to. Still, I guess this is how my parents/grandparents felt when we switched to decimal. All it will take is some getting used to :)

Dave.

Re:Euro coins by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:25 · Score: 0

the euro coins are quite ok from a german point of view, imho. but the cents are unusual, we had thrown away our 0.20-coins ages ago... and the 0.50 is bigger and in the same style than the 0.10, strange...

i'm asking me, how long will it take not calculating everything back to the old currency?

btw, 1:~2 in germany or the netherlands is easy, but in austria 1:14... or italy 1:x*10^y...
Re:Euro coins by glitch! · 2002-01-01 06:50 · Score: 1

IMHO the coins are too small and "fiddly" compared to the old Irish coins I'm used to.

Last time I visited Eire, the half-penny seemed very thin to me :-) People told me that it was really only used for buying tobacco, though, and had something to do with the funny taxes. Also, they said that nobody really wanted to carry them around, and often just left them on the counter.

Now the 10P coin was a different matter! That fellow was as big as a US half-dollar coin, and I always ended up having a kilogram (couple pounds :-) of them in my pockets if I wasn't careful.

I wonder what the money-changers are going to do now?

--
A dingo ate my sig...
Re:Euro coins by DGolden · 2002-01-01 08:25 · Score: 2

1/2p coins haven't been legal tender in Ireland for quite a while now (I think they were phased out in the 80s - I'm 23 and barely remember them), and the old 10p was replaced by a smaller coin about the size of the old 5p, while the old 5p was replaced by a really tiny coin. We also had 20p coins (a bit smaller than the old 10p and a bit bigger than the newer one) and (big, thin) £1 coins introduced.

The new 1-cent coin is even smaller in diameter than the old irish 1/2p (it's a little thicker, though).

I always liked our Irish coins, because they had nice pictures of animals on them, and you could "pluck" the "strings" on the harp on the other side, and each "string" really did make a sound with a different pitch (though the sounds were sort of claack-clack-cliick-click), rather than the ugly thingies and wrinkly people's heads on british and most other countries' coins.

The new Irish-issue euros still have the harp on the "national" side, but the euro-side motifs are really boring looking, with a sort of "modern" look that you just know will date astonishingly quickly, like shiny plastic furniture in the 70s.

--
Choice of masters is not freedom.
Re:Euro coins by Godwin+O'Hitler · 2002-01-02 00:04 · Score: 1

Euro/Eurocent coins are the ugliest money I've ever seen and the hardest to distinguish. Blech! Which idiots decided to make 6 coins all the same colour and, in the case of 2 vs.10 and 5 vs. 20, nearly the same size. And with a different "heads" in each member state. Morons.

--
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
Re:Euro coins by vkt-tje · 2002-01-02 01:04 · Score: 1

Ah come on!
The .01, .02 and .05 are copper colored and increase in size by value

the .1, .2 and .5 are silver colored (Ti I guess) and also increase in size by value

The 1 and 2 coins are double colored (ring) and ... (yes indeed)

AND All coins have different edges (for the blind mainly, but also very usefull for me)
A nice picture of all the coins can be found starting at http://euro.fgov.be/frames/ena_index.htm (in english), click on the left coin for the national side (head) or the right coin for the common side.
PS: most coins have NO heads at all! Only Belgium, The Netherlands and Luxemburg have put a head on all their coins. You can see the "head" side of every one of the 96 (12*8) coins at the above site.

Dollar users: check out the notes. How can any geek not be in love with such a sophisticated peace of money. (the images on the site do NOT give a good image of the notes. do it IRL)

Watermark, complementary doublesided printing, hologram, relief printing (for the blind), color changing metallic ink, UV-reacting fibers, ... compare all those features with a mere dollar bill...

--

120 chars is not enough!
Re:Euro coins by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 02:16 · Score: 0

>>the .1, .2 and .5 are silver colored (Ti I guess) and also increase in size by value

the .1, .2 and .5 are GOLD,not silver.
Re:Euro coins by Godwin+O'Hitler · 2002-01-02 03:38 · Score: 1

It would be great if they were silver.
But when I say there are six coins the same colour I am speaking about the coins I've had in my hands; maybe they'll dull differently with time.
I presume the Belgian and French coins are made to the same spec., right?
The coins are hard to distinguish in the denominations I mentioned. No one I've tested them on can pick 'em out at a glance. And that's especially annoying for traders. The 2c/10c and 5c/20c are seriously similar, much more so than in any other coin set I've seen.
BTW "heads" and "tails" is like "pile" et "face", OK? it doesn't necessarily mean there's a head or a tail.
I don't know where your Belgian coins are minted but the French ones are very badly finished with imperfections all over the faces.
Of course, ugliness is in the eye of the beholder, but most beholders I've spoken to agree.

--
No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
Re:Euro coins by vkt-tje · 2002-01-02 19:59 · Score: 1

yup, I realised that to when I got my change this noon :-)
Anyway, the color is different

--

120 chars is not enough!

Will slashdot change? by www.sorehands.com · 2002-01-01 06:08 · Score: 1

Will Slashdot change the category from the almighty buck to the almighty Euro?

--
Fight Spammers!

Re:Will slashdot change? by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-01 06:10 · Score: 5, Funny

After all, all they have to do is turn the Quake II icon sideways.
Re:Will slashdot change? by rune-bare-rune · 2002-01-01 09:55 · Score: 1

User Friendly had a strip like this a while ago...

http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=19990207
Re:Will slashdot change? by thogard · 2002-01-02 02:13 · Score: 1

So can Id sue the EU?

Ireland *is* part of the Euro-Zone ! by defender · 2002-01-01 06:09 · Score: 2, Informative

Ahem, Ireland is part of the Euro Zone...
The UK was EuroSceptic and opted out. But the attitude seems to be changing...
The countries partaking in the Euro:

Germany
Ireland
Norway
Greece
France
Luxemburg
Austria
Finland
Belgium
Italy
Portugal
Spain

The official (non-responding) Euro website: http://www.euro.ecb.int/ ...

--

--
Ehm... I'm not very creative

Re:Ireland *is* part of the Euro-Zone ! by ostiguy · 2002-01-01 06:34 · Score: 2

Uh no. Norway is not in the EU. The Dutch who live in the Netherlands, and apparently include you, with a .nl url in his profile, are in the EU, *is* converting to the Euro.

sheesh!

ostiguy
Re:Ireland *is* part of the Euro-Zone ! by Rob+Kaper · 2002-01-01 06:38 · Score: 2

Norway is not (yet) part of the Euro-zone. The Netherlands are. Byebye guilder.
Re:Ireland *is* part of the Euro-Zone ! by tedrlord · 2002-01-01 06:46 · Score: 1

Luxemburg is its own country? I always thought it was part of Belgium. Shows how much I know about European geography. How embarraskin'.

brendan

--
[insert witty quote here]
Re:Ireland *is* part of the Euro-Zone ! by sconest · 2002-01-01 07:17 · Score: 1

There are 2 Luxemburgs : one is a country, the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg (on the south-west of Belgium).
The other is a province of Belgium (in the south-west of Belgium).

--
Guvf vf abg n EBG zrffntr
Re:Ireland *is* part of the Euro-Zone ! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 11:02 · Score: 0

the germans are at #1 of the list, of course - they were not asked to join...

Interesting to note... by Jon+Abbott · 2002-01-01 06:10 · Score: 2, Funny

...is that there are already reports of homeless people saying, "Willing to spare a Euro?"

--
Slashdot's first reaction to VMware

Re:Interesting to note... by pjgunst · 2002-01-01 07:03 · Score: 1

And how many people already have change (in Euro)? Until the end of february, the local currency can still be used.
FWIW, some more or less interesting opinions:
1) The Independent (a british newspaper) describes the transition as a loss of identity, a loss of our ability to determine our own political and economic policy .
2) The Sun claims it's the dawn of a huge mistake. The Euro is born and thank God, the UK is not part of it. Uhum.
3) The transition not only has a profound impact on Europeans; e.g. a lot of women in Kinshasa (Congo) make a living out of the exchange rates dollars-Congos currency-belgian francs. They haven't got any information whatsoever about the Euro, except what they hear from tourists.
4) Scandinavia (certainly Sweden) now doesn't debate about if they'll introduce the Euro, their governments are no debating when they'll make the transition.
5) Despite the quite negative attitude of some newspapers in the UK, they can't avoid it. The tourism industry has to accept Euros. It will be quite interesting to see WHEN the somewhat negative attitude will change. They can't ignore the fact the Euro will make the European market more competitive and coherent. Expect some major changes in the balance of power, and my personal feeling is that Britains isolation will weaken their position. I wonder if or when Tony Blair (pro-Euro, IIRC) can make the Euro debatable.
Re:Interesting to note... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:42 · Score: 0

On a serious note. The Dutch gouvernment gave al its citizens (6 years and older) a free set of Euro coins. They have gone to great lenghts to make homeless people aware of the Euro and the homeless will be able to get their own free Euro introduction kit (worth EU 3,88) provided they still have their identity papers.

The change to the Euro will be a golden time for beggars in the street because a lot of people will want to dump their old change (it's a hassle to have both Euro an old change in your wallet) even though its still a legal currency.
Re:Interesting to note... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:43 · Score: 0

Whereas the Irish government charged its citizens IR£5.00 for a 6.35 bag of Euro coins... d'oh!
Re:Interesting to note... by Ewan · 2002-01-01 09:01 · Score: 1

Tony Blair is definitely pro-Euro.

Remember that the UK is still the worlds 4th largest economy (USA Japan and Germany are bigger), this won't change overnight (if you want, replace Germany with "Germany and France and Italy" as one economy).

The attitude here is changing, but quite slowly - most people in Britain are not anti-Europe in a general sense, but quite a lot are anti-Federal Europe, where we give up our parliment for one held in Belgium.

I can't see Britain joining before 2005 or 2006, but since it's meant to last forever anyway, what's the rush?
Re:Interesting to note... by pjgunst · 2002-01-01 10:17 · Score: 1

Maybe you're right, only the future will tell us. Maybe it's just a prudent move, and the change to a large internal market (i.e. comparable to the USA) has unpredictable consequences.
The Euro would definately benefit from Britains participation in terms of monetary stability and credibility as a worldwide accepted monetary unit.
"Germany and France and Italy" as one economy They're all interdependent. E.g. Belgiums primary economical system is entirely based upon the transit and trade of goods from and to the economical superpowers it's surrounded by (i.e. UK, France and Germany). Although they all do have an internal market, it's almost insignificant in a broader perspective. The transition to the Euro is, form my point of view, nothing more than a logical next step to a true unification of the internal markets.
quite a lot are anti-Federal Europe, where we give up our parliment for one held in Belgium. I agree, we won't see this happen in the near future. However, if I recall Adam Smiths writings correctly (some of his theories are still valid), and if I may take the liberty of oversimplifying them, a governments policy is little more than a means of providing the best possible environment for economical activities. If this environment is far bigger than its political borders, does it still have the necessary credibility? In my opinion, the introduction of the Euro may have long-term consequences which are not so obvious today.
Re:Interesting to note... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:54 · Score: 0

Dude, get your facts right. UK is not even very close to the 4th largest economy. The latest ranks are USA, Japan, China, India, Germany and then may be UK(though I don't remember it top of my head).
Re:Interesting to note... by Ewan · 2002-01-01 11:12 · Score: 1

It very much depends on how you count it, but China and India are generally further down the list because their currencies are worth very little - GDP is normally counted in US dollars, not the local currency.

Even under your list, that would put Britain at 6th, hardly "not even very close" from 4th is it?
Re:Interesting to note... by Teun · 2002-01-01 13:29 · Score: 1

Free, yeah right.
And where do you think the governement got that money from??

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."

Not everyone is happy in Ireland by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:12 · Score: 0

about the Euro. See this opinion column.

News for nerds, stuff that matter? by jsse · 2002-01-01 06:12 · Score: 1

Absolutely a news for nerds! I mean, an integration of Punts, Francs and Deutschmarks into one Euro! That means it can solve the portability problem for 300 million people!! Now we won't be vendor-locked to use obnoxious currency...

Oh wait...

Re:News for nerds, stuff that matter? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:25 · Score: 0

I guess what happened Sept 11 doesn't really matter to nerds either, so it should not have been featured here...
If you live in the eurozone it does matter, nerd or not.

Picture of bills with US bill by Therlin · 2002-01-01 06:12 · Score: 5, Interesting

I was able to get a hold of a couple Euros and I took a picture with the only bill I had at home at the moment (a $2 bill)

Picture of a 5 Euro bill, 10 Euro bill, 1 Euro coin

They are pretty cool looking.

Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:17 · Score: 1, Funny

You moron! Two dollar bills don't exist. It must be fake.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:19 · Score: 0

You are a moron yourself. They do in fact exist. They are just not so common.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:21 · Score: 0

There is a 2 dollar bill, stupid ape.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by AnalogBoy · 2002-01-01 06:21 · Score: 2

I want my money to look like a MS Software License too!!! :)

Actually those look really cool.. I wonder why the US keeps this drab, slashdot theme with the currency.. I know! lets convert to the Euro too! :)

I wish I understood the principles of economics.. I didn't have any classes in school about it (That i was awake for, long story).. I'm sure there is one or fifty /.ites (/.ians?) who would be willing to share their totally objective view.. i just have to say something inflammatory and utterly unfounded.. lets try this:

The US could transition over to the Euro overnight! It would have NO impact on our economy, and would make the world a better place, fostering peace between nations.. and bill gates would have another economy to help!

okay. that should do it.
:)
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:21 · Score: 0

I was really wondering about the durability of the material on th Euro notes... Here in the US we put our notes through some extreme testing (washing in the machine, crushing, extreme temperatures, etc etc.) That hologram deal on the right of the euro note seems like it would make it very fragile. Any comments?
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by bnatale · 2002-01-01 06:24 · Score: 1

The Euro bills consist of cotton and can be washed at 60C in your washing machine without damage.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Therlin · 2002-01-01 06:25 · Score: 1

It's hard to explain the feel of these bills. I live in the US so I handle US bills daily. These Euros feel a little different but they feel sturdy.

The hologram is only on one side of the bill, it's not visible on the other side.

My guess is that these bills were through all kind of checks and experiments before being given the final approval. Probably the same type of stuff that we did here when we released the new dollar bills.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by tempmpi · 2002-01-01 06:29 · Score: 1

I agree with you on your opionion that the euro coins and bills look nice, but I do not like the fact that there aren't any real builds/persons/whatever are on the bills. Why are there just drawings of imaginary buildings on the euro bills ? Shouldn't real bills have drawings of real things ?
The coins are really cool. There are different version of the coins, one version for every state that uses the euro.
BTW:heise.de has an interressting article a about faults that happend in ecommerce shops because of the change.(in german/ use the fish)

--
Jan
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by phillymjs · 2002-01-01 06:29 · Score: 2

They do in fact exist. They are just not so common.

Which, if you have a sense of humor like mine, makes it great, great fun to use them to pay for things when the cashier is too young to know they exist, or older and obviously uneducated.

~Philly
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:29 · Score: 0

Yeah, except the US is not in Europe. They should have named it the UN Dollar if they really wanted the US to participate. And, it should look exactly like the US Dollar. EXACTLY. This would be one step closer to out plan of taking over the world. (read Manifest Destiny, but only for the world) Nexxt step is to take over the Moon People.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:32 · Score: 0

I think the rarity of the 2$ bill makes them more valuable than the currancy value. This seems like an unintelligent thing to do in itself... But, whatever yanks your chain.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by bnatale · 2002-01-01 06:37 · Score: 1

There aren't real persons/buildings on the bills because the bills are all the same all over Europe. If there would be real persons/buildings on the bills, this would only produce enviousness between the countries. It's a different thing with the coins. Each country has its own coins with it's own symbols/building on them. You can, however, still pay in every country with every coin.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Ami+Ganguli · 2002-01-01 06:41 · Score: 5, Insightful

Well, there are certain advantages to having your own currency. The big thing is that interest rates, and the exchange rates are adjusted to your economy, not somebody elses.

Witness what's happening in Argentina right now. They pegged their currency to the U.S. dollar - in all practical terms that means they adopted the U.S. dollar. But the U.S. dollar kept gaining value as the American economy grew, so that Argentinian exports became too expensive and the economy suffered. A free-floating Peso would have devalued to keep things in balance.

This probably won't happen in Europe because European countries have been integrating their economies over the last half decade. With common regulations, and free-flowing goods, the economies should grow (or shrink) together. As long as that's true things should work out.

--
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:47 · Score: 0

Eeehm...

Just think about it. Do you realy think we would like our new money to be fragile and easly damaged maybe selfcombusting? Of course these bills are tested for wear an tear.

To prevent forging of the Euro bills there are far more security features on the Euro (including the holograms) than there are on the dollar notes. Holograms on money work we have used it for years on outr national currency.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:48 · Score: 0

What get me is the Masonic imagery all over it :-)
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by snake_dad · 2002-01-01 06:53 · Score: 4, Interesting

Hmm... overnight? That hurt, you flaming [fill in the blank]! :-)

I really, really hope for you that your country never switches currencies. These past 2 years, and especially the last couple of months have been hell, putting a lot of effort in adapting some real old software packages to a different currency, converting millions of records to the new values, dealing with rounding errors, and trying to find out where critical errors may come up.

The economy will not be affected very much imho, but for us IT people it has not been fun.

btw, you were right. That did it indeed :-)

--
karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:53 · Score: 0

Hey, haven't heard about qwk in a while. Good old days of being able to read *all* daily fidonet posts :)
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Henry+V+.009 · 2002-01-01 06:54 · Score: 1

This probably won't happen in Europe because European countries have been integrating their economies over the last half decade. With common regulations, and free-flowing goods, the economies should grow (or shrink) together. As long as that's true things should work out.

In a perfect world you would be right. But not in reality. There is no way that, for example, Ireland is ever going to be synched up to the rest of Europe. The EU economies simply are not synched enough. The fact is that the EU doesn't have 'common regulations', and won't unless it get a far higher degree of political unity than appears probable. And any degree out-of-synchness from EU member states will be exacerbated by a common monetary policy. And then the Americans will have to come in and clean up like they always do.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Jacco+de+Leeuw · 2002-01-01 07:00 · Score: 1

You might have a hologram on your creditcard. If it's good for you, it's good enough for us also :-)

--
-------
Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:05 · Score: 0

Uneducated because he/she is not aware of existence of $2 bill ?
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Ami+Ganguli · 2002-01-01 07:06 · Score: 5, Insightful

Dunno. Time will tell I guess. But I don't see why the differences between European states should be greater than the differences between (for example) American states. Labour, goods, and capital move freely, so when one part of the Eurozone becomes undervalued investors should come in and snap up the bargains.

--
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Henry+V+.009 · 2002-01-01 07:13 · Score: 1

The differences between American states are pretty great, and economic unity is hardly assured. But they do have a (more or less) soverign federal government which makes laws about interstate commerce. The EU does not yet have a counterpart.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Vegeta99 · 2002-01-01 07:16 · Score: 1

You can buy them by the sheetful from the Federal Bank. Cut em' up and put em on a tablet and tear them off. Steve Wozniak did it!
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by BlowCat · 2002-01-01 07:24 · Score: 1

Look at this:
http://www.bep.treas.gov/document.cfm/5/43/150
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by drsoran · 2002-01-01 07:36 · Score: 0, Redundant

You know, all we need is a good World War to stir things up over there and this common currency idea will drag all of Europe down with it. Should be funny to watch. Remember guys, just 60 years ago Austria and Germany were marching into France, Poland, Belgium, Italy, and just about any other place they damn well pleased. Just because there's been a level of semi-peace for the last 50 years or so doesn't mean it'll last long. History has shown that the diverse cultural groups of Europe tend to get pissed at each other and wage war every century. I'd say we have less than 50 years until Europe has another major war between states. Good luck until then.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Reality+Master+101 · 2002-01-01 07:47 · Score: 2

I wonder why the US keeps this drab, slashdot theme with the currency..

I hear this lament sometimes, and personally I like the US's drab money. All other countries make their money look like colorful "disney dollars". The US's money looks like serious money, dignified, beefy and substantial. There's no mistaking that the bill is a serious document.

Which is actually the problem I have with the newer currency. The artwork is a bit lighter weight, and just doesn't seem to have the "oomph" that the old currency had.

--
Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:51 · Score: 0

UN money. That would very likely be the end of the western world.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Sloppy · 2002-01-01 07:59 · Score: 2

The US could transition over to the Euro overnight!

I see no reason for switching from one form of corruption and theft, to another. At least, right now, the theft is perpretrated by my own government, and I at least get a little bit back in services. If EU does it instead, I lose even more.

If US switches currencies, it should be to gold, silver, or something else that can't be so easily artificially messed with. The economy shouldn't be the government's business.

--
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by avdp · 2002-01-01 08:00 · Score: 2

To further clarify your statement, the coins have two sides. One side is common to all countries, the other is country specific and show something country specific. For example, the Belgian Euro coins show a profile of the King - as every Belgian has always done for as far back as I can remember. Think of them as the new quarters in the US.

they of course all have the same weigh, shape, etc so that you can use any of them in vending machines, etc.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:00 · Score: 0

Its a good thing people like you will never be taken seriously.

Its not funny
its not intelligent
its not insightful in any way

Its just the same old baseless arguments
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:01 · Score: 0

I wonder how much that hologram increases the cost of making them.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:23 · Score: 0

There you go.
Europeans ( I used to be one ) are blinded with their misplaced belief that "everything will be fine" and dark conflicts of the past are over.
These might be over but there will be new ones, probably resulting in just as deadly confrontations as before.
There is no escape from the basic human instincts...
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:34 · Score: 0

I'd rephrase that. For us IT people it has been... profitable. Just like all the "Y2K" consultancy jobs, the Euro has led to lots of contract positions over the past copuple of years. (Of course, smart companies got their ancient COBOL and PL/1 business logic modernised for Y2K and Euro stuff at the same time)
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by JaredOfEuropa · 2002-01-01 08:36 · Score: 1

There is a similar hologram on the new 10 guilder note. This is a low demonination note that changes hands a lot. I've never seen one where the hologram was worn off or damaged.

--
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Derwen · 2002-01-01 08:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

They are pretty cool looking.

Just a slight problem with reality, though?
On US (and much other) currency the buildings are national monuments symbolic of a nation's power and/or aspirations...
However the bridges and arches to nowhere on the Toytown Euro cash are entirely imagined
By the time the USA had fully standardised on the dollar (1870s - iirc - when it finally had the reserves to back it up) they certainly had enough symbols of national identity.
The Euro is part of the project to impose 'nationhood' on the united states of Europe, despite their being no such nation - and thus no symbolic bridges and buildings upon which everyone can agree :-(

--
http://fsfeurope.org/
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by cowbutt · 2002-01-01 08:39 · Score: 4, Funny

The US's money looks like serious money, dignified, beefy and substantial.
OTOH, I prefer knowing that my european "disney dollars" and British pounds have substantial anti-counterfeiting measures which mean that although they may look insubstantial, they're actually more likely to be real money than a random US dollar bill... :-P
--
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Robert+Hutchinson · 2002-01-01 09:01 · Score: 1

I was able to get a hold of a couple Euros and I took a picture with the only bill I had at home at the moment (a $2 bill)

Ol' Tom looks like he resents the comparison. (He just wishes he could show off his red hair.)

Robert Hutchinson

--
Robert Hutchinson
Smash it. Smash it good.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:38 · Score: 0

So do US bills.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by thogard · 2002-01-01 09:43 · Score: 2

Most of the unneeded work was because that some power hungry idiots decided they couldn't use a symbol that was already in the ASCII chart and picked a new one.

Remember the process of spending an E$ is called euronating.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by spudnic · 2002-01-01 09:48 · Score: 2

Then why don't they all just agree to put American images on their money?

Seriously, why didn't they do the 2 side thing for the bills like they did for the coins? It seems that it would help make the transition easier for traditionalists, and also create a market for collectors.

.

--
load "linux",8,1
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by thogard · 2002-01-01 09:48 · Score: 1

I know a guy who used to do payday loans/loan sharking at one place I worked. He would not charge interest if you paid him back in two dollar notes which involved going to the bank and asking for them and then showing up two days latter when they arrived and hope they hadn't given them all away.

The US$2 note was introduced in 1976.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by kinnunen · 2002-01-01 09:52 · Score: 1

I think the primary motivation behind the colors of the euro notes is helping vision impaired people recognise them. Imagine an elderly person paing in a poorly lit shop. Is he/she giving the salesperson a 10 or a 100 dollar bill? 10 vs. 100 euros: €10 is red, €100 is green - easy pick. Also notice how the left side of the bill is white, printed on that with big numbers is the value. Good contrast easy to see even if have bad eyesight. The bills also difffer in physical size (quite significantly), so even blind people can tell them apart.
I happen to think this kind of consideration is great and should be applauded, even if some people might think it makes the money look a bit cheesy.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by uradu · 2002-01-01 09:55 · Score: 2

> Seriously, why didn't they do the 2 side thing for the bills like they did for the coins?

Well, perhaps they were afraid that the French would put nudie pictures and such on their bills, raising the ire (amongst other things) of more staid nations.

-
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by uradu · 2002-01-01 10:00 · Score: 2

> I think the primary motivation behind the colors of the euro notes is helping vision
> impaired people recognise them.

Following the successful introduction of the RFID, we now bring you--the talking Euro bill. Gently rub the bill and it will speak its value.

-
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by dgroskind · 2002-01-01 10:02 · Score: 3, Interesting

They pegged their currency to the U.S. dollar - in all practical terms that means they adopted the U.S. dollar. But the U.S. dollar kept gaining value as the American economy grew, so that Argentinian exports became too expensive and the economy suffered.
Ecuador adopted the U.S. dollar as its national currency in March, 2000, and now, according to the Economist, "Ecuador is now Latin America's fastest-growing economy, its GDP set to expand by over 5% this year. Much of the social unrest of recent years has died down."
When a country can't control its own monetary policy, it is more likely a symptom of a serious problem, not a cause.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by kinnunen · 2002-01-01 10:06 · Score: 1

Fix the exhange rate to be $1 = €1 and you could switch overnight. All would need to teach the europeans to recognise the dollar and americans to recognise the euro, but actual change could be done in a day. Euro would become good money in America and the dollar would become good in Europe. Then start phasing out the other currency, you can have a very long grace periond (even several years!) because there is not danger of confusion because of exchange rates.
Euro started at about $1.10 and is now less than $0.90, I think $1 = €1 could well happen in the future. Of course the political will is missing so it wont actually happen..
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:28 · Score: 0

I guess it's a shame that America is already at war. Though Europe is completely at peace. Good luck until your war has ended.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:32 · Score: 0

Why did the Dutch banks bother introducing a "new" 10G note?
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by snake_dad · 2002-01-01 10:35 · Score: 1

Bah. You must be a manager type :-)

--
karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:37 · Score: 0

Yeah, as an Englishman (Alright we're not in the Euro, but read on!) I would have no problem with the notes containing images of buildings & monuments from around the EU. The Eiffel Tower, Brandenburg Gate, Houses of Parliment, the Riechs Museum etc. would all look great on the various notes.

Then I guess you'd get nationalist dick-waving over whose country "has" the higher value notes...
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by mgblst · 2002-01-01 10:46 · Score: 0, Flamebait

Wow, an arrogant american, who would have thought. One of the reasons UK has not adopted the Euro is there paramount arrogance? YOUR money looks mickey mouse, or like monopoly money, since it is all one colour! Boring....
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by rcs1000 · 2002-01-01 11:09 · Score: 2, Interesting

I won't get any Karma for this - but hey, I gave up whoring ages ago...

There are two common fallacies about sharing currencies between countries:

(1) It is necessary to have a shared government. Monetary integration *must* lead to political integration;
(2) Entering a 'common currency' is a once-and-for-all measure.

Both these can be countered by recent history.

Ireland and the UK.
Until the mid-1970s Ireland and the UK shared a currency - the British pound. This situation began with Irish independence at the beginning of the Century. Yet Ireland was not subsumed inside some British super-state. Ireland's independence as a country was never in doubt.

Ireland decided to go its own monetary way following the start of the 'troubles' in Northern Ireland. The Irish government made the, no doubt politically correct, decision that breaking from a currency agreement with a country responsible for 'Bloody Sunday' when tens of Catholic (Northern) Irish citizens were killed would not harm its electoral chances.

If anything, Ireland and the UK had less interlinked economies than most of the Eurozone (cf the figures for Ireland's exports as a % of GDP in the 1970s, esp. pre its entry into the EU - then the EEC.) Add in the almost complete lack of Ireland/UK trade resolution agreements - don't forget that one of Ireland's two major political parties was against the partion of Ireland - and it becomes clear that there is no reason why countries cannot share a currency without sharing a government.

Belgium and Luxembourg:
OK, they're both small. But the point remains.

France and the 'Convertible Franc':
Interesting one this, and one which I don't know as much as I should. (Reminder, read books on the subject.) France's ex-colonial 'possesions' in Africa share/shared with their previous overlord, a semi-convertible currency, even as 'colonial ties' were being increasinly relaxed. No greater disparity between the (predominantly) African economies of the former colonies and their erstwhile masters can be imagined. Yet, these countries regarded the convertible franc as the one beneficial legacy of colonialism.

I don't know how this has changed since the 'creation' of the Euro. Nor can I point to any noted economic successes in Africa. (Although, I would say - largely without any hard evidence - they have done no worse than peers.) So, it is not necessarily a great example.

BUT - they do go some way to demonstrate that a 'sovreign federal' body is hardly a necessity to a working currency.

--
--- My dad's political betting
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by InigoMontoya(tm) · 2002-01-01 11:19 · Score: 1

Following the successful introduction of the RFID, we now bring you--the talking Euro bill. Gently rub the bill and it will speak its value.

Hehehe... if they did this, it would definitely be a Good Thing there aren't portraits on the Euro... who knows how many things EuroH4X0rs could make (name European historical figure) say when gently rubbed?

InigoMontoya(tm)

--
This signature is self-referential.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Menthos · 2002-01-01 11:29 · Score: 2

Since when should the ASCII chart decide what a new currency symbol should be? The ASCII chart is not more than a mediocre excuse for a character table that lacked a lot of needed characters even when it was new, and has been unmodern ever since. It doesn't even include all characters needed for English! Replace with a Unicode character set as soon as possible wherever possible, if you have the chance.
Also, usually all characters already have a defined meaning. Adding an additional meaning to a character would most likely only cause confusion. Clearly a new symbol has its place, it's after all one of the world's most powerful currencies. If you question why Euro needs its own symbol, you should also ask yourself why the US Dollar or the British Pound need their own symbols.

--
GNU/Linux. The Freshmaker.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Trojan · 2002-01-01 11:40 · Score: 1

It was the last 'new' note, issued in 1997. We could have done without it, but they probably decided it was worth the trouble for the remaining 4-5 years.

Btw, if you think the Euro notes are colorful, you've never seen the more recent Dutch notes. I think the Dutch designer was also in the race for the design of the Euro notes, but unfortunately that task went to some Swiss guy.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by MtViewGuy · 2002-01-01 11:41 · Score: 2

I think at the rate the North American economy is going (especially with the introduction of NAFTA), we may get a currency that has something akin to the Euro within 10-14 years.

Imagine something called the North American Dollar, which replaces the US Dollar, Canadian Dollar, Mexican Peso, and every local national currency in Central America and the Caribbean. The $100, $50, $20, $10, $5 and $1 bills will be truly multi-colored with architectural and landscape scenes from North America, Central America and the Caribbean, and $1, 50 cents, 25 cents, 10 cents, 5 cents and 1 cent coins will have representations of famous people from North American, Central American and Caribbean history. The paper bills regardless of denomination will be sized the same as the current US dollar.

The Euro is actually a pretty interesting concept in theory, though there are still question marks about how it will affect the various national economies of Europe over the next 15 years.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:57 · Score: 0

>real builds

2.4.9 -ac
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:15 · Score: 0

Wow, an incoherent, pissed off european with a hair trigger for perceived (but not actual) sleights. What a surprise.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by piecewise · 2002-01-01 12:31 · Score: 2, Funny

That's just because OUR currency is the only currency really WORTH being counterfeitted.

;-)

--
The next comment I write will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 14:07 · Score: 0

-1, Plain stupid
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 14:11 · Score: 1

damn shame - Euros look really dull. Guilders, Sterling and French Francs are (were?) all IMHO beautifully designed.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Banjonardo · 2002-01-01 16:16 · Score: 1

I'm 15 years old, and my country (Brazil) has switched twice or thrice in my lifetime. My grandparents have seen it 9, 10 times. Heh.
Some thing all the inflation in Brazil did do that was good was:
Our banks, electronically speaking, kick most other bankses asses. Seriously.
The people are quite flexible; this comes from the bad old days of checking on a chart what milk would cost next week.

--
-----
Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 16:39 · Score: 0

I guess it's a shame that America is already at war. Though Europe is completely at peace. Good luck until your war has ended.

Heh. Typical Europeans. Go hide your head in the sand and let you know when its safe to come out into the world again once the Americans have mopped up the enemy. If you weren't such a dipshit you'd realize there were at least half a dozen European terrorist targets in Al Qaeda plots. As an American I'm really sick of cleaning up the rest of the world's shit and was perfectly content to ignore the rest of the world but these terrorists had to go and make it so god damned personal. They don't know when to just let it go. So a couple million Iraqi kids die.. big fucking deal. Kick Saddam out so the government stops siphoning that oil-for-food program money away into weapons programs.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by snake_dad · 2002-01-01 20:19 · Score: 2

The Pound doesn't need its own symbol. The brits should use EUR (or ) too. :P

<duck>

--
karma capped .sig seeking available Slashdot poster for long-term relationship.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by mpe · 2002-01-01 21:07 · Score: 2

Actually those look really cool.. I wonder why the US keeps this drab, slashdot theme with the currency..

One of the most unusual things about the US doller is how all the paper currency is the same size and colour scheme. (though at least the more recent issues have metal strips in different places.)
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by PurpleBob · 2002-01-01 21:31 · Score: 2

Or, for something more amusing, this.

http://www.milk.com/wall-o-shame/two_dollars.html.

--
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:07 · Score: 0

Why would a bill have to express symbols of national power? it is a method of payment, not a method of impressing your enemy!
I would think that after the recent events, US citizens would realize that expressing national power in communication with others is not always the wisest thing to do... but NO.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:10 · Score: 0

But that is because your dollar bills feel like toiletpaper! In many european countries we have had quality bills like this for a long time. Also color schemes like this. In fact, our original Guilder bills were much more modern in graphical design than these Euro bills!
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by uebernewby · 2002-01-01 23:10 · Score: 2

IIRC, one of the reasons why the Dutch guy "lost" was that his design couldn't be manufactured in each country - some printing firms simply were unable to produce each and every one of the anti-counterfeiting measures put in his designs. Which is why euro bills are way more secure than their dollar counterparts, but still very unsafe compared to recent Dutch bills.

--

News and bla for computer musicians: http://lomechanik.net/
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Hydrogenoid · 2002-01-02 01:27 · Score: 1

You know, English isn't the only language in Europe, and *a lot* of other symbols necessary for them (think accents, greek alphabet, etc, etc...) do not belong to the ASCII table...
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Hydrogenoid · 2002-01-02 01:32 · Score: 1

Huh?
All the bridges and arches pictured *are* real... (Well, OK, if you want to get philosophical, we could debate on the nature of reality, but...)
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by sphealey · 2002-01-02 02:00 · Score: 2

Labour, goods, and capital move freely, so when one part of the Eurozone becomes undervalued investors should come in and snap up the bargains.
Not based on my experience. (US) Americans do have a tendency to stay close to where they grew up, like all people, but if push comes to shove and the Midwest economy (say) goes down the tubes, Americans will pick up and move from Illinois to Texas, California, Washington State, or wherever jobs can be found. I have a very hard time picturing the average Brit picking up and moving to Greece because more jobs are available there.
sPh
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by ZigMonty · 2002-01-02 03:53 · Score: 2

A pound is worth more than a US dollar.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by pit_bull · 2002-01-02 04:16 · Score: 1

1 slight problem:

There wouldnt be enough gold or silver.
Thats one of the reasons why we switched from intrinsic value silver to paper notes and nickel coins.... (The other being impracticallity)

--
_ Light travels faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.... -
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Sloppy · 2002-01-02 05:29 · Score: 1

Bah.

There wouldn't be enough gold or silver.

?! If there isn't "enough", then its value increases until it is enough. The whole reason that precious metals are precious, is that you never have as much as you want. ;-)

The real reason we switched was so that the government could artificially lower interest rates, by stealth-taxing the ownership of money, via inflation.

--
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 05:37 · Score: 0

Try and pass a pound in some oddball country. They'll use it for toilet paper. On the other hand, US currency is completely universal. It will be taken anywhere.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 05:41 · Score: 0

NIce 10, I hope nobody in europe is color blind.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 06:54 · Score: 0

Euro started at about $1.10 and is now less than $0.90, I think $1 = ?1 could well happen in the future. Of course the political will is missing so it wont actually happen..

The downfall of Euro's exchange rate to USD has strong links with American bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. Americans were so eager to undermine Euro in every way, and bombing of Yugoslavia was an excellent excuse to do so...
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 07:29 · Score: 0

Actually I remember a few years ago selling large, oversized chocolate euros at the import store I worked at...they are pretty neat looking.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by gorilla · 2002-01-02 07:42 · Score: 2

The US Dollar doesn't have it's own symbol. The $ sign can mean US Dollars, Canadian Dollars, or Australian Dollars.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Now15 · 2002-01-02 09:54 · Score: 1

ROLF, how naive

--

Computers are useless: they can only give you answers. -- Pablo Picasso
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:53 · Score: 0

ROLF, how naive

Rolling On Laughing Floor? Apparently your knowledge of web acronyms is as good as your knowledge of world currency.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 20:23 · Score: 0

Following the successful introduction of the RFID, we now bring you--the talking Euro bill. Gently rub the bill and it will speak its value.
That would be nice. Then there would be the surprise of discovering a warm erotic italian female voice, or a authoritarian german male voice.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 23:09 · Score: 0

Hmm, I dunno about looking pretty cool, we used to have an interesting cast of characters on irish notes. The Euro notes are fairly boring in comparison. Bits and peices of architecture where the best they could find to put on them without sparking off war . But other than that its a nice change.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by franois-do · 2002-01-03 03:24 · Score: 1

Euro notes are rather dull, though the pastel colors they use make our wallets look like (Seurat-like) rainbows, and also save time organizing them; just like with Monopoly banknotes; I wonder if royalties are being paid for that :o). As far as I know, the first goal with Euro notes was to make their forgery more difficult as no other currency has has so many users in Europe since the Roman Empire. I hope that Europe's agony will be less painful, though.

The Euro will not change much about the economic war going on except its unit of measure. The State economic debt of France grew by almost one (ex-)World Trade Center tower each month and this has been going on, as far as I know, for more than ten years. No human casulaties, of course, except that we are now among the biggest antidepressor consumers in Europe, which makes us wonder whether we really live longer that other european residents or if is just an impression we have. Now, the US also have a big national debt, I have been told (numbers are welcome if you have them) while Japan, which does not, is in a so-callled crisis (5% of jobseekers, a crisis ? France has around 10%, Mauretania 80% and yet nobody is ever left out alone in the latter). I do not know exactly what can be deduced here, and am open to any ideas by e-mail, here or both).

--
Signature omitted in order to save space. Thanks for your understanding.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Menthos · 2002-01-03 04:44 · Score: 1

s/US Dollar/Dollar/
Sorry about that. I hope what I meant with my comment still was clear though.

--
GNU/Linux. The Freshmaker.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-03 07:07 · Score: 0

a couple million Iraqi kids die.. big fucking deal. Kick Saddam out so the government stops siphoning that oil-for-food program money away into weapons programs.

Heh, typical americans. Ever occurred to you that it isn't your country to be doing that in?
What if Saddam fancied your resources and thought 'OK, a couple million American kids die, big fucking deal. Kick GWB out so the government stops makign things so fucking personal'. I guess that would be OK huh? If you weren't such a dipshit you'd see that your view is exactly why your twin towers aren't there right now.

Listen, you think you are out there 'mopping up' all the problems. You wouldn't even have to be mopping up stuff if your attitude to other countries was at all reasonable. Just because some people aren't for hire for the biggest dollar and don't eat big macs, doesn't mean they aren't human. They are more human than you are, you piece of shit.
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-05 02:02 · Score: 0

They are pretty cool looking

Please do a google picture search for dutch guilder bank notes, we went back ages in design, euro`s look ancient compared to dutch 250 guilder notes or "tientjes".... :-(
Re:Picture of bills with US bill by znark · 2002-01-09 10:51 · Score: 1

>> why didn't they do the 2 side thing for
>> the bills like they did for the coins?

> Well, perhaps they were afraid that the French
> would put nudie pictures and such on their bills,
> raising the ire (amongst other things) of more
> staid nations.

Not completely unimaginable. For example, the old Finnish markka bank notes from 1922 had some naked people pictured on them.

One simple reason why it won't work: by SlackMeister · 2002-01-01 06:18 · Score: 1, Interesting

common-currency zones must have two things: free movement of capital and free movement of labor. When the factories in Detroit lay people off they can move to Dallas, LA, etc. But when people are layed off in Paris they won't be able to chase jobs to Berlin. It's not a problem if both countries have their own currency that they can devalue to discount their products, but with a common currency the country with high unemployment will be stuck, much like Argentina's problem when they pegged their currency to the US dollar and therefore priced themselves out of competition with other south american nations.

Unless people can freely move to where the jobs are, all Euro-using countries will start to look like Argentina in 10 years.

--
*** ***

Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by fidget42 · 2002-01-01 06:24 · Score: 2, Interesting

I agree 150%. In the US, we have problems where states compete against each other for business and the political backlash that causes (S. Carolina gives incentives to pull corporations from Verginia, etc.). Here, there is a stable overseeing government to keep things civil, but the EC does not have that sort of power. I expect the next five years to be very uncomfortable in Europe as nationalism gets entered into the equasion.

--
The dogcow says "Moof!"
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by nchip · 2002-01-01 06:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

When the factories in Detroit lay people off they can move to Dallas, LA, etc. But when people are layed off in Paris they won't be able to chase jobs to Berlin.

uh. labor CAN move freely within EU. try learning facts of the world outside USA before bashing. could be enlightening exprience.

--
signatures pending - ansa@kos.to - (dont mail there)
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Ewan · 2002-01-01 06:30 · Score: 1

Europe (or rather the European Union, which is 15 countries, including those now using the Euro) already has free movement of labour between the nations, and has done for several years now.

As a British citizen, I can up sticks today, and move to Germany and start work immediately without any need for visas, paperwork, or anything at all (except learning better German maybe!).
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-01 06:34 · Score: 5, Interesting

What are you talking about? What restrictions on moving and working in other European countries are you refering to?
One of the advantages that Europe has is that language and culture maintain national entities in such a way as to resist the "winner take all" scenario, in which all the educated professionals move to a tiny handful of economic supercenters. Economic growth can be distributed geographically more in Europe, but it has nothing to do with any restrictions on travel.
One of the ironies of economic popular wisdom in the 90's is apparent by the fact that Brazil, with its protectionist policies, is doing reasonably well, while Argentina, which did almost everything the IMF and the US banking establishment told it to it, is about to go toes-up. The Argentine disaster could spell the end of WTO-styled globalism far more than the protests of Seattle etc. ever could
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:36 · Score: 0

They are free to move to were work is
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by slam+smith · 2002-01-01 06:39 · Score: 1

It certainly isn't a cure all. But, it will have a positive effect. For any import-export business it will remove one layer of red tape. It won't be a huge effect, but it will help.

--
My Weblog
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:41 · Score: 0

But when people are layed off in Paris they won't be able to chase jobs to Berlin.

Yes they can. As a European citizen, I can move to and work in any other European country, with no thought to immigration or tax paperwork. Pack your bags, hope on a train, and go where the work is.

With the introduction of the Euro, most of Europe can now be thought of less than a collection of different countries, and more like the US, where they are a collection of states
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by ozric99 · 2002-01-01 06:44 · Score: 1

When the factories in Detroit lay people off they can move to Dallas, LA, etc. But when people are layed off in Paris they won't be able to chase jobs to Berlin.
Is this a troll or are you just ignorant?
There is nothing to stop people moving between countries in the Eurozone and finding work.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:47 · Score: 0

Actually, any EU citizen can work in any EU country.
The problem, in my opinion, will be the lack of common culture and common language. It will require a strong revision in our educational programs, then decades, maybe centuries, to see the EU as a single entity, as we see the USA today.
The Euro is just the first step, not the last: if we think of it as a goal, we've lost.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-01 07:00 · Score: 1

On that note, scanning this thread one finds a mind-numbing array of ignorance and misconceptions about Europe (and, indeed, the rest of the world) from presumably American, presumably intelligent people. I guess it's the same combination of hubris and ignorance that leads a lot of Americans to simply assume that the US is the freest nation in the world, without either qualifying what "freedom" means or investigating how people all over the world live. It's sad, really.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by SerpentMage · 2002-01-01 07:00 · Score: 1

Do you even understand the EU? First it is not the EC, but EU and second the thing that many forget to realize is that there is an entire generation that thinks EU. Anyone under 30 is in favour of the Euro because many of them consider themselves European.

And nationalism will not get in the way because people will not consider the EU as evil. This is because EU integration spanned generations.

--

"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Vegeta99 · 2002-01-01 07:04 · Score: 1

Sure, they can, but IIRC, Germans speak German and the French speak French. See the problem?
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:06 · Score: 0

Yes , there is freedom of movement between countries. But the difference in culture and langauge between the nations makes it difficult to just up and move. And yes , many people in Europe are bilingual, but are they fluent enough to excel in a new job? What about regulated professions like doctor and lawyer? Not only do they rely on extremly high proficency in a native language , but the differences in licensing between nations.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by the+eric+conspiracy · 2002-01-01 07:13 · Score: 2

Germans speak German and the French speak French. See the problem?

Well, in Europe the French also speak German, and the Germans speak French. And most speak English as well.

Still, I do imagine there is a certain economic cost to supporting and using several different languages.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by ozric99 · 2002-01-01 07:14 · Score: 1

Sure, they can, but IIRC, Germans speak German and the French speak French. See the problem?

No, not really. You see, we have these things over here in Europe called schools, and instead of guns our teachers carry books (or at least they did back in the day). Now some of those books are for teaching foreign languages.

Don't tar Europeans with your American monolingual brush.

What do you call someone who can speak three languages? Trilingual.

What do you call someone who can speak two languages? Bilingual.

What do you call someone who can speak one language? American.

Yes, that was a joke.. sheesh ;-)
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by fidget42 · 2002-01-01 07:16 · Score: 1

My apologies on saying EC rather than EU, but nationalism will be a major problem. There are areas in Europe that are holding grudges that are centuries old. Countries, within the EU, are having problems with their citizens concerning immigration. I don't think a common currency will solve these problems.

Nationalism is a tool used by those people who prefer that their followers not think for themselves and gives them a reason to feel opressed (You are not European, you are X and the EU is trying to opress us!).

--
The dogcow says "Moof!"
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by an_mo · 2002-01-01 07:19 · Score: 1

You're right that labor, legally and technically can freely more, but there are such huge cultural barriers (language) that make it very costly to move. So effectively I would say that the parent message is right that labor cannot move around euroland
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by the+eric+conspiracy · 2002-01-01 07:20 · Score: 2, Flamebait

On that note, scanning this thread one finds a mind-numbing array of ignorance and misconceptions about Europe

Scanning this tread also reveals a mind-numbing amount of European prejudice and ignorance about America, presumably from Europeans. Not only do Europeans seem to have these xenophobic and parochial attitudes, but they also seem to feel compelled to display them at every opportunity, furthering the impression that they are both ignorant and ill-mannered.

It's sad, really that attitudes of Europeans prevalent since the discovery of America towards the "colonies" still persist some 500 years later.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:23 · Score: 0

"without either qualifying what "freedom" means or investigating how people all over the world live. "

People vote with their feet.
Do you see millions of Americans emigrating abroad or is it the other way around?
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:25 · Score: 0

"and instead of guns our teachers carry books (or at least they did back in the day)."

How interesting .... only books yet they managed to start the most brutal and costly conflicts ever. Twice in the last century and both times required intervention of gun-totting Americans to One hell of a culture if you ask me.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Jonavin · 2002-01-01 07:26 · Score: 1

This isn't necessarily a problem either. Many people in Europe speak more than just their coutries official language. And then you some, like the Swiss, that have many official languages in the first place.

Just because Americans are unilingual, don't assume the rest of the world is.

Remember, language didn't stop thousands of people from (legally) immigranting to the US to seek a new life.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Vegeta99 · 2002-01-01 07:29 · Score: 1

Haha, I'll take the hit.

In America, they teach foreign languages, but they're usually optional. Many colleges require 2 years or more of a language.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Miska · 2002-01-01 07:38 · Score: 1, Flamebait

erhmmm.... when was the last time you experienced a Frenchman willingly learn German?

--
-
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by ozric99 · 2002-01-01 07:43 · Score: 1

Wow. Not only do you lot have no foreign language classes, it seems you have no history classes either... for shame
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by ozric99 · 2002-01-01 07:46 · Score: 1

:-)
Yeah, of course they do. I guess the part where I said "yes, that was a joke" was missed by somebody in another post. Glad you noticed it!
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by rseuhs · 2002-01-01 07:47 · Score: 2

Maybe they mean some special US-American freedom like the DMCA?
Oh well, I think I can do just fine without this kind of "freedom". At least here we don't have to be afraid to be jailed for reverse-engeneering.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Nightpaw · 2002-01-01 07:52 · Score: 2

No, not really. You see, we have these things over here in Europe called schools, and instead of guns our teachers carry books (or at least they did back in the day). Now some of those books are for teaching foreign languages.

The teachers don't carry guns, the students do. Get with it.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by forged · 2002-01-01 07:53 · Score: 1

Obviously there is a certain economic cost to supporting and using several different languages. It has always been there! The scope of the € simply will make people from other EU country understand when prices are differently when they travel abroad, and save us all a lot of headache.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:02 · Score: 0

The first world war was won by the British (at virtually the cost of an entire generation). The second world war was won by the Russians - the eastern front had already been won by them, and they were on the road to Berlin, when D-Day happened. The US helped, particularly in the latter case with material support and by maintaining the pressure of a second front, but you may want to crack a history book before you spout off nationalistic lies.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Lemmy+Caution · 2002-01-01 08:25 · Score: 2

At this point, it is probably easier to get into the US than to get into the EU. There is no significant immigration from Western Europe into the US. US monolinguism discourages them from moving to the EU, but I still wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that the US->EU emigration rate surpassed the EU->US rate.
Most immigration into the US is from 3rd World countries; Japan does not have a significant emigration to the US either (a fact which is actually making US Nikkei communities become more isolated from Japan.)
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by NeonSquare · 2002-01-01 08:56 · Score: 1

Hm... it is obvious that you do not come from europe... Europe _has_ a common culture - the fact that there are local traditions does not contradict that. There are even local traditions _within_ particular countries like e. g. Germany. Americans may think that all Germans are like Bavarians with "Lederhosen" and "Schuhplattler" but this is only the common xenophobic and rest-of-the-world ignorant stuff we already know from many Americans. Thanks God that I know enough smart Americans to recognize that not all Americans are such morons...
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by am+2k · 2002-01-01 08:58 · Score: 1

I know one. He married a relative of mine which happens to be from Austria, now he's learning German (and she's learning French for that matter).
I've been told that French people are generally pretty open-minded as long as they aren't in their own country.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by hughk · 2002-01-01 09:10 · Score: 2

I have known several Frenchmen willingly learn German. However the working language in the large international organisations tends to be English. Many French professionals have no problems with that.

--
See my journal, I write things there
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by jjo · 2002-01-01 09:23 · Score: 5, Insightful

I would suggest that you try thinking through the poster's comments before engaging in ignorant-American bashing.

The United States does have true labor mobility. Moving from one section of the US to another for economic advantage is not only easy, it is very common. In addition to the lack of legal barriers, there are no language barriers and few cultural ones.

Are you asserting that the average Parisian, having just been layed off, could and would chase jobs in Berlin? The average Detroiter could and would do so in Dallas. The Parisian is prevented from doing this, but the barrier is de facto rather than de jure as you seem to assume. From a macroeconomic perspective, it amounts to the same thing: the workers do not, in fact, move.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 09:31 · Score: 2

You're right that labor, legally and technically can freely more, but there are such huge cultural barriers (language) that make it very costly to move.
I have lived and worked in four European countries and I have never troubled to learn the native dialect. All foreigners speak English, particularly now that it has become the de-facto language of the EU.
Language is becoming much less of a barrier simply because the size of the EU has grown so large that everyone who wants a job in management has to know English. All the technical litterature is in English, just about the only thing not available in English is high quality porn but nobody cares much whether the lassie groans in French (ah, ah, ah, aieeee!), English (oh, oh, oh, aghhh!) or German (eine swei, fier, ugh! ...)

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by dgroskind · 2002-01-01 10:26 · Score: 1

Not only do Europeans seem to have these xenophobic and parochial attitudes, but they also seem to feel compelled to display them at every opportunity...
Is there a major irony deficiency here? The story is about Europeans dropping their national differences, adopting a common currency, moving freely within the EU, learning each other's languages. In addition, the penetration of American culture in Europe is legendary.
If some Europeans find parts of the American culture distasteful, it probably isn't because they're xenophobic. It's probably because they tried it and didn't like it.
Hooray for the Europeans putting aside centuries of war and national rivalry. It is an example to the world.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Khazunga · 2002-01-01 10:54 · Score: 2, Insightful

I can't confirm your de facto barriers for mobility. Language is certainly no problem, and cultural difference is small enough to be an incentive rather than a deterrent.
I'm Portuguese, and I can say that Portuguese usually speak two foreign languages -- English and French. Couple that with the language proximity to Italian and Spanish (enough to get you started, if you travel there), and you've opened up a great part of Europe.
I'd say that Europeans tend to settle when they get older (mid-thirties). But that's natural. It's impossible for 100% of the population to be mobile. Younger people tend to grab the oportunity to travel. I don't know the US, but I'd guess the average red-neck Texan won't move to Sillicon Valley too quickly either,

--
If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by the+eric+conspiracy · 2002-01-01 10:58 · Score: 2

Is there a major irony deficiency here?

Yes, there is. The deficiency is about Europeans carping about American ignorance while they still manage to elect governments with strong Neo-Nazi elements.

Reading comments from Europeans denegrating freedom in the US is ridiculous. You are looking at a nation populated by ex-Europeans seeking escape from political,economic and religious oppression in Europe.

If some Europeans find parts of the American culture distasteful, it probably isn't because they're xenophobic.

Perhaps, but we are still talking about a Europe intent on ignoring a European government bent on genocide a mere two years ago. Some of the leaders of this nation are currently undergoing trial for war crimes as I write this.

Hooray for the Europeans putting aside centuries of war and national rivalry. It is an example to the world.

I would be very happy to see Europe united and at peace. Both my father and grandfather had to fight in wars in Europe; there are American peacekeeping troops my sons' age serving in Europe today.

If some Europeans find parts of the American culture distasteful, it probably isn't because they're xenophobic. It's probably because they tried it and didn't like it.

I am sure that some Europeans don't like the inroads American culture has made into their society. However I am sort of puzzled by the apparent feeling of European governments that they must legislate to insure local content in their media. What sort of freedom is this? Shouldn't Europeans be free to listen or watch whatever they please?
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by knups · 2002-01-01 11:20 · Score: 1

It seems interesting in this context that a survey of Radio Free Europe [www.rferl.org] amongst the eastern Europe candidate countries for the planned EC expansion showed that really large figures of workers - especially from Poland - are willing or even are already planning to move to Germany, or Austria. I can't find the original article in their archive, but I think it was 25% of Polish workers who consider moving. BTW, this is the main reason for Germany and Austria to *not* expand the EC too soon - they fear increasing unemployment rates in their countries. Is anybody out there from Poland or eastern Europe? I would like to hear their personal opinion !-)
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by dgroskind · 2002-01-01 11:57 · Score: 1

The deficiency is about Europeans carping about American ignorance while they still manage to elect governments with strong Neo-Nazi elements.
No, the deficiency is about Americans carping about European ignorance while still electing governments with strong racist elements. [1], [2].
Perhaps, but we are still talking about a Europe intent on ignoring a European government bent on genocide a mere two years ago.
No, we're talking about an America that supported brutal dictatorships all over Latin America and still deprives its aboriginal population of their treaty rights.
Shouldn't Europeans be free to listen or watch whatever they please?
As one example, I read that when Jurassic Park was released, it was playing in one-quarter of all the movie theatres in Paris. How many French films are playing in your town?
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by SerpentMage · 2002-01-01 12:02 · Score: 1

Sorry, but those are old reasons. Really...

First grudges centuries old. Most of them are actually gone. And those that are still there want to separate from the country, but not the Union. That is the kicker of it. Take Northern Italy for example. They wanted to separate from Southern Italy. Then asked if they wanted to separate from the Union and the response was, "What loose all that trade and such? Never..." Nobody in Europe does not want to be part of the union. This is something that has come to pass.

Next about immigration. This is not an Intra-EU problem, but a problem of people trying to get into the EU. Nobody has anything against an EU member moving from one country to another EU country. Having lived in many of the EU countries I have never witnessed it. The only thing I witnessed is that some people get annoyed that all the vaction spots are getting bought out.

--

"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by -brazil- · 2002-01-01 12:04 · Score: 1

Don't know about "willingly", but roughly 25% of the French learn German in school, and about the same percentage of Germans learn French...

--
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by SerpentMage · 2002-01-01 12:07 · Score: 1

Excuse me, but give it a rest...

Just to give you an illustration here is my point. Ask any European if they have met either a German or British plated car in any EU country other than Germany and British. Answer is YES because Germans and Brits travel.

BTW your argument of true labour movement in the US is incorrect. I know I have lived there. Some people in some states move, whereas others do not. For example Southerner's do not tend to move. They stick fixed. However a Northerner will tend to move aorund.

Will a Frenchman move? Not likely, but a German, Brit, Irish sure will move...

--

"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by SerpentMage · 2002-01-01 12:14 · Score: 1

> governments with strong Neo-Nazi elements.
And Louisana was what??? KKK Yes? How about Pat Buchanan? Or how about many of the other Republicans? Sorry elements exist on both sides of the pond...

> I am sure that some Europeans don't like the inroads American culture has made into their society. However I am sort of puzzled by the apparent feeling of European governments that they must legislate to insure local content in their media. What sort of freedom is this? Shouldn't Europeans be free to listen or watch whatever they please?

Ahh, interesting arugment so how come I cannot eat unpasturized cheese (Roquefort)? Or import any vehicle that has been deemed to be safe in Europe? Again my point is that both sides of the pond have just as restrictive policies in one thing or another.

Ignorance is not exclusive to Americans or Europeans. It happens on both sides. I always find this funny because I think that Europe has become the brash teenager who has come to age and America is the old foggie going, Yes but you still need to learn this that and the other thing.

--

"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:03 · Score: 0

I don't know the US, but I'd guess the average red-neck Texan won't move to Sillicon Valley too quickly either

Of course not. It's too figgin' expensive and the people are too goddamn wierd. I could see a Texas redneck moving to Bakersfield, though.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:27 · Score: 0

The US introduction into WWI helped because it brought in a new supply of men and material after the European powers fought to a standstill. It tipped the balance in favor of the UK. Had the US sided with Germany, it would have gone to them for the same reason.

It is true that the Russians bore the brunt of the Nazi war machine, but if it wasn't for the US supplies and pressure in other areas, they would have fallen eventually to the Germans. Russia wanted the US in the war because of that. The US oil embargo against Japan was requested by Stalin in order give the Japanese a reason to attack. FDR knew that the Americans would only get involved if they were attacked. Most Americans didn't want to get into Europe's mess and ex-President Hoover had even stated that the US should just let Germany and Russia fight and "let the dictatorships wipe each other out". This is also a reason that post WWII USSR felt it necessary to surround itself with puppet Communist governments: to provide buffer states the next time the Germans went on a killing spree (Russia surrendered to Germany in WWI which led to the overthrow of the Czar).
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Teun · 2002-01-01 13:44 · Score: 2, Informative

You are partially right, movement in Europe is not as accepted on the same scale as it is in the US, but it is possible.
Some examples:
In Holland we have a strained labour marked and quite a few Brits are working here, mainly in shipbuilding and industry.
And the Dutch construction industry has been trying to get unemployed German builders to come over but that's not easy due to quite different building practises and the exelent social security in Germany

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by mce · 2002-01-01 13:57 · Score: 2, Insightful

I would suggest that you try thinking though the context of your statements before engaging in ignorant-Europe FUD.

Many more people understand and even speak multiple languages here in Europe than the average American can even start to imagine. And the percentage of people who don't do so is falling all the time.

Besides, it's not because people in Detroit and Dallas all speak American english that they move around just as easily as you imply. There are many more reasons than language to stick around in the same area.

--
Linux user since early January 1992.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by mccalli · 2002-01-01 14:07 · Score: 1

...I can move to and work in any other European country, with no thought to immigration or tax paperwork.
How about a thought for language?
Cheers,
Chous,
A bien tot,
Ian
(with apologies to native speakers for any spelling I may have just mangled)
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by TyFoN · 2002-01-01 14:41 · Score: 1

16
Norway is also part of the Schengen agreement :)
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by aprentic · 2002-01-01 15:48 · Score: 2

Q: What do you call someone who speaks three languages?
A: Trilingual.
Q: What do you call someone who speaks two languages?
A: Bilingual.
Q: What do you call someone who speaks one language?
A: American.

Not all Europeans are polyglots but a huge number are. Your hypothetical Parisian likely speaks German. If not they probably speak English and could get a job in Germany on that.
It may be easier to move from Detroit to Dallas but it's not much more difficult to move from Paris to Berlin.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by MarcOiL · 2002-01-01 23:27 · Score: 1

I am sure that some Europeans don't like the inroads American culture has made into their society. However I am sort of puzzled by the apparent feeling of European governments that they must legislate to insure local content in their media. What sort of freedom is this? Shouldn't Europeans be free to listen or watch whatever they please?

That's why we regulate it! I want to see movies in my own language, and movies about local things. If it was just let to "market forces" or any other mythical entity that's just an excuse for multinational corporations, all movie theaters here would just show "Britney Spears Strikes Back Again III".

--
If I have posted far, it is because I replied to giants.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 00:14 · Score: 0

Thats not true. I'm 29, and agains the euro. So much for your teory.

Actually, Denmark rejected the euro, too. A lot people under 30 in Denmark don't like the euro and the idea about a "united states of europe".

Second, don't say that nationalism will not get in the way. It's Europe!!, every conflict in europe for the last 1000 years have been about nationalism, and the euro will not change that. After all, it's only a currency. We are already fighting about the queens and kings on the coins.

And don't forget. This is not the first time in history we had the same currency. We all know how that went. I don't see that manny romans on the streets today.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by DrXym · 2002-01-02 00:15 · Score: 2

Yes, it's easy to work in any country in the EU. I myself upped roots from the UK and now live and work in Ireland. Aside from getting a new social security number, it was pretty much routine. I have French friends who work in the UK and Ireland with similar ease.

Obviously it helps that you speak the language of the country you're going to, but its surprising how quickly you'll pick up a language by working there.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by slim · 2002-01-02 01:20 · Score: 2

Q: What do you call someone who speaks one language?

A: American.

Hmm, I'm British, and I have personally met US citizens who are monoglot English speakers, monoglot Spanish speakers, monoglot Polish speakers (actually I only met the English-speaking son of a mother who he told me only spoke Polish).

Look in the right places and you'll find huge numbers of bilingual Americans; mostly English/Spanish speaking, I'd guess.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by jlennon · 2002-01-02 01:52 · Score: 1

I live in Germany near the French and Luxembourg borders. Over the last years I saw many Germans working in Luxembourg and many Frenchmen buying stuff in German (and vice versa). It's no real problem.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by jlennon · 2002-01-02 02:01 · Score: 1

Most Americans I talked to could say words like "Oktoberfest", things like "Guten Tag" and some insults. But until now I only saw one American (who has been living in Germany for years) you really could talk to in German.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Warrior_Elf · 2002-01-02 04:33 · Score: 1

I live in a Welsh speaking part of wales, and if i owned a company, i'd try, as far as i could, to hire a welsh speaking person. Id imagine that the percentage of people in Europe speaking welsh (but not from wales) are quite small. I'd imagine most other peoples would do the same. A german would only hire a german speaking person if he had any choice etc.

While many people in europe speak one or two other languages to their native tounge, your choice of place to move to will always be limited. Also, i dont think id want to live in greece, even if i did speak the language (no offence to greeks, im a cold climate person!)

The man has a point, labor mobility in Europe will always be less than in america, because we have no common language or culture. And anyone who argues otherwise is so ignorantly pro-europe he's willing to ignore the facts: Labor mobility in Europe NOW is tiny compared to the US. Why should this change?

--
Show me a man with both feet on the ground, and I'll show you a man who can't put on his pants.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by spanky555 · 2002-01-02 05:04 · Score: 1

Q: What do you call someone who speaks one language?
A: American.

Also:

A: Canadian.
A: Chinese.

Applies just as much, but not quite as funny, because they aren't on top of the heap.
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by eWulf · 2002-01-02 05:44 · Score: 1

every conflict in europe for the last 1000 years have been about nationalism

I'm sorry, but this is total bullshit. The idea of national identity only arose comparitively recently. Most wars have been about land struggles between feudal monarchs and princes. It is only the wars of the last century and those towards the end of the 19th century which had anthing whatsoever to do with nationalism.

--
"If Stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?" - Will Rogers
Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by eWulf · 2002-01-02 05:49 · Score: 1

Thats not true. I'm 29, and agains the euro. So much for your teory.

Well, you always get your lunatic fringe don't you.

--
"If Stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?" - Will Rogers

We can... by EnglishTim · 2002-01-01 06:20 · Score: 2

We can get jobs in other Euro-zone coutries. We have been able to for some time, even though (here in Britain) we have not opted to become part of the single currency.

Re:We can... by ostiguy · 2002-01-01 06:41 · Score: 2

How many unemployed farmers from Southern Italy have moved to Ireland during the celtic tiger's boom?

See, just because you *legally* can, doesn't mean that there aren't significant cultural barriers impeding the free flow of labor across borders. The US, as a integrated currency zone for comparative purposes, have far fewer limitations.

ostiguy
Re:We can... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:51 · Score: 0

Not many, but I know a son of an unemployed southern-italian farmer who got a decent education thanks to europe's socialist free education policies, and came to Ireland to land a IR£22000-a-year job doing software localisation work....
Re:We can... by Ewan · 2002-01-01 06:51 · Score: 1

If you know anything, you'll know that all Italian farmers that are unemployed are actually claiming money from the EU for growing olives which dont exist (A european joke for those who don't get it...).

Seriously though, why would an Italian farmer move to Ireland to work for a computer company? Rather larger than the cultural gap is the skills gap - how many out of work Detroit car manufacturers have been working in Silicon Valley for a .com or in New York for a bank recently?

Irelands boom was based on high technology and low interest rates, and I know plenty of people who moved from the UK to Ireland to take advantage of it - they all needed the skills to get the new job in the first place though.
Re:We can... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:55 · Score: 0

lots of Portuguese moved to the UK.
It's not as rare as you might imagine.

But then you're an American, you don't even admit to your problems (hello Mexicans)
Re:We can... by singularity · 2002-01-01 06:56 · Score: 2

So, by the same analogy, a lot of unemployed farmers in the Midwest and auto-workers in the Great Lakes area moved and now make up Silicon Valley?

And with NAFTA, a lot of high-tech industries suddenly moved south of the U.S.-Mexico border to take advantage of cheaper labor?

There are other factors to consider when you talk about people moving for jobs.

In addition, we have the same problems in the U.S. Coming from the South (U.S.), for example, I find that a lot of people have an aversion to moving "up East" (Northeast/New England) or "out West" (California, etc.) because of culture.

--
- (c) 2018 Hank Zimmerman
Re:We can... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:09 · Score: 0

If you can speak the language. I could move from England to Ireland easily enough, but moving to a non english speaking part of europe would be difficult.
Re:We can... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:26 · Score: 0

Might become a little off topic here but the smart farmers in Europe move to the former Earstern Germany and Poland and use their knowledge and money to setup large modern farms there. Its the only way to do some profitable farming in Europe.
Re:We can... by ostiguy · 2002-01-01 07:27 · Score: 2

I did not refer to industry - I simply referred to people moving from one place to another, which is exactly was does happen every day in the US. Massachusetts has lost at least two US Congressional seats in the last 20 years because people are moving southernly and westernly. NY state has lost at least 3 house seats from redistricting after the 90 and 2000 censuses.

I am afraid that there is a wealth of evidence that supports my position re: US migratory patterns. Americans are in fact willing to move and do so at a pretty regular clip.

ostiguy
Re:We can... by _ganja_ · 2002-01-01 07:48 · Score: 2

I'm British but live in Holland right now but I still have to go with ostiguy on this one. Moving around in europe is no where near as easy as it is in the states for one simple reason, the language barriers. Yes, people do speak English and this is especially true of most the working population in Holland but a lot of companies still operate mainly in Dutch hence, job advertisiments require Dutch speakers. In comparison, you never see job ads in the states "must have New York accent".

--
A journey of a thousand miles starts with a brutal anal raping at airport security
Re:We can... by Bake · 2002-01-01 07:55 · Score: 1

No, but (and I'm European so take this with a grain of salt) there could be a requirement to speak spanish as a second language when working in states adjacent to Mexico.
Re:We can... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:06 · Score: 0

That must be a high quality education.
Re:We can... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:17 · Score: 0

cool. makes sense, though it will breed resentment if not handled properly.
Re:We can... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:39 · Score: 0

Well since you are British that explains a lot. I give you a short introduction into the education system here in Austria (similar to Germany). I started with english in the second year of grammar school. And the time I entered university, although I attended a technical school the last five years before entering university I had about 11 years of english classes and 2 years in a romanic language, 5 years of technical education in electrical high voltage engineering and later in the Universtiy I had about 3 years of spanish education just for fun and personal interest, which ended in a trip to South America.

Ok thats an exception but you can expect from most europeans outside of Britain to know their own language and being able to get around with english. In many countries people speak about 3-4 languages (Holland and the Scandinavian countries come to my mind). So the language barrier isnt as high as it was 30 years ago.
Re:We can... by clare-ents · 2002-01-02 03:38 · Score: 2

On the other hand, having to go to Holland for three weeks for a client visit left me obtaining a replacement passport in three hours to go to work and the two indian group members huddled in the cold infront of the embassy waiting for a work visa for which they applied six weeks ago.

Work forces are already becoming more mobile across countries now. If you wish to work in a different country it's now quite easy to do so - at least for short periods of time.

--
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. (Einstein)
Re:We can... by gorilla · 2002-01-02 08:41 · Score: 2

But there are jobs in the US where you have to be a Spanish speaker or an English speaker.
Re:We can... by achim · 2002-01-03 06:31 · Score: 1

Well, maybe not to the celtic tiger, but to Germany: In the last 30 years hundred thousands of people from (at least then) poorer countries and regions came to Germany. The first were italians, greeks and portugese, but later turkish people dominated.

1 [OT] (your sig) by Stone+Rhino · 2002-01-01 06:21 · Score: 1

some good people post less than 1, even logged in users. for a while I was, because I made the mistake of getting first post. So don't assume that because a post is 1 that it lacks good content.

--

Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.

The British pound stable?? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:22 · Score: 0

In my lifetime the British pound has devaluted inummerable times. It's value has been slashed to a third against the DM and the dollar in 25 years and at the moment it is grosely overvalued. 1 pound should be worth something in the neighbourhood of 0.80 euro's. It is on the market 1.60 euro's. If Britain would join with this exchange rate its econimie would be into a 10 year long recession before the wages and cost of living would be in line with europe

Re:The British pound stable?? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:36 · Score: 0

1 pound should be worth something in the neighbourhood of 0.80 euro's. It is on the market 1.60 euro's.

No, you'll find thats because the Pound has remained strong while the Euro, and to a lesser extent the Dollar, collapsed around it.

Take a look at the GBP/EUR exchange rates since the Euro was launced onto the markets, and compare them to the GBP/USD exchange rates. Notice a trend?

conversion by qqtortqq · 2002-01-01 06:23 · Score: 2, Redundant

1 euro is equal to the following: Austrian Schillings = 13.7603 Belgian Francs = 40.3399 Dutch Guilders = 2.20371 Finnish Markka = 5.94573 French Francs = 6.55957 German Marks = 1.95583 Greek Drachmas = 340.750 Irish Pound (Púnt) = 0.787564 Italian Lira = 1936.27 Luxembourg Francs = 40.3399 Portugese Escudo = 200.482 Spanish Pesetas = 166.386

Re:conversion by Phosphor3k · 2002-01-01 06:43 · Score: 1

According to CNN:

1 Euro = 13423.86978 Vietnamese Dongs 1 Vietnamese Dong (VND) = 0.00007 Euro (EUR)

This is not a joke. For 20 US dollars you can get about 320,000 Vietnamese Dongs.
Re:conversion by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:03 · Score: 0

I knew Vietnamese female hookers were cheap, but I didnt know how cheap the male hookers were, wow! Thats a lot of dong!
Re:conversion by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:18 · Score: 0

Hi.

The correct conversion to and from
the Finnish markka is

1 EUR = 5,94573 FIM.

Not that it will matter for more
than two months. After 1st of March
Finnish shops will accept only euros.

Jere Kahanpää
Re:conversion by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:36 · Score: 0

The true European spirit: Don't make it easy for anyone! Let the exchange rate for any country be as crazy as the others...
Re:conversion by MavEtJu · 2002-01-01 11:17 · Score: 1

1 euro is equal to the following: Austrian Schillings = 13.7603 Belgian Francs = 40.3399 Dutch Guilders

Last time I checked you got 2.20 dutch guilders for one euro.

--
bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
Re:conversion by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:01 · Score: 0

If you think that simply declaring 1 currencyA == 1 currencyB would have been a simple or even necessarily a clever thing to do, you know nothing about economics.
Re:conversion by RoyalTS · 2002-01-01 13:34 · Score: 1

Sorry, man you also got the conversion rate for the German Mark wrong. It's 1.95583 Marks per Euro.
Re:conversion by Tuonenkielo · 2002-01-01 22:27 · Score: 1

He did say that. Take a look at the line, first there's the currency, then the rate. So he didn't say 40.3399 Guilders, he said 40.3399 Belgian Francs.

Re:The Burning of Idols by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:23 · Score: 0

ALAMOGORDO, New Mexico (AP) -- As hundreds protested nearby, a church group burned Harry Potter books, Ouiji boards, and the complete works of Shakespeare.

Did they take your copy away? Did they prevent you from aquiring any of these items?

No?

Then why do you have a problem with certain individuals or groups choosing for themselves to reject certain items and demonstrating that rejection publicly? Overboard? Perhaps. Intellectual terrorism? I don't think this measures up...maybe if they offed Rowling (personally I'd be happy if she went away) or burned down several book warehouses. I also reject Harry Potter shit. Partly because I despise commercialism and partly because I don't like the values it teaches. For similar reasons, I didn't bother attending last nights so-called "first night celebrations"...some stunned boomer soccer-mom's ideaof fun: No alcohol, face-painting, folk music, tarot-card reading, and art-fags prancing around on stilts! What fun...NOT!

I guess what I'm trying to say is: You want them to butt out of your life, why don't you butt out of theirs?

Euro symbol support in Linux? by ewan9 · 2002-01-01 06:23 · Score: 1

I've tried a few things but it seems difficult (or impossible?) to get the euro symbol working in console, KDE and other X applications. Mozilla seems to be the only app that automatically supports both displaying and producing the symbol.

So, has anyone successfully got the euro symbol to work in Linux (particularly Red Hat)...?

Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:35 · Score: 0

.xmodmap

keycode 0x1A = e E EuroSign EuroSign

fonts with ...-iso8859-15
Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by DeeKayWon · 2002-01-01 07:15 · Score: 2

But what does that do? After adding that to .xmodmap, what does one do to create a euro symbol? The xmodmap man page doesn't explain it.

Testing the euro symbol found in KCharselect (Table 32)...
Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:21 · Score: 0

"keycode 0x1A = e E EuroSign EuroSign"

No, that doesn't seem to work in Red Hat.

keycode 0x1A = e E currency
works, but only in some apps. In KDE, for example, it doesn't work.
Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by reynaert · 2002-01-01 07:32 · Score: 2

The canonical way to type an euro symbol is AltGr+E. Here's the official stuff.
Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by DeeKayWon · 2002-01-01 08:10 · Score: 2

Ah. Unfortunately, US keyboards don't have an AltGr key.
Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:40 · Score: 0

Right Alt is an exact equivalent.
Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by spudnic · 2002-01-01 10:42 · Score: 1

Furthermore, what is an AltGr key?

Please excuse my stupidity, others have for years. ;)

.

--
load "linux",8,1
Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:21 · Score: 0

request that it be made open source so the source code can be plugged into linux

Are we becoming like star trek? by alen · 2002-01-01 06:24 · Score: 3, Interesting

First we have international trade and monetary agreements like nafta, european union, european common market and the upcoming north and south america trade zone. How far away are we from a one world federal union? Europe is already moving to a common legislature and and some common agencies like approving corporate mergers.

I think in the next 20 years as trade zones evolve we will see the union of trade zones until there is true free world trade. Then in our lifetimes we may see the start of a common world government.

Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:33 · Score: 0

Europe (+maybe russia)
China
USA
lots of messy little countries

for at least twenty years.

Later you may see more convergence - but I will wager you'll never see empires like the USA or China give up their sovereignty.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Lispy · 2002-01-01 06:44 · Score: 1

And of course there is a southern hemisphere too.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by ozric99 · 2002-01-01 06:50 · Score: 1

I think in the next 20 years as trade zones evolve we will see the union of trade zones until there is true free world trade. Then in our lifetimes we may see the start of a common world government.
And no doubt all of our 'sell to the lowest common denominator' tabloids (Daily Mail, The Sun, etc) will be calling for less integration with "planet earth"... We don't want all those pesky earthlings invading our country, taking our jobs, women and beer do we?
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by hey · 2002-01-01 07:18 · Score: 1

According to Star Trek the U.S. goes metric some time. Will that happen in our lifetimes?
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:18 · Score: 0

Then in our lifetimes we may see the start of a common world government.

That's why the US don't care 'bout the UN and pressing poor countries to vote against an international courthouse?

Those things are important, but a 'one world federal union' will make no sense until aliens are landing, IMHO.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:28 · Score: 0

If you are too stupid to notice that this was exactly how Roman Empire turned into junkyard of Europe then it is your problem dude.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:36 · Score: 0

"Although America had changed much, it still hadn't adopted the metric system."
-Kurt Vonnegut, Welcome to Monkey House

(I think that's right at least.)
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Cato · 2002-01-01 09:37 · Score: 2

I've just read Non-Zero, by Robert Wright, which explains how the size of groupings has grown over the millenia (from hunter-gatherer bands to villages, chiefdoms, kingdoms and now nation states) - this is all driven by the benefits of cooperating with other groups for the purposes of hunting, farming, trade, etc, and by the need to defend or attack others by allying with nearby groups. His approach is to apply game theory (zero-sum vs. non-zero sum games) and a scientific outlook to explaining the big picture of history - as someone who hated history at school for its arbitrariness, I find this 'unified theory' approach very appealing. See www.nonzero.org for the author's website, which includes excerpts from most chapters.

The nation state is a relatively recent invention (about 500 years old) - since there are various free trade areas that are similar to the earlier stages of what is now the European Union (e.g. the Gulf Cooperation Council is a free-trade area that plans to have a single currency in 2010), it's not unreasonable to expect many nation states to be subsumed into something close to a 'world government'. Clearly this is something that must be done right (a despotic world government would be far worse than a similar national government, which is normally removed indirectly or directly by competition from freer nations that develop much faster), but some form of closer world governance (not necessarily a government) is probably essential to combat bioterrorism (e.g. alliances for highly detailed investigations into bioterror suspects), global warming, slave trading, abuse of workers, etc.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by mgblst · 2002-01-01 10:53 · Score: 1

What countries do today will make a big impact on one world government. So, the US had better start joining with other countries, before the EU becomes the main focus of world leadership.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:36 · Score: 0

The EU is not only a trade zone. It is more like a
federate state without a elected central
government. Well the EU-Commision is something
like a government.

Also I think even if we have a couple of trade
zones on this planet they couldn't be merged like
european countries, because their economy is too
different. Compare South America and the EU and
you could clearly see that, a merger won't work
for a long time.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by spanky555 · 2002-01-01 13:34 · Score: 1

Ugh. That's crazy. What the world doesn't need is a world government. The EU is *already* starting to show signs of oppressive behavior, and they don't have the monopoly that a world government would have.

Britain has the right idea trying to keep their head out of that noose. And the U.S. would be crazy to enter into any kind of EU or world government relationship - in fact, we should withdraw from the UN as soon as possible. The UN is an absolute farce, and lately has been nothing but a podium for every teapot dictator on the planet with a beef with the "imperialist" U.S.

Personally, I think we should adopt a policy of "benign neglect" when it comes to other countries. George Washington, I believe, was one of the founding fathers who warned against entanglements with other countries. "Benign neglect" would mean just that - no aid, unless it was privately raised and distributed (Red Cross), no propping up of governments we like to get/keep oil flowing - no engaging in war, unless it was a direct attack (Pearl Harbor, WTC/Pentagon attacks, for example), regardless of the injustices that are going on.

Not only would this save us tons of money, it would also prompt us to explore alternative sources of energy, which would result in no other country being able to control our industries. It would also, and this is the most important: it would give all the dumbasses out there no more ammo to use against us...for example, every stupid little Islamic paper blames US for an economic embargo on Iraq that could easily be lifted.

A world government would be terrible in taxes, too: the UN has already displayed an interest in being able to tax individuals within countries. This means that you would not only be paying local, state, federal, social security, and medicare taxes, you'd also be paying UN taxes.

And any rights you have as a citizen under the Constitution of the United States - well, you can just throw them out the window. All this talk about Ashcroft "shredding the Constitution" will be laughable compared to what a world government will do to the Constitution. There are very good reasons for having sovereign nations.

I suggest you adopt a "wait-and-see" attitude when it comes to the EU and whether we have any business being part of it. I suspect time will prove me right - we may even end up fighting to liberate countries from the EU at some future point. Whenever someone suggest we need to be more like Europe, I always chuckle and go over in my head just how great Europe was that someone like Hitler could nearly run the whole affair if it wasn't for us. Europe also produced Napoleon and Mussolini...I wouldn't be so quick to step in the same steps as Europe, and I can understand why Britain wants to hold back, too.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 14:27 · Score: 0

I would like to think we are but can see we are not. The UN/ EU/ US all of one perpose. that is to make mony, portect the people who make mony, creat markets for mony. This is no way to creat a world goverment. The little guy(Country, regions, etc.) is left out or used soleing for the groth of other guys(Countrys, regions, etc). And the all mighty doller is the sole reason for doing somethings and not doeing others.

With a world govemnet thier would be no cost for anything. To test this out try paying your slelf for a job from your own pocket. You would have the movment of resoures but cost wold not be an issue. Mony would not be an issue.

Now the reasion I don't belive we will become anything like star trek. we don't have a common goal. In star trek it is to explore. Our goal now is to sale/buy shit. Of course if we did move all our resourcese to the exploration of space it would greatly help out the world(Chian of demand, you need a rocket that needs parts that needs people, people need food, food needs farmers, so on forever) Of couse any goal the would could take apon would work. I dought any nation would put pople first(houseing, food, education) and economics last with out something therating their existance(if there is I wont to live their). Economics are not as important as goverments say.{10 people makeing 1000, is the same as 10 givein house/tranpertation etc/basic life giveing stuff. The therroy that some will work(more mony), some will learn(why not don't need mony), some will do nothing(it would be such small dent in sociaty that it would not matter)}

But then I could just be talking out my ass. And everything will end the same eventuly. What will we do when thier is nothing else to be sold(all markets are saturated/ no resources/ no one wants anything). Wont happend soon but in 200 years is might.

001100001100001111

Forgive spelling :-)
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 15:02 · Score: 0

Star Trek was actually supposed to be a socalist utopia. There was no currency at all, and man had 'evolved' past greed and desire for power (yet flew around in heavily armed battleships patrolling their empire supposeldy for the sake of scientific research...)

The only people who bucked the system and worried about money and profit was the filthy subhuman races like the Ferengi, an obvious anti-semitic stereotype.

In short, Roddenbury had some crazy ideas and it's best not to connect them too closely to reality.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by spanky555 · 2002-01-01 17:14 · Score: 1

...but I will wager you'll never see empires like the USA or China give up their sovereignty.

Well, I don't care what China ends up doing, but here's to hoping the U.S. never hands over its sovereignty. All will have been for naught, because no world government's Constitution will ever approximate what U.S. citizens enjoy, esp. if that world government grows out of the EU or UN models - it's bound to be an oppressive socialist state that does not recognize full freedom of speech (well, besides things like yelling fire in a crowded theater) and, most importantly, the right to keep and bear arms. George Orwell, call your office.
Re:Are we becoming like star trek? by Cato · 2002-01-01 20:43 · Score: 2

The US and all other industrialised countries are highly interdependent with poorer countries, for trade reasons and more importantly because technology and suicide terrorism has made it possible for terrorists to inflict huge casualties on developed countries at a very low cost. Read www.nonzero.org - the book on which this site is based was written before Sept 11, and included the prediction that by 2020 a terrorist will be able to kill 50,000 people in a Western city using bioterrorism. Because we are so interdependent with developing countries, we simply have to pay attention to reducing the pool of disaffected haters of the US and other developing countries - only by reducing the support for terrorism will we reduce the frequency of such acts. Of course, you also need to go after the terrorists themselves, but in a way that doesn't further increase their support (see the essay about how many Afghan civilian casualties are acceptable in US eyes...).

By the way, Britain is part of the EU and is going to join the Euro in the next few years - we have no alternative really, given that inward investment is already beginning to divert to the Euro zone for economic reasons. I don't think it makes any sense for the US to join the EU, but it's quite possible that NAFTA will deepen to become somewhat like the EU, and perhaps add Latin American members as well.

Sovereign nations were invented about 500 years ago - before that, we had city states. There's no reason why they can't be (largely) superseded by larger groupings, though IMO the nation state will survive in some form for a long time, as part of supranational groupings. The protection of human rights in the US comes from the constitution, but also from the courts throwing out unconstitutional laws (which doesn't seem to be happening with recent anti-terrorism legislation). The EU has its own Human Rights legislation and a court dedicated to such cases - by joining the EU and adopting this legislation, the UK (which has no written constitution) has actually improved the human rights position for its citizens. I'm not a big fan of the EU (it tends to be overly bureaucratic, typical 'big government') but it is economically sensible and overall is doing a reasonable job.

Re:Suck it hard! by core10k · 2002-01-01 06:24 · Score: 0

Holy shit! That's the Euro symbol? How come it's showing on my computer, I'm using the default Windows 98 fonts and common sense dictates that I shouldn't be...

Anyways, it's nice to see John Carmack get the respect and recognition he deserves.

--
Go Kathryn Thurber!

I hope it works! by Martigan80 · 2002-01-01 06:24 · Score: 1, Interesting

I realy hope this currency unification will help. But I have a feeling it will also do harm, for instance in a couple of years Italy will not be able to make some "trademark" wines because the EU is shifting production locations for all countries involved.

--
This SIG pulled due to lack of funding. (This damn war is costing too much!)

It's actually... by root_42 · 2002-01-01 06:26 · Score: 2

...hex 0xA4 or 164 decimal. And it's not really ASCII but it's part of the ISO 8859-15 character set. That's also what you've got to tell all your X11 applications. And you must have ISO 8859-15 aware fonts installed, which is the case with recent Linux distribution (e.g. SuSE 7.3 is fully Euro enabled).

--
[--- PGP key and more on http://www.root42.de ---]

Different versions of the Euro... by wavecentral · 2002-01-01 06:26 · Score: 3, Interesting

Interestingly enough, each member of the EU has a series of euro coins for their own countries. Sort of like how the US has produced quarters for different states. It's quite nice and still perserves the autonomy.

Also, an interesting note, is that the EU states will still need to produce their own stamps but put them in the EURO currency pricing, which will be nice for collectors and more autonomy.

FYI, I was over in Germany for three weeks and spoke to a couple of folks about how they viewed the EURO. Alot of the older folks were worried about how non-assest items will be valued. For example, appraisals. Something that use to be appraised for 5.500 DM, will it be assessed at 2,811 EUROS come a couple months down the road?

Re:Different versions of the Euro... by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 06:56 · Score: 2

How does it preserve autonomy? It lulls people into a perception that the currency is 'local' to their country; nothing more.

The euro means the economies of the member states are regulated as a whole, not individually.

I, for one, am thankful I got the opportunity to spend some Pesetas and Escudos, and Punts before the Euro was brought in. The different currencies really were one of the beautiful and wonderful things about travelling through europe.

Now, of course, the euro WILL make travelling easier.
Re:Different versions of the Euro... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:02 · Score: 0

quite nice?
stupid politicians put our stupid king on our (belgian) side !
Re:Different versions of the Euro... by j7953 · 2002-01-01 10:57 · Score: 2

Interestingly enough, each member of the EU has a series of euro coins for their own countries. Sort of like how the US has produced quarters for different states. It's quite nice and still perserves the autonomy.

Yes. I got some euro coins in december already (so-called "starter kits"), and they all show "German" symbols on the backside: an acorn leaf, the Brandenburg Gate, and the Bundesadler (federal eagle). The front is the same all over europe.

I had hoped to see at least some "foreign" coins in the starter kit. But on the other hand, now I am looking forward to getting some of the other coins over time.

Something that use to be appraised for 5.500 DM, will it be assessed at 2,811 EUROS

I guess you meant 5500 DM, not 5 point 5 DM? Yes, that's now 2812.11 EUR. But what's wrong about that? Over time, things will adapt to the new currency, e.g. the appraisal might become 2800 EUR or 2850 EUR.

One nice effect is that most of the tresholds for taxes etc. have been adapted to nice-looking numbers to the benefit of the taxpayer (at least in Germany).

--
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
Re:Different versions of the Euro... by ricudis · 2002-01-01 13:11 · Score: 1

It's actually interesting how they tried to solve some 'incompaibility' problems between_european countries, mainly due to language pluralism.
All EU countries use the latin alphabet, except for Greece that has its own one.
Euro bank notes are identical in all euro currency zone countries, and the word 'euro' is typed in both latin and Greek alphabets. They are decorated with amazingly neutral designs, avoiding any resemblance to any national currency - they have bridges printed on the one side and buildings on the other (supposedly symbolizing the cooperation and communication of the european union construct), but they came out rather flat and tasteless, in my opinion.
Coins, on the other side, have one common side and one 'national' side, allowing the use of national symbols/logotypes on the national side, and also accounting for the fact that the 1/100th of the currency is not called 'cent' in all european countries.
They expect to have some problems arising from the fact that some people won't accept perfectly valid Euro coins just based on the fact that the 'national' side is different.
On a sidenote, having a currency that equals roughly 0.8$, makes the use of e-bay more economical - you pretend bidding in $, and you always have some money left :>
Re:Different versions of the Euro... by rbeattie · 2002-01-01 13:45 · Score: 2

About traveling, basically you're fucking nuts.

You LIKED getting ripped off at change booths as you entered and left each country? Getting nailed with both a fee and percentage? You liked getting stuck with spare coins from one country that no-one will change in any other country and thus is transformed instantly into stamped scrap metal? Or do you like going from the Drachma with it's low-numbered system to the Lira where a 1,000,000 liras is about $500? You'd be traveling through a country and just about get a hang of the money just as you're leaving - but not before getting ripped off by any and every small merchant and taxi driver who knows you don't know the local system. This appeals to you somehow? Or admit it, you just liked the pretty pictures. Ooooh, gee! Look! The Francs look like they're colored with crayons. Golly.

Fuck that. Travelling through Europe will be much better without this hassle. Get back to the real world, hey?

-Russ

--
Me
Re:Different versions of the Euro... by vkt-tje · 2002-01-02 01:56 · Score: 1

They should have put that cute little princess on them.
Oh damn, that image was created before Elizabeth was born.
/me is no monarchist!

--

120 chars is not enough!
Re:Different versions of the Euro... by yerricde · 2002-01-02 05:29 · Score: 1

I guess [by 5.500 DM] you meant 5500 DM, not 5 point 5 DM?

Different countries have different conventions. For example, in some countries, a million times is written 3,141,592.65 while in others it's 3.141.592,65 . Scientific papers often use non-breaking spaces and a period: 3141592.65 . In Windows, try Start > Settings > Control Panel > Regional Settings.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?
Re:Different versions of the Euro... by j7953 · 2002-01-02 06:23 · Score: 2

I knew that, but the original poster wrote "5.500 DM" and "2,811 EUROS," i.e. he mixed the two conventions. That's why I asked.

--
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)

That's because ... by Tim+Ward · 2002-01-01 06:28 · Score: 1

... stories from Ireland and the UK are likely to be written in English. The /. audience includes a good number of Americans who would probably prefer a story in English to one in Italian or Dutch or whatever.

Pictures of euro coins and notes by kingdon · 2002-01-01 06:29 · Score: 1

There is various information at eu.int and the European Common Bank site, including pictures of the coins (both by themselves and in publicity-photo type poses), various policies (such as how you say "euro" and "euros" in various languages), and more.

Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by MosesJones · 2002-01-01 06:31 · Score: 4, Insightful

Is one answer, there are others, our economy is out of step with that of Europe, we have very different tax rules.

But IMO as a Brit the real reason is that we hate the fact that someone else came up with a better idea. Personally I can't wait to use the Euro in the UK as then it will make getting a mortgage or a loan from A.N. Other country much easier and I can pick the rates in a much more competative way.

The next few years should be great for the UK as we aren't going into recession (touch wood) so we'll hopefully steal a march. We could steal a much bigger march as the strongest fish in the Euro.

--
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi

Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by SerpentMage · 2002-01-01 06:56 · Score: 2, Interesting

Me as a German and having lived in the UK, I thank God that there are Brits in the EU. Because without the Brits the EU would have gone to hell in hand-basket. Sure the Brits sometimes challenge too much. But very often the Brits are a sounding board of reason. If the EU were mainly run by Germany and France there would be NO EU!!!!

So maybe this with the Brits sitting it out may be a funny thing. But eventually things will be different. Until then the EU would do well to listen more often to the Brits...

--

"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:14 · Score: 0

wow. that that could be the case never even occured to me. i always think of us as opposing Europe because because. interesting.
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by Jabes · 2002-01-01 08:45 · Score: 1

The above post should be +1 Insightful. Well, it certainly was for me. I am a UK resident and a European advocate and have always thought that my fellow countrymen have been too sceptical and should embrace Europe.

We can accomplish much more together than apart.

However, I always find it interesting to see how our European cousins see us, especially when it is not obvious because we're too busy arguing about Europe amongst ourselves!
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by SerpentMage · 2002-01-01 11:46 · Score: 4, Funny

Again let me re-iterate that I am German who is a French wanna-be. And I love my EU counterparts with all heart... BUT the following could be said.

Well if the EU were a vehicle and the individual members in the car we'd have the following:

1) Germans steering the vehicle saying "We are Germans our cars are meant for high speed and we can handle the curves. It vill work alvays."
2) Italians stepping on the gas peddle saying "Speed is in our blood, faster is better"
3) French every now and then stepping on the clutch in full speed saying "Philosphically we are the cultural backbone of the union and hence stepping on the clutch makes it possible to assess whether or not the car is driving in the right direction on the correct road in the proper weather conditions that are best for fostering a cooperative system of interacting people at a higher plane of conditioning" (if you understand that you must be French ;) ) 4) The spaniard would constantly be fiddling with the rear view mirror and asking "Do I look good, is my hair in the right order?"
5) The Finn would twiddle with the onboard GPS system equipped with GPRS, RDS, CD, MP3 and proudly say "Hey guys no idea where we are, but guess what I just sent an SMS to my buddy in Sweden stating we are somewhere in Europe"
6) The Greek would be relegated to the trunk of the car and while the car is parked will have changed summer tires to winter tires, filled the gas tank, and checked the oil. Afterwards the rest of the troup asks why the Greek did not refill the windshield wiper fluid and moan at how critical it was that they have a filled windshield wiper fluid tank.
7) The Irish will be neatly dressed and organized and ready to rock and roll. But then moan out load that the Dutch is smoking pot beside him.
8) And finally the Brit seeing this mess of people decides to join the bunch "because it seems like the right thing to do and we would not want to stand out of the crowd". But realizing the mess takes control of the key turns off the car "yelling there is a bloody curve that cannot be handled at 300 KPH" and yet everybody looks blankly at the Brit as if the Brit came from another planet...

Sorry for not including the others, but I ran out of time...

--

"You can't make a race horse of a pig"
"No," said Samuel, "but you can make very fast pig"
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 12:33 · Score: 1

I like it! But surely the Spaniard would be sleeping in preparedness for another great night out. In many ways, your post shows just how f*cking COOL Europe is, so many amazing places to go and people to meet. It seems crazy that the ECB should be in Germany though. German industry is legendary, but the UK leads the world in market-making - London is SO obviously the financial centre of Europe. I live in London, have lived in Paris and grew up in the USA (born in England though). I predict that Europe will once again take pre-eminence in the world during this new century, there's just so much potential here.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by spectecjr · 2002-01-01 13:30 · Score: 2

The next few years should be great for the UK as we aren't going into recession (touch wood) so we'll hopefully steal a march.

According to every single one of my friends and family members, the UK is already *in* a recession. Which is why I'm trying to find a job in the US instead of just giving up and going home.

Simon

--
Coming soon - pyrogyra
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by sql*kitten · 2002-01-01 21:24 · Score: 2

But IMO as a Brit the real reason is that we hate the fact that someone else came up with a better idea. Personally I can't wait to use the Euro in the UK as then it will make getting a mortgage or a loan from A.N. Other country much easier and I can pick the rates in a much more competative way.

The problem with that argument is that the Euro makes no economic sense at all, it's a purely political decision. Look at Greece and Germany: one's economy is more about agriculture and tourism, ones is about manufacturing and heavy industry. Can a single monetary policy suit both?

Germany's unemployment is rising, and they are going into recession. What's the Bundesbank doing to help? Nothing, there is no Bundesbank any more! Low interest rates are fuelling inflation in Ireland (which is in trouble with the EU over its deficit) and Holland - where are their central banks? There aren't any!

What good does a low mortgage rate do you, Mr Andersen, if you don't have a job?

In Britain, we have a hard enough time setting an economic policy that even worked in both the North and South of England. Look at the events in Argentina, that is a graphic illustration of what happens when a weak currency is forced into alignment with a strong one.

The ECB is going to be faced with a choice sooner or later, a monetary policy that favors Germany and France (leading to rebellion in the South) or one which tries to compromise, leading to rebellion in the North. But we shall see.

We could steal a much bigger march as the strongest fish in the Euro.

That simply isn't true. For example, the UK has an independent voice at the IMF and World Bank - all 12 Euro nations share a single seat. The UK is the 4th largest economy in the world - no one suggests that Canada needs to merge with the US to survive, do they?

The Euro is a political tool for an eventual federal superstate. Whether you feel that would be a good or bad thing, you must at least admit it.
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:54 · Score: 1

Low interest rates are fuelling inflation in Ireland (which is in trouble with the EU over its deficit)
Wrong. In trouble over the expansionary budgets of late. Ireland is operating a large surplus and has been for years.
Re:Xenophobia and pig headedness ? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 20:56 · Score: 0

The reason Britain should not join the Euro is because your economy is out of step with the Continent's. Your economy is doing fine while the other Europeans are in recession and will soon be doing stimulus policies. Why should you be in lockstep with another country's policies?

It's U+20AC EURO by Tim+Ward · 2002-01-01 06:31 · Score: 1

It isn't in ASCII.

the coin route by Stone+Rhino · 2002-01-01 06:32 · Score: 2, Insightful

Its interesting to see that they issued a 1 euro coin from the start, as canada does with its dollar, rather than attempting to introduce a coin later, as the united states has unsuccessfully tried to do again and again with first the silver dollar and then the golden dollar.
Since 1 euro coins are likely to see more circulation than larger denominations, it makes sense to use coins, because coins will last longer and so have lower replacement costs.

--

Remember, there were no nuclear weapons before women were allowed to vote.

Re:the coin route by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 06:58 · Score: 2

Regarding the 'unsuccesful' attempt to release a coin in the US.
To release a $1 coin successfully, all you have to do is... drumrolll please... make coins, and stop making $1 bills. Period. Instant success.

Silver dollar? Golden dollar? What were these? Actually putting $1 worth of gold in the mix for the coin? Or are you referring to something else.
Re:the coin route by Vegeta99 · 2002-01-01 07:11 · Score: 1

the Silver dollar is usually referring to a large 90% (10% copper) silver coin with the head of the Statue of Liberty and an Eagle on the back. There's also the Morgan dollar and the Susan B. Anthony dollar, which looks way too much like a quarter. The gold dollar was that Sacagawea dollar that they released in 2000. It's not gold at all, it's brass, and it's small. Kinda popular, but I haven't seen one in about a year.
Re:the coin route by Jonavin · 2002-01-01 08:07 · Score: 1

Canada did not introduce the $1 coin from the start. There are still plenty of $1 bills in circulation. They just stopped printing $1 (and $2) bills and just produced coins.

Frankly I hating these larger coins. If you are not careful you can have $100 worth of it in your car's coin tray before you know it. SO the cash just goes "missing".
Re:the coin route by Deviant · 2002-01-01 08:23 · Score: 1

Yes, but they know that the political basklash would be severe. People here have never had a prevelent $1 coin currency and like the $1 bill. I am amoung them. I live in Buffalo, NY about 20 minutes from Niagara Falls, ON and I personally dispise the Canadian $1 and $2 coins. It is quite the pain, they do not go in a walet and I personally don't like pockets full of change. I have friends who worked as cashiers during the introduction of the last $1 coin here and people would go out of their way to request bills instead of them as change. It might be better for the government because of their longevity but as far as I can see that is the only upside, and it isn't one that I personally care about, nor do many other Americans.
Re:the coin route by BluBrick · 2002-01-01 09:02 · Score: 2

To release a $1 coin successfully, all you have to do is... drumrolll please... make coins, and stop making $1 bills. Period. Instant success.

That's exactly how it happened here in .au with the 1 and 2 dollar coins, and surprise, surprise... It works!

That's also what we did with the plastic notes (that's right, our "paper" money is actually printed on plastic film). No biggie. Numismatists took care of keeping some of the better condition paper notes out of circulation, and the reserve bank took care of the rest. It's all still legal tender, but I haven't seen a paper note for about 3 years now.

Changing the physical implementation of currency is easy. Changing the currency itself would be a major PITA. I've never experienced it myself, being far too young to even know about money when .au went from pounds to dollars in 1966.

--
Ahh - My eye!
The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
Re:the coin route by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 09:27 · Score: 2

Yes.. I'm Canadian, I was there....
Yes, it's a pain. Sure, everyone whined about it. Sure people say 'Look at all this change'.

The reality, though.. is this.
Everyone gets by; it's not really an inconvenience, and it saves the country money.
It's mostly psychological.

Better for the government becuase of longevity? That means better for the taxpayer, as it costs less.

As for saying 'Poeple here have never had a prevalent $1 coin'.. well.. of course not. We never had one in Canada either, until the day we dropped the bill and used the Loonie.

Yes.. people would go out of their way to reqeust bills.. that's out of a neurotic compulsion to keep things the same. In the end, though, there are no more $1 bills. And lots of loonies.

As for pockets full of change.. I find I have no more or less change because of the loonie. If it's in my pocket after one transaction, it's gone at the next.
Re:the coin route by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 09:29 · Score: 2

Exactly.
It's just money, whatever form it's in.

I will say.. I do miss paper money..

I have coworkers from venezuela.. where, up until recently, there were no coins (or nobody used them). THe smallest denomination bill was worth something like a penny or two. Consequently, you tended to have huge piles of cash around.
Re:the coin route by cpt+kangarooski · 2002-01-01 10:32 · Score: 1

What? I recall that we've had plenty of medium-denomination coins. The shift towards bills, instead of things like the $20 gold coin was around a hundred years ago, however.
I like the coins, but if we did drop the $1 bill, we should definately start printing up more $2 bills to take up slack, or perhaps a $2.50 bill.
Sadly, our really large-denomination bills have pretty crappy backs; guess that's unavoidable given when they date from.

--
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Re:the coin route by Hobbex · 2002-01-01 10:48 · Score: 2

Actually nowhere do people have as much change in their pockets all the time as in the US, because merchants in America set their prices without adding VAT, so you are always paying prices like $1.08 because the advertised price was rounded to $1, wheeras elsewhere the prices are rounded off with the VAT already added. Compared to that, the move from dollar notes to coins is negligable.
Re:the coin route by spudnic · 2002-01-01 11:04 · Score: 2

That's why I don't like the $1 coins. It makes me feel like I don't have any money, just change. I know the value is the same, but it's a huge psychological difference. It devalues the dollar in the American psyche.

I could have $2 in change scattered on the floor of my bedroom, but that dollar in my wallet just feels more valuable.

.

--
load "linux",8,1
Re:the coin route by InigoMontoya(tm) · 2002-01-01 11:31 · Score: 2, Funny

In the end, though, there are no more $1 bills. And lots of loonies.

Well, that's Canada in a nutshell right there.

(ducking thrown CN tower)

Hey, it was only a joke!

InigoMontoya(tm)

--
This signature is self-referential.
Re:the coin route by weave · 2002-01-01 12:03 · Score: 2

Amen to that. I live in Delaware with no sales tax. Most prices are set in even multiples of .05. Everytime I go out of state, I end up with a pocket full of useless change and shit loads of pennies. I never have that problem in my home state.
It's a real pain.
Re:the coin route by DerekLyons · 2002-01-01 12:13 · Score: 2

Its interesting to see that they issued a 1 euro coin from the start, as canada does with its dollar, rather than attempting to introduce a coin later, as the united states has unsuccessfully tried to do again and again with first the silver dollar and then the golden dollar.

Actually the US has had a dollar coin in circulation as public tender for decades if not centuries. The issue isn't the goverment, but lack of public acceptance.

Another poster writes:
Regarding the 'unsuccesful' attempt to release a coin in the US.
To release a $1 coin successfully, all you have to do is... drumrolll please... make coins, and stop making $1 bills. Period. Instant success.

Right, if you choose to ignore the extensive economic costs of changing * millions * of cash handling systems across the country, from something as humble as the cash drawer at my small store to extensive installations in Mints, Amusement Parks, Grocery stores and other places that handles coins by the ton everyday.
Re:the coin route by epsalon · 2002-01-01 12:16 · Score: 2

Here in Israel, we have 10NIS ~ $2.70 coins, that were introduced several years ago. There is no problem using these larger denomination coins. You don't keep your change in your pocket, you keep it in your wallet because it's real money. Then, you can always pay with a coin.

--

Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
Re:the coin route by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:16 · Score: 0

Stop printing $1 bills? I'm sure that strippers have conviced the politicians that this would be a bad idea. It's much easier for them to hold a bunch of bills in their g-string than coins.
Re:the coin route by Tachys · 2002-01-01 14:05 · Score: 2

In Australia they have a $2 dollar coin that is actually smaller then their $1 dollar coin.

This is annoying because you don't think you have much money because it is small change, but find they a $2 coins so you are actually rich
Re:the coin route by Fortuna+Wolf · 2002-01-01 14:45 · Score: 1

I have a pile of 30 dollar coins sitting in front of me,
Its somehow more stylish to pull a few gold coins out of a pouch and slap them on the counter.

--
Disclaimer:The "Human" attached to this account is unresponsible for anything unless it wants responsibility.
Re:the coin route by Prior+Restraint · 2002-01-01 15:18 · Score: 1

To release a $1 coin successfully, all you have to do is... drumrolll please... make coins, and stop making $1 bills. Period. Instant success.

That won't happen anytime soon. The company that supplies material (I've heard it's linen, not paper) for our currency would lose the lion-share of its business. Any company with such a massive government contract surely has a powerful lobby. They can convince Congress to try the dual-prong approach (it's only a temporary dip in business). Then, it can sit back and watch Americans' interia kill the dollar coin.
Re:the coin route by RSevrinsky · 2002-01-01 19:11 · Score: 1

Minor nit -- the 10 shekel piece is actually worth closer to $2.30 (and falling).

When I first moved to Israel, I tried to buy a Snapple with a 50 NIS bill ($11.60 at the time). The shopkeeper refused to accept the 50 and forced me to go change it elsewhere. I was floored by the attitude that the 50 was a "big bill" (probably because of the number "50"), even though I highly doubt any merchant in NY would have given me a hard time for paying with a $10 bill.

- Richie
Re:the coin route by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 19:23 · Score: 0

humm, I have 200 of those gold dollar coins sitting in a box on my desk right now.......from a very creative Christmas present
Re:the coin route by epsalon · 2002-01-01 22:17 · Score: 1

Actually, that is illegal. According to Israeli law, a merchant may not refuse to accept valid currency. He must have complied, even if you had payed with a 200 NIS bill (which are quite rare). I had no problem purchasing goods worth less than 5NIS with a 200NIS bill. The merchant didn't like it very much, but complied with the law.

--

Make even shorter URLs - 8LN.org
Re:the coin route by thogard · 2002-01-02 00:57 · Score: 1

Where NZ has a larger $2 coin and a smaller $1 coin. The results are often confused kiwi's working in cafes for a few days.
Re:the coin route by gorilla · 2002-01-02 08:12 · Score: 2

Right, if you choose to ignore the extensive economic costs of changing * millions * of cash handling systems across the country,
Almost everyone doesn't need to do any changes. For those few who do, the costs are easily countered by the cost of maintaining bill readers on vending machines, which are very unreliable compared to coin readers.
Re:the coin route by festers · 2002-01-02 09:58 · Score: 1

No, to successfully get people to use those $1 coins, you need to convince most US males and anyone who doesn't carry a change purse that the extra weight in their pockets is actually a *good* thing. Why should I carry around more coins in my pockets when the bills fit nice and neatly in my wallet? Thanks, but I think time would be better spend on improving the paper to make it last longer.

--

-------
"Every artist is a cannibal, every poet is a thief."
Re:the coin route by Brendan+Byrd · 2002-01-02 10:45 · Score: 1

Hmmm...reminds me of hemp and DuPont. Go find yourself a copy of "The Emperor Has No Clothes".

--
Zodiac Survey
Re:the coin route by DerekLyons · 2002-01-02 14:05 · Score: 2

Almost everyone doesn't need to do any changes.

Oh? Only those businesses that don't handle cash.. Oh, right, that is the vast majority of businesses.

For those few who do, the costs are easily countered by the cost of maintaining bill readers on vending machines, which are very unreliable compared to coin readers

Oh? The cost of replacing my cashboxes will countered by reducing maintenance costs on something I don't own? Oh, right, you don't realize that there are businesses other than vending machines...

why did they have to come up with a new symbol? by steve_l · 2002-01-01 06:32 · Score: 0, Flamebait

I know it is the first new currency for ages, but why did they have to invent a new currency symbol which isnt on US keyboards, older european keyboards or existing fonts installed on systems and printers.

There are umpteen little symbols on the normal keyboard, and they could have used a few letters as they have done in the past "SFr", "DM" to give us "e$" or something like [e500] that would even avoid all those mime encoding errors you get with UK pounds where £ maps to %163 and the currency value gets screwed up.

sigh.

-stv

Re:why did they have to come up with a new symbol? by vkt-tje · 2002-01-02 02:11 · Score: 1

The symbol has some more problems: officially only the circular symbol can be used. But that doesn't fit in any characterset. It is simply too wide.

They missed one other very big chance while creating the Euro: The nominal value of "one Euro" is simply too big. They could just have well had chosen some smaller value to be "one Euro" than we would never have to worry about decimal values. Simply integers. A vey big chance to make a programmers life so much easier and those stupid "economicans" missed bigg time. Boohoohoo :(

We all know why the Euro had to be this big: it could not be that one Euro was much less than one dollar...

--

120 chars is not enough!

Re:Euro Snotting! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:32 · Score: 0

WIPO YOU FAT BASTARD

Why are you never on AIM?

I've been waiting for you to sign on for a week!

You fat son of a bitch. SIGN THE FUCK ON AIM!

How does devaluing happen now?? by thesolo · 2002-01-01 06:33 · Score: 2

I just have one question about this switch--since they are all using the same currency, how does the currency become devalued in one country?

All of these countries have different values to their money; some of them are currently very strong, and others are currently very weak. So what happens to your Euro when you go from say Ireland to Italy? Do they just inflate/deflate the price of goods/services to compensate?

I'm honestly not sure how it will work, since there is no longer a currency exchange between these countries. Is it just me, or does this seem like it's not the brightest idea on the surface??

Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by ostiguy · 2002-01-01 06:37 · Score: 2

All of these countries do not have different values to their currencies - exchange rates have been fixed against the Euro since jan 1 99, IIRC. The Euro is supposed to help price transparency, ie, comparing apples in italy to apples in france.

ostiguy
Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by markj02 · 2002-01-01 06:43 · Score: 2

It's no different from the different states in the US: people, goods, and services can move freely among different states, but their laws and the economy are still different.
Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by theMAGE · 2002-01-01 06:44 · Score: 1

It's the some problem as taking your New York dollars to Iowa.
Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by tjb · 2002-01-01 07:08 · Score: 1

Yup, that's my worry too.

Unifying the currency before unifying the individual economies and the government debt loads seems like a bad idea. It may not matter so much for the bigger/more-stable players, but for Italy or Spain I can forsee problems as they will want to devalue to ease debt burdens and increase competitiveness while the more stable economies will block any effort at devaluation in order to avoid inflation.

Despite the cries of Europeans to the contrary, this *is* going to create a winner-take-all situation, with Germany (likely) being the winner. There is an inequality between the economies and being locked into the same currency as Germany and France will cause rampant deflation in the less developed economies as they struggle to compete, much like how Argentina screwed themselves by locking their currency to the US dollar and keeping it that way (and refusing to devalue despite the urgings, of, oh, everybody else).

As someone else mentioned above, there is also the problem of job competition. WHile in theory, anybody from any Euro country can move to any other Euro country, in practice its not going to happen that way. It doesn't even happen that way in the US, where everybody speaks the same language. Try telling one of the laid off Lucent engineers living in the posh suburb of Holmdel NJ that you've got the perfect job for them in some backwater town in Mississippi (or vice-versa). The response, I assure you, will be negative for a number of reasons, namely culture difference and the fact that they will have to take a salary cut. And while the lower salary may represent greater purchasing power in Mississippi than their high one did in the shadow of NYC, not everything gets locally adjusted (cars, for instance, I grew up in rural PA and while $40K/yr there was theoretically equivalent to $60K/yr here in NJ, the lower salary doesn't buy a Mercedes, though it might get a bigger house than the $60K salary in NJ) and people, in general don't like pay cuts.

Now take that and apply it to even greater economic and cultural inequality in Europe, and I can see some real problems ahead.

Tim
Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by Derwen · 2002-01-01 09:10 · Score: 2

It's no different from the different states in the US: people, goods, and services can move freely among different states, but their laws and the economy are still different.
Not, alas, the laws.
If I am resident in, say Kansas, and wanted in, say, Texas for an act that is illegal in Texas but not Kansas, I will not be deported by the good officials of Kansas.
However if I live in Britain, France or Ireland I can be deported from there for something not illegal there (such as criticising the Church) to another eu state such as Greece or Italy.
It should be noted that no one in any european state voted for such measures - but then most Germans were against the Euro currency. Europe is separated from democracy by more than the odd chad :-/
- Derwen

--
http://fsfeurope.org/
Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by cpt+kangarooski · 2002-01-01 10:16 · Score: 1

Well, not entirely. If you did something that was illegal in TX while in TX (or otherwise in certain forms of contact with TX) you may be subject to TX law. It's fairly thorny.

--
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:47 · Score: 1

However if I live in Britain, France or Ireland I can be deported from there for something not illegal there (such as criticising the Church) to another eu state such as Greece or Italy.
At least in Ireland's case, this is absolute rubbish.
Re:How does devaluing happen now?? by psicic · 2002-01-02 15:32 · Score: 2

However if I live in Britain, France or Ireland I can be deported from there for something not illegal there (such as criticising the Church) to another eu state such as Greece or Italy.

From Ireland at least, you would not be deported. IANAL, but I do know that Ireland will not usually extradite on acts that aren't crimes in Ireland, reserves the right not to extradite if the potential punishment is too harsh by standards of Irish law or if there is no chance of 'due process' and will most certainly use extradition cases to their full political potential. They will also not extradite if there is a possiblity of the violation of the human rights of an individual or their rights provided for under the Irish constitution.
That's why there are growing murmurs of dissent in Ireland with regards to the European arrest warrant. This effectively allows unilateral extradition at a federal(re: Union-wide) level. We don't have an extradition treaty with many countries - including the USA - for many well-articulated(by political pundits) reasons...Now all of a sudden extradition warrants can be 'handed-down' to member states?

It all reeks of efforts at a political unification that no population was ever polled on(yes we did vote to join the then EEC - an economic community). Ironically, I have no doubt that Ireland would join a political unity given a few provisos; Primarially that the politico's power-houses in Europe didn't get their way and dismiss Ireland as merely a peripheral concern constantly. But pehaps the people of Ireland and Europe aren't worth the concern of consultation. Perhaps a truely democratic meeting out of power would disrupt plans to centralise power...perhaps I'm straying too far off-topic and treading nervously on the boarders of being anti-EU.
In my opinion, a federal Commission(that's Senate to all you non-EU people out there) should be based on a system similar to the current one where the bigger countries would get two commissioners while the smaller countries would get one. Which mould the European parliament should be cast in is a little more involved and there are many arguments out there for the vying opinions. Hey, I'm open to convincing.
I'm just a little concerned. When we were presented with the Amsterdam Treaty, the anti-EU lobby said we were eroding our(Ireland's) policy of military neutrality - our politicans assured us that the purpose of the treaty was to allow for bureaucratic change at EU level and the parts regarding the military were vitually inconsequential for the Irish state - we would remain neutral, not participate in an EU army without a referendum and so on. Since we voted in the Amsterdam Treaty, we have pledged 1,100 troops to the EU rapid reaction force(a substantial part of what is, truthfully, an inconsequential army) without consulting the Irish people and we have been upgraded from 'neutral', thru 'former-neutral' into the ranks of 'allied nation' in NATO and US military rankings.
It gets me, that's all. I know politicans lie, cheat and steal - that's what we pay them for. But it still gets me, especially with all the media-whores fawning around these people like they're heroes and heroines: Why politicans want to rewrite what the people of most member states signed up to is beyond me - why they are determined to do so without consulting the populace is verging on the fraudlant in my estimation.
(by-the-by, I would vote "Yes" to a Federal Europe but not on the grounds of the thinking of the current politicos in Europe...)

8)

--
Concrete analysis...

I don't really care about the Euro.... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:33 · Score: 0

Whether I get ripped of in Guilders or Euros doesn't really matter that much, now does it?

Re:I don't really care about the Euro.... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:30 · Score: 0

Wise words. Wise words indeed

Norway? Huh? by filtersweep · 2002-01-01 06:34 · Score: 2, Informative

Last I checked Norway was NOT on the list (and proud of it)- they didn't join the EU- probably because they can do whatever they want with just a few million people to share all that North Sea oil (they have several thousand "dollars" of oil per person sitting in reserve). The rest of the Scandanavian countries are also conspicously missing (no one actually considers Finland to be Scandanavian).

--

Those that suggest you "dance like no one is watching" really want to see you make a complete fool of yourself.

Re:Norway? Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 19:25 · Score: 0

I wonder who consideres Norway to be European.
Re:Norway? Huh? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:59 · Score: 0

No, they aren't european, they're viking ;-)

Congrats to the Brits by Ars-Fartsica · 2002-01-01 06:34 · Score: 1, Interesting

For having the brains to let the rest of Europe muck around with the Euro before they bother with it. They have the facts on their side - the Euro has drifted lower and lower with regards to the greenback since it was introduced.

Until the EU can get the Euro some value, the Brits are much better off using Sterling for a few more years.

Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:40 · Score: 0

it will probably bounce back now it's been issued.
Which is a good thing, because right now the Pound is hopelessly overvalued against the Euro - a fact that is killing our export industry.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:40 · Score: 0

inside the euro zone the euro was more stable than the deutschmark in their best times.

against the US$ it lost, but it's a normal range the mark had always had, too. remember that the USA were extremly successful in economics under clinton's government.

i know no other (important) currency which has lost more of it's value than the pound sterling in the last fifty years,
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Sanity · 2002-01-01 06:54 · Score: 2

Yeah, well done Britain, who now can't export anything as their currency is overvalued against the Euro, and who will probably end up using the Euro whether they like it or not, despite having no control over it.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by yesthatguy · 2002-01-01 06:55 · Score: 2

inside the euro zone the euro was more stable than the deutschmark in their best times.

Hmm...you think that has something to do with the fact that the prices for the Euro in the currencies of participating countries were set three years ago? It's easy for a currency to be stable if it's not allowed to fluctuate.

--
Yes! That guy!
Re:Congrats to the Brits by markj02 · 2002-01-01 06:57 · Score: 3, Insightful

So, you congratulate the Brits for being selfish and nationalistic? The irony is, of course, that the British economy and currency are in pretty sad shape. Britain isn't a wealthy empire anymore, it has become a second-rate nation. Britain only stands to gain by joining the monetary union, as many businesses might prefer to have their European offices in an English-speaking country. But until Britain adopts the Euro, it just doesn't make much sense for businesses to go there.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:01 · Score: 0

Let me see the Euro is under valued against the dollar and the pound and you like it that way? Great I like it to. Being in the Euro zone with all these other countries UK and USA products are getting slighly more expensive but guess what? The other Euro zone countries also produce a lot of these products so maybee I will buy them instead of somthing from the US/UK.

Under valueing the Euro will cause the loss of your export to Euro zone countries and increase import from Euro zone countries to you. This only helps the economy in the Euro zone countries.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:08 · Score: 0

> Britain isn't a wealthy empire anymore, it has become a second-rate nation.
Last time I checked it was a second-rate nation with the fourth-largest economy in the world (about $1,000,000,000,000 GDP)
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:12 · Score: 0

Selfish and nationalistic ?
So that is a dirty word these days ?
I mean they are Brits after all, not Germans, not Russian but Brits.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:15 · Score: 0

Selfish and nationalistic isn't very accurate. There are multiple reasons why the UK didn't join the euro. Not least of which was the economy. Upon adopting the euro many major economic decisions would be made in Europe. Given the fact that the vast majority of EU countries have a different style of economy it doesn't seem make sense to rapidly adopt a very radical economic policy.

One of the reasons the public doesn't support it is a mixture of FUD (hot political topic) and dissolution of control.

The British economy/currency is in relatively good shape at the present. The could harm it more than anything. The Euro has been greatly affected by the decline of the German economy. When the German economy rises so should the Euro. Until that happens it will be damaging to the UK.

FWIW businesses in the UK are at a half way point. Some will use the Euro and others won't.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 07:22 · Score: 2

Why do you think that? The 'issuance' is only a physical thing.. as far as money markets go, the Euro has been traded for 3 years already.

All that's happening now is that everyone will actually have Euro cash, instead of having to exchange money. Banks, it's not a problem; they've been using Euro internally for years.

This should not affect the value of the euro one way or the other.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Ars-Fartsica · 2002-01-01 07:27 · Score: 3, Insightful

Being in the Euro zone with all these other countries UK and USA products are getting slighly more expensive but guess what? The other Euro zone countries also produce a lot of these products so maybee I will buy them instead of somthing from the US/UK
Really? Name a major manufacturer of computing equipment that in the EU that is not a foreign conglomerate.
Get used to paying more for the products you really want.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by 3247 · 2002-01-01 07:27 · Score: 2

Hmm...you think that has something to do with the fact that the prices for the Euro in the currencies of participating countries were set three years ago?

The Euro has actually been fluctuating since 1999. Only the cash had strange denominations.

--
Claus
Re:Congrats to the Brits by yesthatguy · 2002-01-01 08:01 · Score: 1

As I understood it, the Euro has been fluctuating in relation to international currency, but the price of the Euro in Lire or Deutschmark was initiall set and unable to change.

--
Yes! That guy!
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:15 · Score: 0

Siemens. Olivetti. Phillips.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:15 · Score: 0

Size isn't everything, you know. Some pretty large countries are on a downwards spiral, and some pretty large countries have some pretty lousy living conditions.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:17 · Score: 0

If you have production or assembly lines in a European country your product is already in Europe and you don't have to pay import taxes. A lot of 'foreign' companies use this rule to evade import taxes and anything from computers to cars gets produced in Europe.

Being someone that reads Slashdot a lot don't you think I would notice a significant price change in Conputing equipment? The prices go up and down when they try to cut production of SD RAM's but it doesn't change a lot.

The Euro zone country's exchange rates have been fixed since 1999. The Euro has been with us since then. Nothing is changed the Euro just became more visable and the psychological border I had before I took a day trip (from Rotterdam) to Brussels (Belgium), Paris (France) or Berlin (Germany) has gone no more But I have to exchange my money before I...

BTW do you really think the raw computer components get produced in the UK / US? For example Dells assembly lines are in Ireland (guess why they are not in the UK) the parts come from Asia.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:26 · Score: 0

Do you think it was easy for the Germans to give up the German mark and central bank (which they committed to when their economy was still in much better shape)? Of for some of the smaller European nations to give up some control?
Lots of countries made sacrificies to make the Euro happen, in the hope that it will increase stability and integration in Europe. The British (along with the Danes and the Swedish) just weren't willing to make those sacrificies. Saying, "we'll join when you once our economy is down" is asking to get the benefits without paying the dues. It may be rational, it may be political reality, but it's still selfish.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by toggleflipflop · 2002-01-01 08:27 · Score: 1

I think the introduction of the physical currency will have at least a short-term effect on the value of the Euro. Here in Belgium the new prices in Euro have been invariably rounded up to a nice 10 cent multiple, even though this is supposed to be forbidden. With prices for everything going up I think there will be quite some inflation in the first weeks / months of the physical currency. I expect this to stabilize pretty soon, though.

Oh and by the way, I must agree with the Dutch: the queen Beatrix on the backside of your coins really looks awful. Even our old guy Albert looks better...
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:39 · Score: 0

If you use half the value of the pound(it's real value) it would be number 6. GDP numbers have a large fudge factor in them.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:50 · Score: 0

Its not the same as moving dollars from NY yo California. Cali and NY both have the same over-all social policies, and federal spending levels, etc. Greece and Germany are far different, wiht Greece being prone to bouts of severe socialist money minting, whereas Germany has exercised fairly tight solid fiscal policy. Yet now both are bound to the weakest ones policies. What happens once the government of greece decides to mint more Euros to help prop up their failing economy? The greeks end up with more euros and can spend them in germany, kicking thier inflationary problems into Germansy's hetertofore stong econmy, eroding German wages and buying ability. What happens when the Greeks are restricted from inflating their economy to stimulate it? A hoover-style deflationary cycle kicks them in the ass, whcih will be aggrivated by the "richer" germans being able to "buy in the cheap" capital assets in greece - and dropping the demand in Germany which will cause deflationary pressures there. So its a very BAD thing to tie your econopmy to Greece and Portugal. the Brits are smart to opt out of this one, the Germans will pay the price: the first time France or Italy sneezes, the Germans will get the flu for them, tied to the same yoke.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Ewan · 2002-01-01 09:13 · Score: 1

The British economy and the currency are actually in better shape now than they have been in decades - low unemployment, stabilty, sustainable levels of growth.

Britain is the worlds 4th largest economy, and has more foreign investment entering it each year than any other European country. While being in the Euro would certainly help it gain more investment, that existing money will not change direction overnight.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:41 · Score: 0

Oh my, my! Another individual who, like the pathetic QUeen Elizabeth and her embarrassing royal family, still lives in the 19th century.

England has not ruled the waves for many years now, and sticking to their quaint sterling won't help them revive that dream. The sooner they relegate it to the history books, while embracing the euro, the better for them. And, while they are at it, they might try and eliminate their ridiculous and parasitic royal family to boot.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by akihabara · 2002-01-01 09:48 · Score: 1

If you use half the value of the pound(it's real value)

LOL! If you really believe that; I've got a lot of Euros I'd like to change into pounds at your rate. Your size.

Just because the media and some whinging corporations say the pound is overvalued, doesn't mean it is. It's been there for 6 years now! If you ask me, it's undervalued - for those 6 years we've been kicking the asses of the European countries despite the currency being "overvalued". And getting an average of 6% on our currency rather than 3% to boot!

Our GDP per head is now above that of Germany and France, and our economy 5% larger than France's. Our pension system is not fucked up like that of the continental countries - they just want to sponge of our wealth! Who wants to invest in a country where you can't adjust your capacity and workforce to suit the prevailing economic conditions? Clearly, not as many as want to invest in old Blighty!

Get a clue and watch - we'll keep kicking their asses for some time to come.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 10:03 · Score: 2

So, you congratulate the Brits for being selfish and nationalistic? The irony is, of course, that the British economy and currency are in pretty sad shape.
For most of the Thatcher years that was indeed the case. Growth was sluggish, unemplyment catastrophic.
However since exiting the ERM the UK has been doing OK and in recent years has been growing at a steady rate of 2.5 to 3% a year - pretty good compared to the rest of Europe, inflation and unemployment are both low. Pretty good compared to the rest of Europe and not bad even in comparison to the US under Clinton. Unlike the US the UK is not currently in a recession.
Economic triumphalism goes in cycles. In the 1980s Germany and Japan were trumpeted. Then in the space of 18 months Japan went from being the miracle economy to basket case. Germany is no longer talked about with awe which is probably unfair as no other ecomony could have absorbed Eastern Europe the way Germany has without major upheaval.
But for the Bush recession the pundits would have been talking about a US economic miracle. If the US recovers they may yet do so. If they do not however and the UK continues to do well it is quite likely that the UK will be the flavor of the season.
Although pay rates in the UK at the top end are lower than in the US, wages in the middle and lower end of the scale are much better. The UK has far fewer slums than the US and beggars are almost disappeared from the streets.
Joining the Euro might well help. The effect is nowhere near as it is being made out, just as the loss of sovereignty is negligible as the choice is surrender to the exchange markets or surrender to Brussels.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:18 · Score: 0

What happens once the government of greece decides to mint more Euros to help prop up their failing economy?

They can't. Since 1999.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by DodgyGeezer · 2002-01-01 11:25 · Score: 1, Insightful

You seem to imply that it is bad for a currency's exchange rate to constantly drift lower. It could be argued that from a European perspective that it is VERY GOOD. Their exports have become cheaper making them more desirable and thus generating jobs. It has also made imports more expensive thus encouraging local solutions and generating jobs. For some reason, people seem to think their nationalistic pride is hurt when a currency's exchange rate drops. This is missplaced pride.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by MtViewGuy · 2002-01-01 11:50 · Score: 2

I know one thing though: American tourists in Europe are going to love the Euro, since you only need to exchange it once from the US dollar to use it in the majority of Europe.

This saves one of the biggest hassles of European tourism, namely having to exchange national currencies multiple times.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:51 · Score: 0

And then, in ten years time, all the money you had in the bank is worthless.

Yeah. Great.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:58 · Score: 0

Haha - wherever did you get that idea?

Low unemployment? Just go look at the now dead contract market. Tomorrow, I will be going to the pub to have drinks with my other redundant friends.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:36 · Score: 0

My point regarding the low value of the Euro was not to do with Britain joining the currency. Rather to do with foreing investment. I myself am in favour of joining the Euro. It has damaged the UK in inumerate ways by not being in the 'first wave'. The reason we did not join the Euro in the 'first wave' was the prior government. Now 'anti Euro' position is believed by conservitive MP's to be a 'vote winner'. The current government is putting off a referendum until the 'economic conditions' are correct. If you check the stats for certain portions of the British economy you'll find that it is closer to the US than other EU countries. Waiting was the correct choice not for any economic realities, but for political ones. The gov. knows it can't win a referendum on the Euro and joining w/o a referendum is IMO questionable at best. Afterall this is a major economic decision.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by pfalstad · 2002-01-01 13:15 · Score: 1

check again.. it's seventh largest, smaller than India.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by mccalli · 2002-01-01 14:13 · Score: 1

maybee I will buy them instead of somthing from the US/UK.
By doing so you are increasing the demand for Euros, as you will require them to pay your bills. By increasing demand, you will increase the 'price' of a Euro, ie. the exchange rate. And by increasing the exchange rate, you remove a little more of the incentive to buy from the Euro-zone, or indeed any other "insert-currency-name-here" zone which currently seems cheap.
Cheers,
Ian
Re:Congrats to the Brits by SlashDread · 2002-01-01 22:22 · Score: 1

"Until the EU can get the Euro some value, the Brits are much better off using Sterling for a few more years"

What nonsense.

Currency fluctuates, its a representive of some sorts of the current state of economic power of the currency region.

Europa is about unity and fairness and solidarity between europeans, as we understand such things help our economy.

The temporal fluctuation (being upward even) does not mean "Brits are better off". It may very well mean that the pound will de-valuate rather rapidly now, since they didnt join. Still no biggie. Theyll join sooner rather than later, as the Brits start to understand: you can keep the UK out of Europe, but you cannot keep the Euro out of the UK. 70% os spending on Downing Street London is done by non-english europeans.
Most stores on Downing street, all gas stations in Britain WILL be accepting Euro's

The point is, the euro is working on a common economy.
You cannot reap its benefits, while leaving its caveats, its not only not possible, its anti-social to try. That is not smart.

The whole point of locking our currencies is TO GET RID of currency flux.
For the export of brit goods to europe f.e., a high pound is BAD; now brit goods are expensive!

(Oh I almost forgot, social =! communism in Europe, it means ehm, being social and solidair)

Gr /Dread
Re:Congrats to the Brits by joss · 2002-01-01 23:06 · Score: 3, Funny

This is rated in PPP$. Purchasing power parity is hard to measure.

eg, a train ticket for a 100 mile journey in India is a lot cheaper than in the UK, but it is a very different experience. In India, the train may be crowded and unreliable while in England, oh, wait, nevermind....

--
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Re:Congrats to the Brits by vkt-tje · 2002-01-02 02:22 · Score: 1

Here in Belgium the new prices in Euro have been invariably rounded up to a nice 10 cent multiple

This weeks (well known) "Makro-folder" has a whole page of (food)products with prices like 0,123 . Yes, including 1/1000 of a Euro... (a tenth of a cent)

Do you also wonder how they got Albert II to keep still long enough to get the picture for that coin right?

--

120 chars is not enough!
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 07:23 · Score: 0

> The 'issuance' is only a physical thing

but because it was a success, and there is no immediate danger of any country pulling out of the Euro it will boost confidence in the currency. I agree with your points, and they would be valid in a sensible world.
Re:Congrats to the Brits by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:43 · Score: 0

Those 'other currencies' didn't exist since 1999-01-01, so they were 100% stable compared to each other. Of course.

But that wasn't the thing, the "inflation" (i don't know the if it's the right term in english) was very small. The value of the coins to buy something was very stable - even in times of a very strong dollar and high oil prices.

How the coins look by sekra · 2002-01-01 06:35 · Score: 2, Informative

The coins of the different countries have different pictures on their back. Follow this link for an overview of the back sides of the euro coins.

Re:How the coins look by checkitout · 2002-01-01 07:17 · Score: 1

The coins of the different countries have different pictures on their back. Follow this link [bundesbank.de] for an overview of the back sides of the euro coins.

Maybe the picture lies, but the thing that strikes me as strange is all of those coins seem to be about the exact same size. It would really suck to not be able to just "feel" how much change you have in your pocket, and imagine having to be a cashier. yikes!
Re:How the coins look by reynaert · 2002-01-01 07:44 · Score: 1

Don't worry, the coins are of different size. The Bundesbank just has a stupid webmonkey.
Re:How the coins look by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:06 · Score: 0

There all different in size.
And the edges are almost all different.

The 1 euro cent(16.25mm) and the 5 euro cent(21.25mm) have the same edge. And the 10 euro cent(19.75mm) and the 50 euro cent(24.25mm).
Re:How the coins look by sekra · 2002-01-01 10:07 · Score: 1

Maybe the picture lies, but the thing that strikes me as strange is all of those coins seem to be about the exact same size.

The sizes are different.

Better Pics by DeeEm · 2002-01-01 06:35 · Score: 1

Here are some better pics

Re:Better Pics by spudnic · 2002-01-01 09:54 · Score: 2

The pictures on this site are quite a bit different from the photograph the original poster put up. I'm assuming that these are drawings from before the final version was complete?

.

--
load "linux",8,1
Re:Better Pics by Netzkind · 2002-01-02 00:02 · Score: 1

Having seen the Euro-bills in real:
these pics are somewhat boring.
The real bills have tons of glitter (?) and those MS-license-lookalike holograms.

Euro for Debian by Outlyer · 2002-01-01 06:38 · Score: 2, Informative

For those of you lucky enough to be running Debian, it was announced yesterday that Euro support is available. The announcement is here: http://www.debian.org/News/2001/20011231
And the HOWTO is here: http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debian-euro-supp ort/

--
----------------- "I have a bone to pick, and a few to break." - Refused -------------------

Re:Euro for Debian by datalife · 2002-01-01 08:12 · Score: 1

I think that SuSE, as being an european distri, has this already in their latest distributions.
But i stick with debian.

--
There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Already on keyboard by Tim+Ward · 2002-01-01 06:38 · Score: 1

respective keyboards will have it already on their keys

It's on the two year old keyboard I'm using right now. "ALT GR" and "4".

Now let's see how Unicode-clean slashdot is:

""

Well, I keyed "ALT GR" and "4", and it got somehow translated to "& # 8364 ;" (without the spaces) and displayed correctly.

Comment removed by account_deleted · 2002-01-01 06:42 · Score: 2

Comment removed based on user account deletion

LaTeX and HTML fonts by Paul+the+Bold · 2002-01-01 06:42 · Score: 2

I did a quick search on Google, and found this site that explains how you might get the symbol to appear. It's not ASCII, but it is part of unicode 2.1.

The page claims that if you are using LaTeX 2e, \usepackage{textcomp} gets the right character set, and \texteuro gets the symbol. I tried it, and it works.

Now, does anybody know how to get the American symbol for cents?

Re:LaTeX and HTML fonts by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:47 · Score: 0

€ or € and you're all set, you dingbat (no pun intended). And the American symbol is ¢. Not sure what the Unicode value is.
Re:LaTeX and HTML fonts by Paul+the+Bold · 2002-01-01 15:28 · Score: 2

Sorry, I meant sign in LaTeX, not HTML.

Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Xouba · 2002-01-01 06:42 · Score: 5, Interesting

Well, being one of the 300 million affected, I just thought that I could karma whore a little and get an "informative" mod by telling you (the non-european or non-affected-even-if-european people) a few issues that arise in real life with this change :-) Let's hope not to be another of a million messages about this O:-)

First, I suppose that you don't really imagine what this change means for every Joe European's day-to-day life. In Spain, 1 euro is 166.386 pesetas. There's a few rough equivalences, like 6 euro = 1000 pesetas, but anyway it's quite tricky to know, for example, how many euros are 135 pesetas, or how many pesetas are 4.27 euros. And many people (me, at least) need to know that equivalences in the first days, to make an idea about what you are paying.
Given this difficulties, every government has tried its best to inform every citizen about the equivalences, how to use the euro ... and has made available a kind of "calculators" that consist in a little plastic piece that shows euros and their equivalences in the local currency, to be used by everyone. They're pretty cool, if someone is able to take a photo of any and post it, please do :-)
The devil is in the details, as they say, and in this case the devil is in the rounding. As I said, 6 euros are roughly 1000 pesetas. But that's not exact: 6.01 is more precise. This doesn't mean anything in "cheap" things, but if you're going to buy a car ... There's a lot of concern about the way that commerces are going to apply rounding, as many think that they're going to raise prices to make them more "euro-compliant".
Most of the prices were already both in euros and local currency since months ago, so everyone could make an idea about what prices were going to be like in euros (a cinema ticket is about 4 euros in "spectator's day", for example). But anyway, in my personal experience, nobody looked at the prices in euros, so the impact of this measure is, for me, doubtful :-) Anyway, bussiness have to work in euros from now on, and most of them were already prepared when year's end came.
There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it. Specially since a coffe here is about 125 pesetas, which is roughly 0.75 euro. We've got 2 and 20 cents coins, but anyway, I don't know why there're no 25 cents coins.
As someone already said, the coins are pretty cool :-) A few of them are in two colors, and have a face with a local design and the other with a common european one.
There's more, but I don't recall anything specially interesting now, so let's hope that another one with a better english and memory can say something more fulfilling ;-)

--
My weblog in spanish

Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by dangermouse · 2002-01-01 07:26 · Score: 1, Offtopic

Hi! What's "spectator's day"? Do you European kids do matinees on a day-of-the-week basis instead of a time-of-day basis?
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 07:42 · Score: 2

The change to Joe European's every day life is not that big a deal.
It's not different than the change one goes through spending a year travelling around Europe.

As for buying a car.. if someone buys a car without doing some *careful* calculations, he deserves to get stung. C'mon.. this is simple math.

No 25 cent coins... you are just used to having 25s.. that's all. PRices will adjust to whatver is easy for everyone.

As for coins.. here in Costa Rica, there are so many denominations.
The base unit is the Colone
340 colones = US$1
It devaluates at about 1.5%/month

the coins:
1(not too common), 2(not too common), 5(2 kinds), 10(2 kinds), 20(2 kinds), 25, 50, 100, 500(very uncommon)

The coins with 2 kinds, there are smaller, gold colored fat coins, and thinner, silver coins, with a larger diameter.
SO you end up with a rediculous amount of currency in your pocket.
Most people round to the nearest 5 or 10 colones for convenience.. 1 & 2 colone coins are not that common.
Technically, they have cents too (100 to the colone), but they only show up on paper.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:44 · Score: 0

* There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it. Specially since a coffe here is about 125 pesetas, which is roughly 0.75 euro. We've got 2 and 20 cents coins, but anyway, I don't know why there're no 25 cents coins.

I wish there were 0.95 and 0.99 coins to help
you pay the 3.95 prices.

rh
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Rob+Kaper · 2002-01-01 07:46 · Score: 5, Informative

And many people (me, at least) need to know that equivalences in the first days, to make an idea about what you are paying.

No, no, no. Don't calculate back to pesetas, francs and guilders for the rest of your natural lifes.

Write down twenty things that you often buy: a weeks worth groceries, CDs, DVDs, whatever. Write down a resonable price in your old currency. Convert. Learn and remember the new decent euro price.

Instead of calculating back to guilders whenever I buy a DVD, I will have remembered that ?25 to ?30 is a reasonable price. That is by far the easiest way to get used to the new currency.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Rob+Kaper · 2002-01-01 07:48 · Score: 1

There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it.

As much as I will miss quarters, research concluded that a 1-2-5 system for currency is most efficient.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Xouba · 2002-01-01 07:49 · Score: 1

Well, I don't know exactly how to translate it, but "spectator's day" is that day of the week that tickets cost a little less than the rest of the week :-) For example, all mondays or all wednesdays. It depends on the theater.

--
My weblog in spanish
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Xouba · 2002-01-01 07:54 · Score: 1

No, no, no. Don't calculate back to pesetas, francs and guilders for the rest of your natural lifes.
Yes, yes, yes. I mean, I said the first days. Just the first week. Or the first two days. I've already assumed that I must change my "mental currency system" to euros, but a need a soft transition :-)

--
My weblog in spanish
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by mansoft · 2002-01-01 07:56 · Score: 1
There's no 25 cents coin
Well, I thought exactly the same, because we had a 25 pesetas coin. But euros follow the 1-2-5 rule. You only have to remember these three numbers to know which coins and bills are available.
For instance, we have
- 1, 2, 5, 10, 20 and 50 cents coins
- 1 and 2 euro coins
- 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200 and 500 euro bills
--
Engage!
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Pulzar · 2002-01-01 08:11 · Score: 2

As for buying a car.. if someone buys a car without doing some *careful* calculations, he deserves to get stung. C'mon.. this is simple math.

It's not the problem with math, it's the problem with rounding. Say the car used to cost 500,000 in the old currency, and converted to euros, that's equal to 39,173. To make the price more euro-friendly, the car dealership will round the price to 39,500 or 40,000, not 39,000. Therefore, the price of the car is likely to go up just because of the currency change.

That's what people are worried about, anyway.

--
Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:40 · Score: 0

As an Irish person, we've never had a 25-something-coin, so I won't miss quarters :-)
They always seemed superfluous to me - after all a 20p and a 5p isn't much more hassle. What happens is not that it's more difficult to pay for goods because they're £1.75, what happens is the retailer sells them at £1.95... :-)
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Nameles · 2002-01-01 08:41 · Score: 1

In the US, we have matinees, like your spectator days, based on time. In theatres local to me, They usually have 3 prices, basing this on weekends:
$5 for an adult to a morning or early afternoon show
$8 for a normal ticket
$6-$7 for matinee shows, usually around 6, the time when everyone is eating dinner/supper/last-meal-of-the-day
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Sentry21 · 2002-01-01 08:52 · Score: 2

I can't speak for the poster, but in Canada, every theatre I've ever been to (and I've been to a lot) has matinees until about 5 PM every day, as well as a 'matinee day' - a two-for-one day, a day where all prices are matinee prices, or something of that sort.

Perhaps this is to what s/he was referring.

--Dan
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by torako · 2002-01-01 09:04 · Score: 1

No 25cent coins? True, but you know, what I really want is a 99 cent coin and, for that matter, a 1.99 bill. :)
Now, that would make it easy to buy coffee or get some of those cool Low Price offers ;)
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by thogard · 2002-01-01 10:12 · Score: 1

The goverments didn't understand rounding when they locked down the rates...

Most prices are set so they have a nice psychological point. This is why cars in the US are adversied as $19,999 and not 20 grand. Without a E$.25 coin, the price of coffee isn't going to .75 but will soon go to 1.00.

Australia uses the same 1/5 dollar coins like the euro and not the 1/4 coins like the US (and major chunk of the world). It looks like another pretend metric thing (like A4 paper) but I think it will result in higher prices for many small goods as the psychological price point creaps up.

I find that in places with the .50,.20 coins, the number of high value coins that end up in my pocket increases but I never seem to have the right amount to get rid of them. Maybe its a result of years of the years of using US money but I like having $1 notes, they are much lighter than $1 coins.

The US keeps talking about having $1 coins (and has had many in use since 1976) for vending machines. One problem woth that is the cost of moving the money around. In Australia (with $2 coins worht about 1 $usd) the people who remove the coins out of vending machines have a wheeled cart because of the heavy load. Its not unreasonable for the people who are emptying the parking meters to have a few hundred pounds of coins and because that many coins has quite some value, you have to have armed guards to empty most vending machines so prices go up as do losses from theft. A few months ago someone was using a hacksaw to remove the parking meters outside my house at 3am.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Menthos · 2002-01-01 12:29 · Score: 2, Insightful

The goverments didn't understand rounding when they locked down the rates...
I do think they understand it very well. Rounding should always be done in the last step, e.g in the consumer-retailer chain with the individual prices, not the first step which in this case was the currency fixating inbetween the 12 Euroland currencies. The earlier you introduce rounding, the more impact it has. If the Euroland currencies' values would have been rounded to the Euro, the national economies and trade would have been greatly affected. Just skipping some decimals would increase or decrease the national debts and expenses and budget and export incomes and whatnot and cause economic unbalances, the greater the rounding. And roundings would have to be great in some cases, and all this for a questionable gain in currency transition. Remember that this is a transition, not an ongoing conversion, so artificially increasing national debts and possibly reducing profitability for export industries just for some additional one-time ease in the human transition is questionable. Computers and pocket currency converters can handle this easily, and the governments also have provided cheap pocket currency converters en masse to people for the last year.
Most prices are set so they have a nice psychological point. This is why cars in the US are adversied as $19,999 and not 20 grand. Without a E$.25 coin, the price of coffee isn't going to .75 but will soon go to 1.00.
Yes, and the danger of new psychologigal prices in fact making things more expensive has been greatly discussed. This is why shops have been required to also list all prices in Euros for the last year, even if the Euro wasn't available back then. Even if this probably doesn't eliminate price increases, it probably limits them somewhat since the people who noted the previous prices in Euros will notice if they suddenly are "rounded up" to a psychologically attractive price, and put pressure on the shops.

--
GNU/Linux. The Freshmaker.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Trojan · 2002-01-01 12:41 · Score: 1

The 1-2.5-5 system (as we have in The Netherlands) is mathematically just as efficient: just multiply everything by 2 and you get 2-5-10, which fits exactly in the 1-2-5-10-20-50 system.

The most efficient system (in terms of number of coins need for an arbitrary transaction) would of course be 1-3-9-27-81-... but since we have 10 fingers that would also be a little awkward.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Trojan · 2002-01-01 12:50 · Score: 1

Ehm, I think the reason that parking meters are removed with hacksaws and that armed guards are needed is that parking is expensive. Nothing to do with $1 coins or not, as far as I can see....
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by bOtCartman · 2002-01-01 13:31 · Score: 1

Most prices are set so they have a nice psychological point. This is why cars in the US are adversied as $19,999 and not 20 grand. Without a E$.25 coin, the price of coffee isn't going to .75 but will soon go to 1.00.

Do not call it E$ it is not the "European dollar", use the euro sign or just call it EURO.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by BlueWonder · 2002-01-01 14:03 · Score: 1

There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it. Specially since a coffe here is about 125 pesetas, which is roughly 0.75 euro.

There is also no 99 Cents coin, which is really a shame, given that many things cost some Euros plus 99 Cents. ;-)
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 14:14 · Score: 0

It's not totally unheard of in the US -- Back in the 80s when I was a teenager, Tuesday night was "discount night" at the theaters, where you could get in for $3 instead of ~$5 (unless it was really popular movie). This was in the Midwest.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by rixster · 2002-01-01 14:28 · Score: 1

Don't often laugh when reading /. but well done. Roll on the 99c coin...

--
Two wrongs may not make a right, but three ....
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by thogard · 2002-01-01 15:43 · Score: 1

Why not call it what it is...
its an E$
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Bake · 2002-01-01 16:58 · Score: 1

OK then.
By that analogy the USD is an US€ ;)
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by thogard · 2002-01-01 17:23 · Score: 1

A US?
or were you tring to use some funky symbol thats not in my char set?
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by csbruce · 2002-01-01 17:46 · Score: 2

* There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it. Specially since a coffe here is about 125 pesetas, which is roughly 0.75 euro. We've got 2 and 20 cents coins, but anyway, I don't know why there're no 25 cents coins.

It looks like they went full-tilt with the 1-2-5 paradigm: 0.01, 0.02, 0.05; 0.10, 0.20, 0.50; 1.00, 2.00, 5.00; 10.00, 20.00, 50.00; 100.00, 200.00, 500.00.

Buy anything in America and you get a fist-full of ones.

* As someone already said, the coins are pretty cool :-) A few of them are in two colors, and have a face with a local design and the other with a common european one.

Canada has a bi-metalic $2.00 coin.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Bake · 2002-01-01 18:13 · Score: 1

Well, the Euro sign was supposed to come instead of the question mark so you'll just have to use your imagination.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by SoupIsGoodFood_42 · 2002-01-01 21:20 · Score: 1

There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it. Specially since a coffe here is about 125 pesetas, which is roughly 0.75 euro. We've got 2 and 20 cents coins, but anyway, I don't know why there're no 25 cents coins.
Probably because there is a 5 cent coin. I could be wrong here. But if you use a 20c coin and a 5c coin together, you could use that combination instead of a 25c coin. ;)
One thing that shocked me was the fact that they have 1 and 2 cent coins. I was so glad when they phased out the little bastards here in NZ. But I spose since the euro is for many different contries, all much much larger and diverse than NZ, it's probably a nessesity.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by csbruce · 2002-01-01 21:34 · Score: 1

the people who remove the coins out of vending machines have a wheeled cart because of the heavy load. Its not unreasonable for the people who are emptying the parking meters to have a few hundred pounds of coins and because that many coins has quite some value, you have to have armed guards to empty most vending machines so prices go up as do losses from theft.

I'm not sure this makes a whole lot of sense. Regardless of whether paper or coins of different denominations are used, you'd expect the vending machines and parking meters to have the same amount of money in them because people will have bought the same amount of stuff from them.

Also, for parking meters that only take coins, a dollar in lower-value coins will probably weigh more than a dollar coin in most currencies.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by csbruce · 2002-01-01 21:38 · Score: 1

The most efficient system (in terms of number of coins need for an arbitrary transaction) would of course be 1-3-9-27-81-...

Are you sure that the most efficient system wouldn't have an e in it somewhere? Not that that would help with making a rational amount of change.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by MarcOiL · 2002-01-01 22:46 · Score: 1

* The devil is in the details, as they say, and in this case the devil is in the rounding. As I said, 6 euros are roughly 1000 pesetas. But that's not exact: 6.01 is more precise. This doesn't mean anything in "cheap" things, but if you're going to buy a car ... There's a lot of concern about the way that commerces are going to apply rounding, as many think that they're going to raise prices to make them more "euro-compliant".

I think the rounding will be more important in small prices, not in big ones. When you're buying a car, one € more or less it's not big deal.
But small prices have gone up a lot in just one day. Let's take coffe for example. Two days ago a coffe here in Barcelona was 150 spanish pesetas, which is officially 0.90 €. But most coffe shops (and bars) will round it up to 1€, so you are paying 16 pesetas more.
Well, 16 pesetas are not a lot, but think on all coffes sold yesterday :) That's going to generate a lot more inflation that all cars toghether, I think.

--
If I have posted far, it is because I replied to giants.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by ashurachan · 2002-01-01 23:05 · Score: 1

For bi-metallic coins, we've had in France for quite a time (10 francs and 20 francs coins). The 1 euro coin resembles the 10 Francs coin a lot (it's just a little smaller).

For security, Euro bills resemble Francs bills a lot. In fact France changed its bills just a few years back, just to show our skill in making secure ones.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by bungo · 2002-01-01 23:13 · Score: 1

There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it.

Why are you confused?

Of all of the currencies I've used, only the US had a 25 cent coin. France, Belgium, Luxemburg,
Switzerland, Austria don't have one. Not even does the UK, Australia or NZ.

If it that you're use to a 25 cent piece, and you assue that everyone else should think the same as you? (Are you American and your own bias is showing through?)

If most of the other countries in the EURO zone don't have a 25 cent piece, then why should it even be considered for the EURO?

--
"The best part? I became an ordained minister while not wearing pants." -- CleverNickName
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:49 · Score: 0

In Israel we are very much tied to the US $.
This will probably cause problems with exports - most exports go to EU countries.
For example my shop had the problem of large exports to the UK, expenses go in $ and revenues in Pounds. When the exchange rate changed, they had a problem.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:22 · Score: 0

Right. In Spain (At least in the Catalan region) , usually Thursday is the "Viewers Day", more cheap.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:27 · Score: 0

Read the poster. In Spain we have (had) a very popular 25 pts.coin. And a lot of prizes are usually rounded to that coin.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by orabidoo · 2002-01-02 01:37 · Score: 2

another spaniard here... and i totally agree with your last point: where is the 25 cent coin?? i won't miss the peseta (or the french franc, or any other dead currency), but i really think 25c is a better mount than 20c for a coin. another gripe: the euro's set of coins is way too granular. there are coins of 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100 and 200 cents. for the same range, they could have just had 1, 5, 25, 100, 200; it's easy enough to handle arbitrary amounts, and it would have simplified everyone's life by remembering only 5 coins instead of 8.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Muad'Dave · 2002-01-02 02:28 · Score: 1

Why don't they mint a -1 cent coin? Then I could hand the clerk two dollars and a -1 cent coin. There's your $1.99!

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by heilbron · 2002-01-02 02:40 · Score: 1

>>> There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it. Specially since a coffe here is about 125 pesetas, which is roughly 0.75 euro. We've got 2 and 20 cents coins, but anyway, I don't know why there're no 25 cents coins.

I like this comment :-) For me being from Germany this question doesn't make sense (we dont have 2,50 Euro coins (and the former 25 Pfennigs) either !!) But its refreshing to see how one can become accustomed to longstanding habits .... Cheers to the Spaniards!
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by pit_bull · 2002-01-02 04:36 · Score: 1

I think that in the Netherlands the government put a ban on raising the prices for at least a month or so. The "Consumentenbond" (Official Consumers representation, dont know what to call it in English) comes down on shops changing the prices to more attractive prices. (Unless its down of course... hah, like that will ever happen)

(Ive been living in Portugal for more than a year now, so I havent been actively involved in the Dutch switch-over)

--
_ Light travels faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.... -
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Tepic++ · 2002-01-02 04:45 · Score: 1

'European' kids? I'm not too sure if there is such an entity. Probably a little like me (England) saying "you kids from the continents west of me".
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by spanky555 · 2002-01-02 04:56 · Score: 1

Buy anything in America and you get a fist-full of ones.

You should end up with four ones at the most. How is that a fistful? I usually buy everything with cash; I use a money clip and usually carry $100-$300. The scarcity of $2 bills hasn't been a problem for me, ever. Having lots of $1 bills always comes in handy when eating out - just leave the proper amount and go. No waiting for server to break a yuppie food stamp, no waiting for stupid debit card and signing it.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by fremar · 2002-01-02 05:09 · Score: 1

Of the countries participating in the Euro, at least Spain and The Netherlands had coins and bills for 25 cents / pesetas. Maybe others but I don't remember. I guess most of the participating countries had the 1-2-5 system (at least france and Germany did) so that's what was decided for the Euro.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by ReinoutS · 2002-01-02 08:42 · Score: 1

Agreed. In The Netherlands we used to have quarters as well. I'll miss them, but life will go on.
Re:Issues with the euro in day-to-day life by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:12 · Score: 0

or were you tring to use some funky symbol thats not in my char set?
Yes. You are obsolete.

Nazi-Export ... by orangeguru · 2002-01-01 06:43 · Score: 1

... well, we exported all Nazis to the US back at the end of all. They build your rockets and your nukes ...

But I guess, the US has now more Nazis onboard then the whole of Germany, most propaganda stuff thats illegal in Deutschland is printed in the US and shipped to good old europe, because even Nazis are protected by the freedom of speech ...

Re:Nazi-Export ... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:03 · Score: 0

Not Nazis but scientists, you idiot.
Re:Nazi-Export ... by orangeguru · 2002-01-01 09:30 · Score: 1

Most scientist have been party members ...

Coming from a store owner... by snellac · 2002-01-01 06:43 · Score: 3, Interesting

I own a chain of stores here in London, and after several meetings with lower management, we have decided to not accept the Euro currency in favor of the pound from foreigners. We came to this conclusion for several reasons, which make both economic and political sense for a store dealing mainly in jewlery such as ourselves.

The Euro costs us £0.50 to exchange for every transaction made. That's right, the banks charge us to convert our money back into pounds! They don't charge at the consumer level, just merchant to merchant, so we mandate consumers do this on their own, or pay via another means.
The new anti-counterfeit measures contained in the Euro. This may seem like a good thing, but the larger Euro demoniations contain coils electromagnetically charged to a certain serial number. This can thus be tracked, and as much as consumers are worried about their privacy, merchants are worried about ours in respect to competitors.
The attitude here in London is mostly anti-Euro, as Brits object to this new prospect of a continental government. We've been independent for this long, and under no means do we want to be governed by someone higher than the Parliament
The conversion rates fluctuate constantly. What's to say that one day, we charge 500 for a gold ring, and then going to the bank to exchange it, it's then worth 90% of that? That's lost money to us. We can't afford to be dealing in currency fluctuations. Both the pound and the US Dollar are stable enough to be dealing with, but I won't put my corporation's trust into the Euro.

Businesses like mine are doing the same thing. I can't find a single business here in London Square willing to redeem Euros for face value. So, when you come to London, be sure to bring your plastic, or redeem it for pounds.

-snellac

Re:Coming from a store owner... by Sanity · 2002-01-01 07:02 · Score: 5, Interesting

The new anti-counterfeit measures contained in the Euro. This may seem like a good thing, but the larger Euro demoniations contain coils electromagnetically charged to a certain serial number. This can thus be tracked, and as much as consumers are worried about their privacy, merchants are worried about ours in respect to competitors.
Er no they don't, didn't you see the article here just a few days ago about how they were considering doing this, but didn't expect to see it before 2006?
The attitude here in London is mostly anti-Euro, as Brits object to this new prospect of a continental government.
Speak for yourself, there are many in the UK who are pro-Euro.
We've been independent for this long, and under no means do we want to be governed by someone higher than the Parliament
Such as, um, the WTO? Or perhaps the US government who seems to be making the decisions about how the UK uses its military these days?
This is such a short sighted view point. Only through cooperation can European countries have a say in world affairs, the UK, a country of about 60 million people, will be ignored in the face of trading blocks of 300 million people and upwards.
Sooner or later, the UK will come crawling into the Euro with its tail between its legs, and feeling rather stupid.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:03 · Score: 0

bloody hell, stay on your island then ! we wont accept your pound either !
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Kryptonomic · 2002-01-01 07:09 · Score: 1

This can thus be tracked, and as much as consumers are worried about their privacy, merchants are worried about ours in respect to competitors.
I've never understood this argument.
How does the cash I hand out link me to the purchase I made (and thus violate my privacy) -- even if it could be "electromagnetically tracked"?
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:10 · Score: 0

"Businesses like mine are doing the same thing. I can't find a single business here in London Square willing to redeem Euros for face value. So, when you come to London, be sure to bring your plastic, or redeem it for pounds"

Or else....don't go there. I really think the common currency is gonna make the Euro-zone countries a lot more atractive to prospective tourists from other Eurozone countries, and the UK will certainly suffer from that. Well, it's not as if the UK was considered as an inexpensive country to begin with, anyway......
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:16 · Score: 0

You run a chain of "stores" selling jewellery in london and you're worried about an extra 50p charge on transactions?

And you'd rather lose customers than take a chance on currency fluctuations (which can go up OR down, so you're just as likely to MAKE on the deal?)
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:17 · Score: 0

"Sooner or later, the UK will come crawling into the Euro with its tail between its legs, and feeling rather stupid. "

Like theyd did in 1940 ??

Right ...
Re:Coming from a store owner... by charlie · 2002-01-01 07:19 · Score: 5, Insightful

"The attitude here in London is mostly anti-Euro, as Brits object to this new prospect of continental government. We've been independent for this long, and under no means do we want to be governed by someone higher than the Parliament" --
It is precisely this attitude that makes me ashamed to be British.
Vive la EU!
Seriously:
There's a widespread assumption in the UK, and most widespread among the Euroskeptics, that we are unequivocally better than everyone else and that their ways of doing things are worse.
I don't buy it. Doing someone else down is the nastiest expression of patriotism, and usually conceals a narrow-minded reluctance to scrutinise one's own actions.
Yes, the banking currency-conversion objection is valid: and so are the issues to do with non-anonymity of large-denomination notes.But the exchange rate doesn't fluctuate wildly -- the Pound is typically locked to within +/- 0.1% of the Euro.
Personally, I'm looking forward to using the same currency whether at home or abroad. And I'm looking forward to the opportunity to vote for tighter integration with the EU.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by tdrury · 2002-01-01 07:24 · Score: 3, Interesting

With regards to tracking the serial number:

The only way I can see someone tracking you via a Euro is this: you go to an ATM to withdraw money. The bank knows you and can read the Euro as it is dispensed. You spend the bill. Assuming the merchant deposits all cash to their bank, the bank could resolve the bill from the merchant to the bill dispensed from the ATM assuming it is the same bank or banks share info. This is only likely for large denominations since smaller ones may be tendered as change. Once changed hands, any tracking data is bogus unless the merchant themselves are tracking the euros coming in and going out.

Every US bill has a serial number too, just not magnetically encoded. It would be quite easy to build a box that scans in US bills and reads the serial number. I believe cash is still the best anonymous tender. Magnetic encoding doesn't change anything.

Just food for thought.

-tim
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Jacco+de+Leeuw · 2002-01-01 07:42 · Score: 2

I assume your bank charges for converting dollars as well, otherwise they would be running the exchange rate risk. And banks would not be doing that, otherwise they would not be banks for much longer :-).

I have never heard of this particular anti-counterfeit measure. But how is this different from a number or barcode printed on it? Or perhaps it's an anti-theft measure, similar to RFID tags in clothing etc.? (One could always buy a wallet with built-in Faraday cage :-)

Ten percent fluctuation in one day? I don't buy that. In fact, I read that the euro has weathered the Sept 11th crisis better than the dollar. The thing is probably that you have more American customers who want to pay with their own money than European customers. To me, it's a form of respect to exchange your money for the local currency. It would be convenient to pay you in euros but I would not expect it. But what if one of your competitors would start accepting euros? Would you?

So that leaves the anti-Euro sentiment. Which is, of course, mainly politics.

--
-------
Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Sanity · 2002-01-01 07:46 · Score: 3, Troll

Like theyd did in 1940 ??
Yeah, you know, now I see the light. Hitler's suicide was a hoax, he actually went underground where he started to work on his plan to take over Europe - and on the 1st of January 2002, the result of Hitler's planning, the Euro, is unleashed upon the world, but yet again, those trusty Brits (aided by the Danes and the Swedes) resist the Nazi hoardes leaving them free to do whatever Bush tells them to do.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by whovian · 2002-01-01 08:10 · Score: 1

I thought the ink on US bills had magnetic filings in it. If that's the case, the bills can in principle be tracked perhaps just like swiping your credit card's magnetic stripe.

--
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:27 · Score: 0

Nope. The point is that so far, Brits were always better off stying away from European swamp and relying on US friendship.
Why fix something if it ain't broke ..
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:45 · Score: 0

Or perhaps the US government who seems to be making the decisions about how the UK uses its military these days?
Perhaps you missed the memo. The US, Canada, and the UK have a treaty that puts the most senior commander from any of the three countries in a particular theatre in command of the soldiers from all three countries. You might have also missed that NATO invoked Article 5 of its charter which requires all members of NATO to recognize the attack on the US as an attack on themselves.
Personally, I always thought it would be the US standing up for one of our European friends, not the other way around.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by avdp · 2002-01-01 08:47 · Score: 2
You are not expected to accept Euros in Great Britain anymore than US merchants are expected to accept British Pounds. So I am not sure what you're trying to say.

As far as a point by point discussion of your post:
- That's no different than accepting French Francs or Deutsche Mark. Don't complain about exchange fees - you British brought that on yourselves by NOT converting to the Euro. It is indeed your right, just don't complain about the consequences of still having to deal with exchange rates (which, yes, do fluctuate).
- There is no such thing yet. They are investigating the possibility to do so. Way too early to bitch about this.
- Well, that's what makes British people British :) Yes, you are member of the EU, but it just seems that you are because you're afraid to be left behind, not because you really want to.
- See the first item.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:49 · Score: 0

two thirds of our trade is with Europe.

staying out of the European Common market in the Seventies did huuuge damage to the economy for exactly the same blockheaded reasons.

and if 'US friendship' is anything like the US/UK Special Relationship then it's so broke it ain't even funny.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:51 · Score: 0

Ha, after reading your info I cannot escape conclusion that your hatred towards Brits is related to the fact that you are Irish ... or is it oversimplification on my part ?
Nah, it is not ... Irish people, however well educated and removed from these "dirty commons" and their "dirty desires", still cannot rid themselves of that genetically conceived hatred of English people.

PS.
I am not from England ..
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Mike1024 · 2002-01-01 08:52 · Score: 2

Hey,

There's a widespread assumption in the UK, and most widespread among the Euroskeptics, that we are unequivocally better than everyone else and that their ways of doing things are worse.

That's because most 'common sense good' laws have been established by government, and hence most of what we hear of getting from europe are 'non-common-sense good' laws and 'non-good' laws.

Nobody hears from the tabloid press that 'The European Parliment has done [useful thing]'. We only get stories about people being threatened with legal action because they price thier apples by the pound, or because they sell wood measured in feet and inches.

Furthermore, The Euro has a bloody awful name. It strikes anyone that hears it as boring and unimaginitive. I mean... 'Euro'? What the fuck?

Your average Joe in the street doesn't know economics - it's not a compulsary course in schools, and not many people where I went chose to pick it up at GCSE. Resultantly, people are not aware of the numerous economic benefits. They are far more easily persuaded by flag-waving and jingoistic "There'll always be an England" attitudes.

Should we adopt the Euro? Probably. Should we be part of a 'European Super-state'? Perhaps not.

Normally I would favour a referendum on questions like the former, but sadly, I don't think that 'the man on the street' is educated enough to be objective. I think the general population should be educated in Economics, enough that they can see all sides of the Euro argument.

On the whole, though, I think the Euro could be a fairly good thing.

Michael

--
"Goodness me, how unlike the FBI to abuse the trust of the American public." -- The Onion
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:38 · Score: 0

IMHO your situation is much easier and doesnt depend on conversion rates or fees. If your competition accepts euros and your prices are not significantly cheaper you can be pretty sure that you will lose more than 0.50 pound per customer...
and you should know whether there are enough customers from euro-land to make the trouble of accepting euros worthwhile for you.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:54 · Score: 0

Face it. You would be long dead or part of greater German Reich if it weren't for US.
Same goes for later Soviet Union threat.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:21 · Score: 0

The reserve banks use OCR to read the bills. Every serial number is checked when they get the money back.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 10:29 · Score: 2

Sounds to me like you might end up being an ex-owner of a chain of stores.
The Euro costs us £0.50 to exchange for every transaction made. That's right, the banks charge us to convert our money back into pounds! They don't charge at the consumer level, just merchant to merchant, so we mandate consumers do this on their own, or pay via another means.
So that would be on what? Cards? Cheques? Cash? If the customer is paying by credit card or EuroCheque then the amount will be in pounds sterling in any case. All you need to do is to quote the price in Euro.
If you are taking cash then the bank cannot charge per transaction, unless you mean by 'transaction' banking your takings at the end of the day. Unless you are paying your staff illegally low wages 50p is irrelevant.
In any case the demand from merchants to support banking of Euros is going to be significant. The bank charges will rapidly fall as merchants tell their banks that they expect the services to be realistically priced. If the banks don't respond there will be plenty of players ready to step in to offer low cost services.
The conversion rates fluctuate constantly. What's to say that one day, we charge 500 for a gold ring, and then going to the bank to exchange it, it's then worth 90% of that?
And what if the pound suddenly devalues to 90%? You are already dealling in precious metals that have a somewhat volatile price. Margins in the mainstream Jewlery business are typically large - 50% is not uncommon so the cost of lost business has more impact than daily fluctuations in the price of precious metals.
However unless you are running real low end outfits it is unlikely that you would do much cash business in any case.
The shops that are going to have to take Euros are going to be the convenience type outfits, newsagents, cafes, restaurants, pubs, particularly in airports and train stations.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Menthos · 2002-01-01 12:50 · Score: 3, Interesting

Sweden is not in Euroland either, but most major, country-wide shops have already announced that they will accept payment in Euro, mostly as a service to customers (after all they want to attract all customers, also foreign ones).
They are not likely to list prices in Euro however, since the SEK<->EUR exchange rate is not fixated and the list prices would have to be changed almost every day, which of course would be impractical. But payment in the converted Euro amount will be entirely OK. A lot of smaller shops are expected to follow this policy, used by the bigger ones, and allow payment in Euro.

--
GNU/Linux. The Freshmaker.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by LOTR+Troll · 2002-01-01 15:03 · Score: 0

It was probably better to keep their current gold reserves, instead of lowering net value to the Euro price, and selling off 'excess' gold reserves post-haste. Hogwash, UK did what's in their best interests.

--
Re:Coming from a store owner... by orionbelt · 2002-01-01 15:54 · Score: 1

I won't comment on this classic piece of british-centered hysteria... I've been constantly amazed at the depth of hate (yes, i think this is the proper word to use) towards anything european, and most of all the euro. Just read what british traditionalists (for lack of better word?) say at e.g. BBC's bulletin boards related to the euro... Especially their triumphant statements when the euro was losing ground to the US dollar! Anyway, i could go on forever with this so i'd rather stop here.

But let me get to the point of this posting: i was just wondering, why on earth would a business in London accept euros anyway? Do they accept dollars? Or any other foreign currency for that matter? I don't think so. So why accept the euro, which is a foreign currency for Britain?

As to the UK banks charging for converting euros to pounds: well, of course they will do, as they charge for the conversion of any other foreign currency! So what is the point of complaining?

I have the feeling that the majority of the british is so negative about the euro that it's best for both them and the euro to stay out of it. Besides, the euro is just the tip of the iceberg. It signifies the will of EU citizens to tie their futures closer together (with respect to each one's cultural identity nonetheless!) as the best way to survive and succeed in the future. We all give up something to gain something else, hopefully greater. A large fraction (majority?) of the british obvisouly does not want that, and they have been a constant pain in the butt when it comes to taking decisions at the european level. So if they do not want to be part of it all, why do they not just move out? If all they want is the customs union let them keep it, but let them not interfere with anything else. I feel it will be best for the peace of mind of a large number of british folks but also for the rest of us!
Re:Coming from a store owner... by namemattersnot · 2002-01-01 16:17 · Score: 1

now, that's a pile of crap.

US contributed less than 5% to win the war.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by joss · 2002-01-01 23:25 · Score: 2

> Should we adopt the Euro? Probably. Should we be part of a 'European Super-state'? Perhaps not.

There lies the rub. Single currency will lead to tax harmonisation, which will lead to Euro super state.

I wouldn't mind EU government if it was founded on something similar to US constitution but current EU parliament is thoroughly undemocratic,
not that British parliament is much better.

As for economics education, it's bollocks. You can do a 4 year degree, and it won't answer the simple question "where does money come from" (mostly it's invented by privately owned banks when people take out loans - an insane system)

--
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Colm@TCD · 2002-01-02 00:18 · Score: 2
I wouldn't mind EU government if it was founded on something similar to US constitution but current EU parliament is thoroughly undemocratic.
No, you're mixing up your EU institutions. The European Parliament is highly democratic in that its members are elected directly by the people of its constituencies (constituency boundaries are drawn so that each MEP represents approximately 500,000 citizens, I believe). The "undemocratic" perception of the EU comes from the fact that the European Commission is the major policy- driving organ of the Union; and the Commission is not directly elected; rather its members are appointed by the governments of the 15 nations in the Union. Note that the Commission, despite its perception, does not set EU policy directly; policy is decided by the Council, which is basically the governments of each state acting in concert; the Commission is in charge of implementation of policy; rather like all civil services. I don't know of any government bureaucracy which is directly elected, so the EU is no less democratic than anywhere else, and a great deal more democratic than many places.
See the following:
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Red+Eyes · 2002-01-02 02:10 · Score: 1

You are not expected to accept Euros in Great Britain anymore than US merchants are expected to accept British Pounds. So I am not sure what you're trying to say.
But my local area merchants seem ever more pleased to give my change in Canadian coins :( I don't even live close to the border.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Muad'Dave · 2002-01-02 03:01 · Score: 1

I don't think the linking of you to your purchases is necessarily the worst abuse of currency tracking. My fear would be lending someone some money, and having that bill end up with blood on it at a crime scene, or as evidence in a drug bust. Who's they come after? The person who last had that bill 'registered' to them. No thanks.

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Muad'Dave · 2002-01-02 03:08 · Score: 1

i was just wondering, why on earth would a business in London accept euros anyway? Do they accept dollars? Or any other foreign currency for that matter? I don't think so. So why accept the euro, which is a foreign currency for Britain?
Most countries accept currency from neighboring ones along their border. Remember that England has Ireland via hydrofoil and all of europe (thanks to the chunnel) just a hop, skip, and a jump away.
When I toured the UK in 1984, the towns on the Scotland/England border accepted either pound. All of the places I've been in the Caribbean accept local currency or the $US (at extremely vendor-beneficial exchange rates!)
It is good business to accept the currency that's in the pockets of your potential customers, especially when you can set the accepted exchange rate.

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Pyrosz · 2002-01-02 05:21 · Score: 1

You should do what many Canadian stores do when it comes to US dollars, we put up a sign that states the exchange rate. This exchange rate is generally fixed to something close to the real exchange rate but does not change very often unless a drastic change has been made by the banks. The exchange is always in the stores favour and actually makes them a little more per transaction (usually no more than around 1 - 5 cents per dollar) So it works like this: $1US = $1.40CAN, you hand over a $1 US bill and we hand back $1.40 Canadian. But, the exchange rate might actually be $1US = $1.43CAN. This insures us a little from loss and sometimes makes a little profit due to the general laziness of tourists.

--

An optimist believes we live in the best world possible; a pessimist fears this is true.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by crealf · 2002-01-02 10:16 · Score: 1

The new anti-counterfeit measures contained in the Euro. This may seem like a good thing, but the larger Euro demoniations contain coils electromagnetically charged to a certain serial number. This can thus be tracked, and as much as consumers are worried about their privacy, merchants are worried about ours in respect to competitors.
I don't understand this at all. All bank notes I have, including british pounds, have a serial number written on them.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by crealf · 2002-01-02 10:26 · Score: 1

The only way I can see someone tracking you via a Euro is this: you go to an ATM to withdraw money. The bank knows you and can read the Euro as it is dispensed. You spend the bill. Assuming the merchant deposits all cash to their bank, the bank could resolve the bill from the merchant to the bill dispensed from the ATM assuming it is the same bank or banks share info
In addition, one has to contrast this to what happens when one buy using a credit card (which are smart cards in my country, and make real time authentification to the bank)... Bank notes don't really look worse.
Re:Coming from a store owner... by psicic · 2002-01-02 16:04 · Score: 2

Aaaagggh!!

What did you tell them that for? Now we'll never get them!

Our diabolical plans involving free debate(i.e. not based solely on what CNN/Sky News tells us we can talk about), common currency and multiple languages have been scuppered by your post! Live it up tonight boys, 'cause its cynanide pills for us all come the morning.

8)

--
Concrete analysis...
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 18:12 · Score: 0

Sorry, can't resist...well, we joined in late, for one. But there is little question what would have happened if U.S. did not enter the war. Soviets would have managed to hold off Germans for a while (if only because of the harsh winter slowing down the Blitzkrieg), but the Brits were teetering on the edge. It would have been only a matter of time.

Denial of this just displays typical Euro-weenie arrogance. Talk about ignorant Americans, this is just preposterousness bordering on denial of the Holocaust.

And....5% of WHAT? Money? Lives? Is this 5% counting the post-war reconstruction of BOTH Europe and Japan?
Re:Coming from a store owner... by iainl · 2002-01-03 02:57 · Score: 1

Thats a good point in theory (although I make it a point never to lend cash to people likely to be involved in drug busts...) but in practice there isn't any 'registering' of bills to people at the moment anyway, so this doesn't work.

Besides, at its very worst this would only be as bad as buying something on credit card, and I can't think of a time I bought something with cash to avoid it being on my statement.

--
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Re:Coming from a store owner... by Muad'Dave · 2002-01-03 03:20 · Score: 1

I can't think of a time I bought something with cash to avoid it being on my statement.
You're not married, are you? 8-)

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.

Single vs. multiple currencies. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:44 · Score: 0

Without being overly technical (and I can tell from your wording, that you already know) there are actually several advantages to having multiple currencies.

The foremost is that differences in relative productivities of the individual currency-zone can be reflected in the relative pricing of the respective currencies. The alternative will be that the productions will shift to the zone with the highest productivity. Take eg. Argentine and their attempt to tie the local currency to the american dollar.

The main advantage of having a single currency in (almost) the entire european zone is to drive down the cost of transactions between the countries (and thereby furthering trade and wealth). The main disadvantage is that it will further the gap between the more and the lesser productive regions within the zone.

All in all it is a rather interesting experimnent to have a single currency spanning several more or less political independant zones.

Let them suffer ... by orangeguru · 2002-01-01 06:48 · Score: 2, Insightful

Well, Europe and the Euro work flawlessly without the Brits. I wonder if the same can be said about the tea suckers without the euro?!

I am german and I lived in London for some time - I am always surprised how much propaganda wars are fought around anything european/EU.

The normal Brit would gain a lot and pay less, if those high prices would come down a bit.

For example: cost of living (food, electricity) - even buying a simple CD (are Madonna CD is a Madonna CD no matter where you buy it) are extremly overpriced compared to the continent.

But I guess the british like it exclusiv?!

Re:Let them suffer ... by drsquare · 2002-01-01 09:56 · Score: 1

Changing currency wouldn't do anything for prices. Anyone who says otherwise is dellusional.

The Euro hasn't even been going long enough to see how succesful it will be, and whether surrendering economic independence is actually a good thing. Argentina tied their currency to the dollar, and look where they are now.
Re:Let them suffer ... by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 10:17 · Score: 1

I'm a British Euro enthusiast but, with the best will in the world, the Euro has hardly been a roaring success so far has it? And your point about the cost of living is fine, but the same could be said about adopting the US Dollar, no?

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Let them suffer ... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:58 · Score: 0

If I've got this straight, you're taking London prices as being representative of the UK as a whole. sorry, but that does give you any credibility. And yes, I would anticipate prices in London to be high whether the currency used was Sterling, Euros, dollars or Roubles.
Re:Let them suffer ... by Yokaze · 2002-01-01 12:40 · Score: 2

There is a difference between tieing a currency to another and having the same currency.

The first is is usually a mean employed to avoid inflation, with the risk hindering exports.
The latter lets you buy with the same currency in all participating countries without any problems.
I have to admit that for an island this seams to be of lesser importance.
But from an Internet savvy person, one should expect some more creative outlook about the possibilities about a common currency.

With the reference to Argentina, you surely want to refer to the statements of some/several financial experts, who are saying that abandoning a national currency is ceding control over monetary policy.

They are, of course, right... in a way.
A common currency does imply one monetary policy, which has to fit all countries. The monetary policy of the US$ fitted only the US.
The monetary policy of the Euro has to fit all participating states, which euro-sceptical people do not consider as fine-grained enough, especially considering the economical differences between the EU states.
Or as Mr. Davis said:

"It's a problem that you have a one-size fits all interest rate across Europe."

But the US aren't in such a different position. The economical situation in all the states isn't the same neither. Should they introduce different currencies for the different regions? Or France?R eaching from La Reunion over Paris to Martinique the same currency.

The asia crisis, and interestingly the introduction of the Euro (which existed virtually over several years), lead to a tremendous rise of the US$ towards other currencies, which did not reflect the economical developement in Argentina and made importing (from Argentina) unattractive compared to other nations, while the US having a flourishing economy and importing more than exporting profited from the rise.

I consider such a developement for the EU less likely.

--
"Between strong and weak, between rich and poor [...], it is freedom which oppresses and the law which sets free"
Re:Let them suffer ... by frost22 · 2002-01-01 22:19 · Score: 1

I'm a British Euro enthusiast but, with the best will in the world, the Euro has hardly been a roaring success so far has it?

Yes, it has.

EU economy currently is sustantially weaker than US economy. EU financial indicators like public debt are worse than those in then US.

And so the Euro "sank" in relation to the US$. The thing is working exactly the way it is supposed to work. Exchange rates are not a matter of national pride, they reflect national - or regional - economics. Those in turn are largeley the result of national - or regional - economic policy. Now this one actually could be a source of national pride, but in Europe is mostly a source of national shame. Or Outrage.

I have yet to see a single politician here that does not talk about reducing the increase of public debt, but actually talks about reducing debt itself.

f.

--
...and here I stand, with all my lore, poor fool, no wiser than before.
Re:Let them suffer ... by biglig2 · 2002-01-01 22:48 · Score: 2

Oh no, it's already affecting prices. It's putting them up.

Shopkeeper:
"lets see, this camembert costs 75 Francs. Thats comes to 11.43 Euros...hell, call it 12!"

--
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?
Re:Let them suffer ... by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 01:59 · Score: 1

You say the Euro is working flawlessly. Ha, ha! The Euro interest rate is too high for your country where you have pretty bad unemployment now (bad for Germany that is, only moderately bad by British historical standards) and it's far too low for Ireland where their inflation rate is too high.

How anybody thought they could link economies as different as Greece and Sweden with one currency is beyond me and the fact that it has been made to work (sort of) is a minor miracle. Now that it's here I think Britain will have to go in eventually, and it will benefit both Britain and the Eurozone, but I wish the whole thing had never been started.

PS the high prices have nothing to do with the Euro. With the pound so strong, foreign imports should be cheap, so why is Britain the most expensive place in Europe to buy a German car?

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Let them suffer ... by a_n_d_e_r_s · 2002-01-02 02:35 · Score: 1

Good luck then that sweden is NOT part of EMU and still uses its krona.

Great Britain, Denmark and Sweden are the countries
within EU that are not part of EMU.

--
Just saying it like it are.
Re:Let them suffer ... by shario · 2002-01-02 04:09 · Score: 1

Then you tell him, "no, it costs around 11 euros, call it 11 or I'm in the next shop"...

Mod the AC up by isolation · 2002-01-01 06:49 · Score: 0

This guy is right on. If I say Harry Potter is of the devil then you will say how dare I make such a insane judgement. Then if I say I reject Harry Potter, you can say I'm a terrorist?

Who is getting in to whos life here.

--
Free Unix? Free Windows. http://www.reactos.com

Debian Euro HOWTO by int0x80 · 2002-01-01 06:50 · Score: 2, Informative

/* FIXME: insert some clever comment about this brilliant HOWTO and mention how useful it is */

Debian Euro HOWTO

--
Order is for idiots, geniuses can handle chaos!

Re:Debian Euro HOWTO by err666 · 2002-01-01 10:00 · Score: 1

It is indeed very useful. Many thanks for the link.

... Waiting 20 seconds ... hitting reply ... now.

--
reduce(lambda x,y:x+y,map(lambda x:chr(ord(x)^42),tuple('zS^BED\nX_FOY\x0b')))

The way they look by halftrack · 2002-01-01 06:50 · Score: 1

The euro looks the way it looks mainly because all of its features makes it almost impossible to copy. Other contries in Europe (and probably other parts of the world) such as Sweden and Norway have also recently made bills with large silver lines in to ensure the stability of their currency. Flowing the marked with counterfeits is not good for inflation. I'd bet the US Dollar bills are simple to copy with a high quality scanner, printer and some nice looking and fealing paper. This wouldn't be grand scale but still.

--
Look a monkey!

Re:The way they look by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:25 · Score: 0

Yeah, it's just trivial to duplicate the watermark, the value thread woven into the bill, the reflective, color-changing ink, the fine printing of the little details, and the paper woven with silk. Anyone who accepts funny money printed on a color printer simply isn't paying attention.
Re:The way they look by Drakin · 2002-01-01 09:23 · Score: 1

Yep. The Canadian bills are heading the same direction, the $10 is already loaded with anti counterfit protections (texture, microprint, embeded fibers, and a multitude of colours).

The US bills however, all use the same ink on the same paper, which means by rights, if you make a close enough ink, you can bleach $1's and make $100's, and print them out.

Personally, I make sure I give at least one new $10 bill in change if posible when someone tenders an American bill... just for thier reaction to our "funny money"
Re:The way they look by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:55 · Score: 0

And I meant all this to refer to that "easy to counterfeit" American dollar. It may be boring and green, but hardly easy to counterfeit for anyone who's paying any attention.
Re:The way they look by jkonrath · 2002-01-01 11:12 · Score: 1

US currency has a lot of anti-counterfit measures built in - the fibers in the paper, the strip telling the denomination, an ink that looks different under different kinds of light, and microprinting. Also, the hidden strip reacts to light in different ways for different denominations. And as for bleaching one dollar bills and printing hundreds - guess what? The new one dollar bills have just been printed and are being released into circulation as we speak...
Re:The way they look by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 06:35 · Score: 0

You're joking about bleaching, right? In case you haven't seen american money recently (say the last roughly 150 years), in addition to the numbers being printed on the bill, the actual amount is also indicated.

So, you would have to bleach the 1s and also remove the actual word 'One' from the various places it exists and then insert the words 'One Hundred' and add an 's' to the end of the word 'Dollar' to make it plural.

You would be better off robbing a bank than trying this nonsense.

Any euro questions? by stefaanh · 2002-01-01 06:50 · Score: 1

The main and english entry to the official euro information site, with clear info and views from a lot of angles.

--
--------
* Sigh *

s/half decade/half century/ by Ami+Ganguli · 2002-01-01 06:51 · Score: 1

I figured I should correct that before somebody else does. Europe has been merging for a while.

--
It is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail. - Abraham Maslow

Depressing anti-European idiocy by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:53 · Score: 1, Insightful

First, someone really HAS to fire michael.

I cant remember a story he has posted which doesnt include a totally unnecessary, snide, catty bitch in it somewhere. "rfid-tags-coming-soon" - oh for fucks sake. we've had that story. any excuse to smugly depreciate whatever the story is about, he just HAS to take it. Well, its deeply unprofessional and downright irritating.

Second, the people who say this isnt newsworthy are either smoking crack, or are depressingly isolationist and inward-looking Americans who really dont care about the rest of the world. Its bad enough when your president believes he can just ignore the rest of world and get on with what he wants, but when geeks do it??

The "star trek" analogy posted was right on point. Guys, you're supposed to be interested in improving society (what with all these YRO stories), but when, for the FIRST TIME IN THE HISTORY OF THE PLANET, countries voluntarily put their narrow, national identities in second place to the greater interests of cross-cultural harmony, you dont care?!?!?

Dont get me wrong. I'm not stupid; I know that in practice, the EU is often needlessly beaurocratic, meddlesome, corrupt even. But if you can forget that and think of the original philosophy behind it - it really does strike me as a first step towards a potential "star trek" future where there are no countries, there are no "Frenchmen" or "Afghans", only "Earth" and "humans".

Looking at the state of the planet (wars, etc), dont you think it would be a GOOD thing if there were only "humans"?

I know a lot of people here, from all countries, are patriotic / nationalist. Nationalism is false. Nations are false. They arent eternal, they arent natural. Nations and nationalism were invented around the 19th century. Thats a whole different subject so I'll say no more, but I'm doing my thesis on this subject, and when you study the phenomena of nationalism for more than 5 minutes, you realise what a crock of shit it is.

Honestly. I guess a typical /. reader might be in their 20s, middle-class, into computers. Do you guys not feel more in common with a middle-class, mid-20s linux hacker who happens to live in, say, Finland? Or Indonesia? Than you do with someone of your own nationality, who is 72, from a different class, and totally computer-illiterate?

And if none of that has any resonance with you - there's always pragmatism. A currency across such a huge population WILL affect you... this teeny thing called world trade, remember? If the Euro succeeds wildly, it could challenge the international primacy of the dollar. Better believe that'll affect you. If it crashes spectacularly, better believe the US will feel the economic consequences too.

Now I'm just waiting for someone to label the whole of Europe "socialist" without any understanding of what that means, and without any explanation of why something done for the benefit of society should be a BAD thing... *sigh* ... Think I'm paranoid? It happens every other time Europe is mentioned on /.

I only wish /. readers' awareness of international social, political and cultural issues was as great as their technical awareness.

Rant over.

Re:Depressing anti-European idiocy by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:09 · Score: 0

Your points on nationalism sound interesting, and right on. Nationalism played a role in the unfortunate recent turn of events in my Balkan country. Out of curiosity, what motivated you to study this topic?

I don't understand your ire with michael, though. Not a single word in the header of this article was his-- it was all quoted from the submitter. Also, you seem to imply that "we"-- geeks, slashdot readers, Americans, roughly-- don't care about the European integration. But the very fact that this article was posted seems to show there is at least some interest, no?
Re:Depressing anti-European idiocy by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:24 · Score: 0

Predictable.

Someone tells people a few uncomfortable truths and they resort to "flamebait" moderation.

I give up on this place an its xenophobic US readership.
Re:Depressing anti-European idiocy by Genjuro+Kibagami · 2002-01-01 13:29 · Score: 1

Now I'm just waiting for someone to label the whole of Europe "socialist" without any understanding of what that means, and without any explanation of why something done for the benefit of society should be a BAD thing... *sigh* ... Think I'm paranoid? It happens every other time Europe is mentioned on /.
People who have problems with Socialism typically don't have problems with things being done for the good of society, humanity, call it what you will, they have problems with small irrelevant annoying things being done for the good of humanity at the immense expense of the collective and each and every member thereof, the individual.
Re:Depressing anti-European idiocy by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 00:32 · Score: 0

Looking at the state of the planet (wars, etc), dont you think it would be a GOOD thing if there were only "humans"?

Maybe for you, you lobeless, filthy hu-mahn
Re:Depressing anti-European idiocy by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:29 · Score: 0

I have a few nits with this opinion:

If the Euro succeeds wildly, it could challenge the international primacy of the dollar.

Interesting that you seem to take, as a personal affront, US monetary policy and it's massive success. But thanks for recognizing the global standard. I'm sorry if the bar has been set too high for others to easily reach, but free markets really are worth the trouble it takes to attain them.

Better believe that'll affect you.

Sadly, for this delusion, it's patently incorrect. The EU is just a dwarf in comparison to US markets, and shows no sign of overcoming either our ingenuity or productivity. That you are apparently unable to see that the euro is a direct attempt to emulate the US monetary strategy in a broken fashion is actually disturbing.

Now I'm just waiting for someone to label the whole of Europe "socialist" without any understanding of what that means, and without
any explanation of why something done for the benefit of society should be a BAD thing... *sigh* ... Think I'm paranoid? It happens every other time Europe is mentioned on /.
I only wish /. readers' awareness of international social, political and cultural issues was as great as their technical awareness.

The demonstrated lack of understanding of techs, and Americans in general is incredible. A large percentage of this population has either escaped from europe, the Soviet Union, or other previously repressive regimes. What the intelligencia in europe decide is for the 'societal good' has rarely, if ever, shown itself to be of any pragmatic value. Rather, we get a steady flow of immigrants running the hell away from several interesting, yet horribly flawed ideas of 'societal good'.

The fact that we spend tens of billions every year (via NATO) just keeping you people from blowing each other up should be more than enough proof that rather than our needing some obsolete moral lessons from europe, you in fact are in rather pathetic need of our ongoing assistance and tutleage. (Granted, it's a waste of time, but who knew so many people could collectively be so stupid?)

Please feel free to send my taxes back if you've found the help superflous, and we'd love to have the half million military personnel who gave their lives to save your sort from having to learn german sent back ASAP. (Thanks for the rousing speeches from Tony Blair, but we really don't need the fucking help.)
Re:Depressing anti-European idiocy by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 02:31 · Score: 0

All you're saying could be summed up as "Amerikkka uber alles. STFU.". But several points.

I'm sorry if the bar has been set too high for others to easily reach, but free markets really are worth the trouble it takes to attain them.

If you think the US economy is a prime example of a truly free market at work.. well, let's just say that some economics textbooks are calling your name.

The demonstrated lack of understanding of techs, and Americans in general is incredible. A large percentage of this population has either escaped from europe, the Soviet Union, or other previously repressive regimes.

Europe is one country? Looks like some geography is in order too. But wait.. you're American. What do you care?

What the intelligencia in europe decide is for the 'societal good' has rarely, if ever, shown itself to be of any pragmatic value.

ITYM 'intelligentsia'. Some examples, please.

The fact that we spend tens of billions every year (via NATO) just keeping you people from blowing each other up ..

Well, fancy that. We're actually in a perpetual state of war, but we don't know it, because our kind American friends gave us some of their precious dollars.

Do you have any idea why NATO began?

should be more than enough proof that rather than our needing some obsolete moral lessons from europe, you in fact are in rather pathetic need of our ongoing assistance and tutleage.

Sure. And all those black men your justice system keeps in prison or sends in disproportionate numbers to their deaths are clearly signs of your collective moral superiority. But what do you care? They're just niggers, right?

(Granted, it's a waste of time, but who knew so many people could collectively be so stupid?)

Remind me which country trailer park trash come from.

More seriously, remind me where it is illegal in Europe to teach Darwin's theories. Remind me which country, in recent history, has had a long, retarded debate about setting fire to a piece of cloth.

Please feel free to send my taxes back if you've found the help superflous, and we'd love to have the half million military personnel who gave their lives to save your sort from having to learn german sent back ASAP.

You probably don't know why America entered the second world war, do you? Here's a clue. It wasn't because of any great love of freedom.

(Thanks for the rousing speeches from Tony Blair, but we really don't need the fucking help.)

You're probably right, for once. Your politicians have quite enough in the way of reserves of sanctimony to draw on already.

Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Brendan+Byrd · 2002-01-01 06:53 · Score: 1

I like dollar coins. When are we going to phase out our (US) own dollar, in favor of the gold coin. I heard it was 2004, but I also heard that they may cancel it because the dollar coin wasn't very successful. (Well, it's not going to be successful unless somebody forces the issue.)

--
Zodiac Survey

Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by dangermouse · 2002-01-01 07:22 · Score: 2

Everyone I've talked to about the new dollar coin likes it a lot. It's not successful because you can't find the damned things. I never get them as change, my bank is constantly out of them, and everyone I ask about it tells me to go buy a book of stamps at the post office (as the machines there give the dollar coins as change).
Well, guess what? I don't go to the post office. Ever. I use the USPS for paying bills, and that's about it. I rarely have to buy stamps, since I only use a couple every month. When I do buy stamps, I buy them at the grocery store. (!)
Linking the distribution of a new currency to postage stamp vending machines is braindead, but it seems to effectively be the means the government has chosen.
Stamp some more of the damned things and send them to my bank instead of bills!
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Admiral+Llama · 2002-01-01 08:04 · Score: 1

So what you're saying is that we need the US Mint to team up with AOL? Those CDs are EVERYWHERE!!!
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Animats · 2002-01-01 08:10 · Score: 4, Funny

There are several billion golden dollar coins in existence. But I haven't seen one in months.
Maybe if the Treasury had a 98 sale, they'd get out there.
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Drakin · 2002-01-01 09:13 · Score: 1

(I know I'm going to get hit with down moderation for this...)

Look north for a view on how well a $1 coin can suceed. Canada's been useing them over a decade now.

Personally, I think of the $1 coin (and now the $2 coin) as change and more readily spend it... so my spending ends up going up... just to cut down on the weight in my pockets.
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Micah · 2002-01-01 11:22 · Score: 2

I agree totally. I often ask my bank for them when cashing checks (and they usually do have a few, if not a whole roll). They're so convenient in Canada -- you can go into a fast food joint and pay for your burger and Pepsi with pocket change, without pulling out your wallet.

But it's been well over a year since I've received one in change. That's pretty annoying.

Unlike previous posts though, most people I've talked to DON'T seem to like them, saying they're too heavy. I guess it will take time.
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Prior+Restraint · 2002-01-01 16:00 · Score: 1

When are we going to phase out our (US) own dollar, in favor of the gold coin.

See my conspiracy-theory rant above.
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by csbruce · 2002-01-01 21:06 · Score: 1

Personally, I think of the $1 coin (and now the $2 coin) as change and more readily spend it... so my spending ends up going up... just to cut down on the weight in my pockets.

I personally don't like carrying around any kind of change so I leave it all at home. Of course, right now I have about $700 in change in my apartment that really needs to find its way back to the bank one of these days. A small roll of twonies is $50!
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by csbruce · 2002-01-01 21:16 · Score: 2

Look north for a view on how well a $1 coin can suceed. Canada's been useing them over a decade now.

Of course, there is a significant cultural difference between Canada and America in changing currency. Canada is more like Pepsi in that the flavor is tweaked every time you turn around. The styles of the bills have changed at least five times in the past 30 years and I don't think the mint has printed the same set of coins for any two years in a row in the past decade. There must have been (literally) forty different styles of quarters over the past five years.

America is like Coca-Cola in that any attempt to change the flavor results in cries of bloody murder.
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Drakin · 2002-01-01 22:27 · Score: 1

40? In the last 5 years, is that all?

Yeah, there's countless styles of quarters around... there was the change withthe queens crown a number of years back, and now the new dimes.

But, it makes sense to alter the bills, and over time you notice, the changes make them increasingly difficult to counterfit. (And beleive it or not, there is counterfitting of canadian bills, dispite the rate of exchange on 'em)

Personally it doesn't matter. It's all legal tender.
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by Drakin · 2002-01-01 22:29 · Score: 1

Oh I have a pile of change too.

The thing is, I prefer to pay cash for most things, it helps prevent overspending I've found. Now you spend a day running around, you end up with a pile of change, and me, well change is nothing, so I'll spend it getting junk food or something... likely dropping another $10 or so I could have saved...
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by gorilla · 2002-01-02 08:54 · Score: 2

The styles of the bills have changed at least five times in the past 30 years
Most currencies have changed their styles over the years, it's an anti-fraud system. What was incredibly difficult for a forger to do in 1970 can be done by anyone with a colour photocopier in 1990, so the anti-fraud system has to be changed. For the quarters, there was a special millenium monthly issue of different designs. This is very similar to the US's ongoing state quarters, where each state is getting a design for the quarter.
Re:Ahhh...a one Euro coin, not a dollar... by martinflack · 2002-01-02 16:08 · Score: 1

There are several billion golden dollar coins in existence. But I haven't seen one in months.

Buy stamps at a USPS vending machine. Give it a large bill so it makes change.

This discussion is two years to late ;-) by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:53 · Score: 0

those exchange had been still quite fixed for long years before, 'european currency system' which had a pre-Euro called ECU or 'European Currency Unit'.

With 1999-01-01, all currencies inside the eurozone moved into the euro. Only coins and notes remained.

This discussion here is two years to late, today only the metal and the paper we hold in our hands has changed.

Re:This discussion is two years to late ;-) by stripes · 2002-01-01 07:25 · Score: 2

This discussion here is two years to late, today only the metal and the paper we hold in our hands has changed.

Sort of. Any time in the past two years that an EU country had really wanted to change it's interest rates and fiddle with it's currency value, it could have done it without somehow convincing everyone in the whole country to trade in the currency.
So yeah, two years ago they all tied their boats to the same dock and started hanging out on the island. Today they started setting fire to the boats.
(That's not to say it's a bad idea, but now good or bad it's real hard to turn back)
Re:This discussion is two years to late ;-) by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:04 · Score: 0

Sort of. Any time in the past two years that an EU country had really wanted to change it's interest rates and fiddle with it's currency value, it could have done it without somehow convincing everyone in the whole country to trade in the currency.

Wrong. The couldn't after January 1st, 1999.
Re:This discussion is two years to late ;-) by stripes · 2002-01-01 11:57 · Score: 2

Wrong. The couldn't after January 1st, 1999.

Sure they could, they just back out of the deal. Now, or really in a few short months, they would have to somehow re-issue the old currency. Very hard.

Cash machine problems by Jacco+de+Leeuw · 2002-01-01 06:54 · Score: 4, Interesting

I tried three cash machines this morning (there were queues, people are enthousiastic apparently) and one of them had an error. I don't know whether it was out of bills or there was some bigger problem.

Then I tried the recharging stations for the (chipcard based) debit card called "Chipknip" (similar to Proton in Belgium and Geldkarte in Germany). Two out of three malfunctioning.
Now, these chipcards are not used very much by the general public. But the thing is, banks have promoted it a lot lately, because it would make the transition easier. The banks should have done a better job if they are really serious about this.

Also, I have a device which I can use to recharge my chipcard at home. I connect it to a phone line and then it makes a connection with the bank.
I noticed that from now on I can recharge it with 25 euro as a minimum. Previously the minimum was about 10 euro. I wished they had maintained that minimum amount.

--
-------
Warning: Slashdot may contain traces of nuts.

Re:Cash machine problems by orkysoft · 2002-01-01 09:01 · Score: 1

Those ATM machines' problems probably stem from the fact that they run NT ;-)

--

I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
Re:Cash machine problems by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 15:18 · Score: 0

They also tried to persuade people to use smart cards for personal money transactions years ago here in Portugal. Porta Moedas Multibanco (PMB) is its name. It never got any large uses though.

IMHO the fact you need a separate machine to make transactions kills the concept completely.
Re:Cash machine problems by uebernewby · 2002-01-01 23:32 · Score: 2

They don't run NT. Their backbone is Tandem machines, which run some sort of UNIX.

--

News and bla for computer musicians: http://lomechanik.net/
Re:Cash machine problems by jlockard · 2002-01-02 03:11 · Score: 1

Sorry, TANDEM systems run Tandem OS... Not at all Unix, and very not Unix'ish at all. It's a bastard of a system to get use to, but it works and works well. The Tandem hardware is also VERY awesome. Try taking a shotgun to another computer with the anticipation that it will still be running correctly afterwards.

--
--JLockard - "Some mornings, it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." - Emo Phillips
Re:Cash machine problems by orkysoft · 2002-01-02 03:46 · Score: 1

Hmm... someone told me he saw an ATM with a BSOD once. Maybe the ATMs in your country use something else?

--

I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
Re:Cash machine problems by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-02 13:33 · Score: 1

I was in the back of a london cab the other day that had a video system called "cabview" installed - ran for about 2mins and then bluescreened. As an ardent Machead, I took a picture.

--
That was classic intercourse!

Conversion rate for Gold pressed latinum? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:55 · Score: 0

Any one know where one could find the conversion rate for gold pressed latinum to Euros?

Euro - not such a new currency by dunstan · 2002-01-01 06:56 · Score: 1

While the Euro notes and coins have been issued today, it has been a de-facto currency since Jan 99 when the exchange rates of the participating countries were fixed. At that point the interest rates across the Euro zone was effectively fixed, and the likes of Germany and Greece had their economies tied together. All that has happened today is that the coinage has caught up with the economics.

One of the concerns is the existence of very high denomination notes (up to E500). Some of the Eurozone countries (such as Germany) have a tradition of large purchases being made in cash, and lobbied for high denomination notes. Of course, they will be ideal for drug dealers and other ciminals.

Still, I wish the Eurozone luck, and look forward to seeing which is the first country to either fall off or get chucked out - my money would be on Ireland where booming growth will lead to rampant inflation if they can't change their interest rate to suit.

Dunstan

--
The last scintilla of doubt just rode out of town

Re:Euro - not such a new currency by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:42 · Score: 1

my money would be on Ireland where booming growth will lead to rampant inflation
Not a chance. Growth is expected to hit ~3.5% this year, maybe even a little less next year. The Celtic Tiger is now the Celtic pussycat, having slowed to a sustainable growth level. For example, house prices in some metro areas have been stagnant or falling for months. Inflation is now falling steadily. It would also be politically unacceptable to us to leave. In spite of our rejection of the Nice Treaty, we are ardently for the European project.

Re:oh yay by iphayd · 2002-01-01 06:57 · Score: 1

A world government today gets the same thoughts as a federal government did after the revolution. I think that a world government, which preserves individual countries' rights, will probably do the world a lot of good, as long as every country has equal representation.

While slipping on some issues (like DMCA), the US's system of republic generally works, and I believe that it would be scalable to a global scale.

Create a global constitution, get most of the people (not politicians) to sign off on it, and we should have a world where human rights are better in all countries, pollution is minimized , and the government is still slave to the people (unlike the UN)

Of course, I could be, and probably am, wrong.

Re:United States of Europe New Currency THankful.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:58 · Score: 0

the euro is two years old.

borscht soup smells fine.

learn to count elector's votes.

UK and the Euro by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 06:58 · Score: 0

Kohl went to Mitterand and asked if Germany could reunify. Mitterand agreed if and only if Germany would agree to the Euro. It was a fait accompli from that point onwards and the Brits weren't involved. Naturally Italy went along with it (notice how the Italians were baled out by the Germans when they had problems with EMU - and the rules were altered to accommodate France when they experienced similar, but the British were told to go to hell when the same thing happened to them).
It has become a mantra, but it is entirely political and little to do with hard economics. The UK has to be very careful. The London financial market is very valuable to us British and the French/Germans are itching to get their hands on the trade. Once the UK are in Euroland it is inevitable there will be shift in markets to Frankfurt where the ECB is based. This could spell disaster for the UK economy. The City employs over 100,000 people, just in the square mile and makes huge returns on foreign exchange trading. Further, labour legislation is far more flexible in the UK than in Euroland and taxes are significantly lower. It is certain taxes will have to rise in the UK when they enter Euroland. Unemployment is literally structural to German and French economies - they live with 9-10% unemployment whereas it has been a UK government policy for many years to achieve zero unemployment. Curiously enough I *think* I would vote YES to the Euro, but with great trepidation because I think the UK will lose a lot more than it gains, in the short term - and there is always this nagging doubt that we will get stitched up by the Franco/German/Italian axis. Naturally this axis regards the British as being their typical difficult selves - not joining the party and all that - but this is because we are expected to do it their way, and in truth they have avoided the tough ecomomic questions. The party belongs to this axis, weaker ecomomies are only too glad to be invited, whereas the pragmatic Brits are saying: 'hang on - what about all these technical issues you have ignored?'

Re:UK and the Euro by Jeff+Kelly · 2002-01-01 11:17 · Score: 1

Kohl went to Mitterand and asked if Germany could reunify. Mitterand agreed if and only if Germany would agree to the Euro. It was a fait accompli from that point onwards and the Brits weren't involved.

Germany and France always were the leading forces behind the single currency movement. Not just since the reunification of germany.

Cooperation began in the late fifties when Germany and France agreed on the "Montanunion" which was an early kind of economic pact. It later evolved into the European Community (EC) and then into the European Union as more and more european countries "joined in" (Note the first was only an economical "union" while the latter is also a political one)

Many people have the misconception that EU policy is just another way to "get back" at Great Britain. And that France and Germany are using their political influence in the EU for just that purpose. The driving force behind the european unity Movement was vastly different. Adenauer along with his french counterpart had understood that is was only possible to prevent future wars when the european countries moved closer together.

The prime reason for the last three european wars were the animosities between Germany and France which reach as far back as the seventeenth century.
Since Germany and France were competing for dominance of the continent (which the UK abandoned for India and Africa) "political differences" were only natural and the struggle between France and Germany led to the war of 1848 which was won by Germany.

At the End of WW1 the French took revenge by very nearly ruining Germany with the unreasonable demands of reparation in the "Treaty of Versailles".
This led to a huge economic downturn with unemployment rates of more than 30% an ideal situation for Hitler to take control. He used the german animosity against france (the germans felt they were very unfairly treated) to gain power and the support of the german population and promised them to end the perceived injustice of the Treaty. As anyone knows this led to WW2.

To make a long speech short the heads of state felt that the only way to end all those grudges, animosities and the hatred which had built up since naerly half a millenium was to try to bring europe closer together. Naturally the first treaties were between Germany and France because they bore more grudges against each other than against GB. Also in the late fifties Great Britain did not care much for either Germany (which even today the british popular press names "Krauts") or France.

The political powers in Great Britain were never in much favour of the Unity Movement so it is unfair to say they were intentionally left out, they just didn't care much.

The UK has to be very careful. The London financial market is very valuable to us British and the French/Germans are itching to get their hands on the trade. Once the UK are in Euroland it is inevitable there will be shift in markets to Frankfurt where the ECB is based.
Althoug it is so typical I as a German find it very appaling for you to presume that we just "are itching to get [our] hands on the trade".
I also do not like the continuous whining about how much you Brtions may lose when joining the Euro. We Germans have sacrificed our "Bundesbank" which was virtually THE most influencial financial institution in Europe (btw this was the requirement for the Reunification. For France to allow it we had to sacrifice our control of the financial market in Europe by joining the Euro AND handing over control to the ECB). We also sacrificed one of the most stable and powerful currencies for the Euro.
To assume that this has only something to do with Animosities against Britain is Hybris.

The whole concept of the european union is not about "our" Frakfurt is as much part of europe as london but if you only think about the perceived power that you personally lose then it is maybe better that you will not join the rest of us. Since this is the kind of thinking which the unity movement is trying to abolish.

Curiously enough I *think* I would vote YES to the Euro, but with great trepidation because I think the UK will lose a lot more than it gains, in the short term - and there is always this nagging doubt that we will get stitched up by the Franco/German/Italian axis. Naturally this axis regards the British as being their typical difficult selves - not joining the party and all that - but this is because we are expected to do it their way, and in truth they have avoided the tough ecomomic questions
This is just the propaganda of your british tabloid press. Were it not for Murdoch-controlled newspapers Major would have signed the "Maastricht Treaty" long ago. (Papers like the sun flamed him to hell for actually proposing to "sacrify the pound" and they cost him the election) Most of the current economic problems in the UK stem from not adopting the euro. (Like the threat of several large companies to leave for the continent because the pound is hugly overrated) Even Blair which is "euro friendly" cannot govern against papers like "The Sun" much like Schröder has to be careful of the "Bild-Zeitung". But what do you have to expect from newspapers which use swear-words and clearly racistic comments on their front page?

Cash movements by extensive · 2002-01-01 06:58 · Score: 1

Since each country participating in the common currency is producing its own set of coins (front sides are identical all over Europe but back sides show national images different for each country) it will be very interesting to view the cash streams.

When will the first coin with an Austrian, French or Italian backside show up in my purse? - Will the money eventually get mixed totally or will there always be more German coins in Germany than other countries'? (due to ongoing supply of new coins by the national central banks) - Anyone has a guess?

Re:Cash movements by Joe+Decker · 2002-01-01 07:53 · Score: 5, Interesting

I'd guess that in a few years you'd have a pretty even distribution (actually one based on the relative proportion of coins produced by each country.), perhaps some bit of "more coins of my own country" still visible left in the distribution.
I can provide some data from a loosely analogous situation in the United States. US bills are printed at 12 locations in the US, and are originally distributed to banks based on which of the 12 districts that bank is located in.
I'm part of a fun projectthat involves tracking the motion of US currency. I live near (60 miles from) San Francisco--here are the locations the bills I've marked come from, and their relative proportion.
San Francisco 776 32.0%
Kansas City 323 13.3%
New York 205 8.5%
Dallas 187 7.7%
Minneapolis 182 7.5%
Chicago 146 6.0%
Atlanta 133 5.5%
St. Louis 129 5.3%
Cleveland 99 4.1%
Boston 97 4.0%
Richmond 82 3.4%
Philadelphia 63 2.6%

Now, while the banks print out different numbers of bills and such, it's pretty clear that the San Francisco printed bills dominate my sample.
This analogy is unlike the situation with Euro coins for at least one reason--the lifetime of bills is much shorter than the lifetime of coins. Bills tend to last a year or two in circulation, coins for a decade or more. So, as time goes on, I'd expect mixing to be a much larger effect for coins in the EU than it is for bills in the US...

--
I'm a nature photographer.
Re:Cash movements by spudnic · 2002-01-01 10:58 · Score: 2

How do they determine how much money a country can produce? Can a tiny country produce the same as a large country? Will more of the coins from smaller countries that are produced in lower numbers be taken out of circulation by collectors?

.

--
load "linux",8,1
Re:Cash movements by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:56 · Score: 0

Actually, according to the US Bureau of Printing and Engraving notes are printed only in D.C. and in Fort Worth, Texas. They are printed with the names of the cities of the twelve Federal Reserve Bank district headquarters though.
Re:Cash movements by Joe+Decker · 2002-01-01 16:17 · Score: 1

Thanks for the correction!

--
I'm a nature photographer.
Re:Cash movements by csbruce · 2002-01-01 18:30 · Score: 1

I'm part of a fun project [wheresgeorge.com]that involves tracking the motion of US currency. I live near (60 miles from) San Francisco--here are the locations the bills I've marked come from, and their relative proportion.

Something similar happens in Canada with U.S. coins, especially with pennies. I'd guess that about 5% of the pennies in circulation in Canada are actually American pennies, with smaller proportions for greater denominations. I'm sure that the banks attempt to filter these coins out, though; after all, they are worth more.
Re:Cash movements by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 00:54 · Score: 0

...and different reserve banks recieve different amounts of cash. The SF branch gets more than the others and the KC branch gets about 1/2 as much. The distribution of the reserve banks (combined with their physical size and ability to hold cash) keeps many of them (like the one in Stl) from dealing with large amounts of cash. Even in St Louis, you will find number about like the ones you have.
Re:Cash movements by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 02:23 · Score: 0

> Bills tend to last a year or two in circulation, coins for a decade or more. So, as time goes on, I'd expect mixing to be a much larger effect for coins in the EU than it is for bills in the US...

Make that decades for coins. I regularly ran across coins minted in 1949, up to last year. Even taking into account that these were produced in huge quantities (1949 being the first year DM coins were issued so there must have been more of those initially) that's a lot.

Just hope the new coins wear as well :-)

Michael
Re:Cash movements by srvivn21 · 2002-01-02 06:45 · Score: 1

Coins don't seem to travel as well... Run a quick experiment, and empty the change from your pocket. I happen to have 7 quarters. Somewhere on the coin you will find either a D (minted in Denver, CO) or a P (minted in Philadelphia, PA). All 7 of my quarters (1981, 1989, 1996, 1998, 2000(x2), 2001) have a D stamped on them. I've been trying to collect commemerative quarters from both mints, and have found the only way I can get P minted quarters is by trading with people on the East coast. YMMV (as I am writing from Anchorage, AK), and I'd love to see the results.
Re:Cash movements by gorilla · 2002-01-02 08:09 · Score: 2

A decade would be a short timescale for a coin, except for very low value ones like pennies. 3 out of 4 quarters in my pocket are 20 years old or more (the oldest is 1974). In the UK, until about 10 years ago, it was common to see pre-war 2 bob bits.
Re:Cash movements by Raindeer · 2002-01-03 01:03 · Score: 2

A bit late, since I spent New Years in Vienna. :-)

The coins will be shipped between te various countries, back to their homeland. I don't really know why, but you might be able to look the reasoning somewhere.

--
Use Adsense for Charity
Re:Cash movements by shippo · 2002-01-04 05:30 · Score: 1

I doubt you saw any pre-war shillings or 2 shillings, the earliest would be from 1947, and made from the same cupro-nickle as then then current coins. Prior to 1947 the coins were minted from silver, and were quickly withdrawn afterwards. The only pre-1947 coins I saw were dug up after being found with a metal detector.

Complete image collection at official Euro site by xdc · 2002-01-01 06:59 · Score: 3, Informative

The official Euro site has images of all of the paper and coin Euro currency, as well as in-depth information. Particularly interesting is the fact that each participating country has its own design on the reverse of the coins.

Here is another official site with plenty of info and images.

Re:Complete image collection at official Euro site by weave · 2002-01-01 11:54 · Score: 1, Redundant

Wow, so the fractions are called "cent" now. Now the EU shopkeepers can say things like "That will be 59 cent please" -- just like in the U.S (adjusted for local language of course. Hmm, le cent instead of les cent?).
(from someone who is annoyed as hell at people who can't seem to understand how to pronounce "cents.")
...and from the looks of the coins, they already say just "cent" so it looks like cent is officially a plural of cent now, at least in E.U. :(
It's phat. Word up mother fucker. I did it all for the nookie, the nookie....
Re:Complete image collection at official Euro site by RC514 · 2002-01-01 13:57 · Score: 2, Interesting

There is an official pdf document called Spelling of the words "euro" and "cent" in the official Community languages . The footnote for the English spelling says: "This spelling without an "s" may be seen as departing from usual English practice for currencies." Note the "may be seen".

--
Re:Complete image collection at official Euro site by Kreeblah · 2002-01-01 14:52 · Score: 2, Informative

From that page: "the symbol © indicating copyright protection"

So the Euro is copyrighted? But by whom? And if it's copyrighted, the copyright owner could, theoretically, shut out people or member states on a whim . . . (Not that it'd happen, but it's an interesting thought)
Re:Complete image collection at official Euro site by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 21:06 · Score: 0

copy any money and you get to feel the power of the banks that monopolized money. They are so unfair!

No, more like the Soviet Union by Ars-Fartsica · 2002-01-01 06:59 · Score: 2

The oversight committees and policy boards of a conglomerate-state EU are completely beyond the oversight of individual voters in the respective member nations. Progress? Sure, if you consider bureaucracy progress. Once again, the Americans got it right here - a weak President, with the real power resting on locally elected officials.

The EU on the other hand is governed by the same socialist leftovers who fled from elected politics in member nations years ago.

Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by GigsVT · 2002-01-01 08:17 · Score: 2

We got it right at first, I agree.

Then we let the executive branch create huge federal police forces, under the guise of the treasury department. Federal agency courts next, seperate, though accountable to (if you're rich enough to appeal it that far), the main judiciary.

The executive order was one of the major things that destroyed the balance of power. That, and the ability to have undeclared wars, and the expansion of the federal government far past what the commerce clause allows.

Tell me how the federal government going against the wishes of the voters in California and raiding cannabis clubs that were legal is justified. Interstate commerce? Hardly, most of it was grown locally and never left the state. They weren't even commercial operations.

--
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by tempmpi · 2002-01-01 10:08 · Score: 1

The oversight committees and policy boards of a conglomerate-state EU are completely beyond the oversight of individual voters in the respective member nations.
The important common EU political institutions aren't elected very directly, but that doesn't mean they are completely out of the controll of the voters. Sure there is a lot of bureaucracy in the EU, but nothing is perfect.
Also you said that it is better that the president is weak and it is important that the real power rests on locally elected persons. I think you didn't really understand what the EU is today. (or maybe I just didn't understand what you wanted to say) The member states of the EU are much weaker connected than the members of the USA are. The central EU political institiutions have very limited power. Almost all important decisions are made by the local goverments of the member states. In fact most decesions by the eu goverment need law changes in the member states and if the local goverment doesn't change these laws, it has almost no power to force them to do so and if these laws don't change nothing changes for the individual citizien in the member state.
All member states have democratic political systems, but there are big differences between the members. [The member states are democratic in an european way: an maybe not completely free speech (nazi hate speech is banned in some eu states) but no capital punishment.]
The EU on the other hand is governed by the same socialist leftovers who fled from elected politics in member nations years ago.
Many member states have middle-leftists/socialist goverments right now. At least Great Britain, Germany and i think France, too.

--
Jan
Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by DerekLyons · 2002-01-01 12:07 · Score: 3, Informative

Tell me how the federal government going against the wishes of the voters in California and raiding cannabis clubs that were legal is justified.

Allow me to direct you to a portion of Article VI of the Constitution:
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
Please note where the Constitution is specifically the supreme law of the land, as well as the clause: anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. It's a longstanding priciple of the US Goverment that the Federal laws and Courts are supreme to all other laws and Courts in the nation. In fact, the United States fought a war over the issue of States rights over Federal rights. This debate goes back to the Articles of Confederation (and in fact originates well before) and continues to this day over the relative strengths of the State and Federal goverments.
Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by GigsVT · 2002-01-01 13:04 · Score: 1

Well, let me point you to

Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

This has always been interperted to leave most criminal law in the hands of the states, unless somehow those criminal acts cross state lines or affect interstate commerce.

Generally, the federal government originally had no power except that which was enumerated, or which fell into the commerce clause. They have consistantly stretched this definition.

--
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by spanky555 · 2002-01-01 13:42 · Score: 1

You said it. Do you know that the EPA actually has ARMED agents now? WTF does the EPA need armed agents for? I'd question any government agent at ALL being armed, because of (I think) the 10th Amendment, which basically says, any rights not specifically granted to the government, the government does not have. The right to keep and bear arms is without a doubt granted to individual citizens, but I'm not so sure about Random J. Agency having them.

And you are correct, the executive order is an abhorrent thing - Clinton was one of the biggest abusers. He and Hitlery ruled like a pair of aristocrats, or worse, despots, that considered themselves completely above the law. How people can STILL continue to sing their praises is beyond me. Of course, the same people who sing their praises are screaming about Ashcroft "shredding the Constitution". What a joke - they better look to their hero to see who has shredded the Constitution.
Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:52 · Score: 0

If you would look at what cliton shredded, it was for his on protection for the most part. Bla.. bla blow job. And for silly reasons such has that. On the other hand Ashcroft and Co. wont to shredded the Constitution to force thier own religions/political/economical views on the popultation(dam south). Both are bad but Clinton's mistakes did not affect many people beyond the Clintons and provided many housr of entertanment(star report). How long will it take to fix Mr. "Populer vote means nothing" Bush's and "bash the gay and athist" Ashcroft's?
Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by FreeUser · 2002-01-01 16:26 · Score: 3, Informative

ahem. The constitution explicitely states that any powers not explicitly granted to the federal government by the constitution in fact devolve to the state or local level, or to the people themselves.

The constitution does not grant the federal government the right to regulate or ban drug consumption, merely to regulate (or ban) its trade across state lines. If cannibis is grown in california and consumed in california, the federal government has no constitutional right to get involved. The matter is entirely subject to state law, which in California's case makes the medicinal use and consumption legal.

The constitution states that it is the supreme law of the land.

The constitution states that federal laws passwd in accordance to the constitution take precedence over state and local laws.

However, the constitution also states, as noted before, that laws only related to those powers explicitly granted the federal government may be passed. The drug laws, indeed the entire drug war, is unconstitutional. Unfortunately they are also popular. So, like the forced expulsion of the Mormons from Illinois for practicing an unpopular religion in the nineteenth century, and like the trail of tears (when the american indians were forced from their home by the executive branch and the president after winning their case before the supreme court) our government is simply doing what it often has in the face of widespread public complacency: ignoring the constitution completely.

The fact that the federal government routinely violates the constitution and tramples state and local rights should not be a surprise to anyone who has been watching the downward spiral of American politics over the last couple of decades. While the blatent contempt shown for the will of the people (the California law was passed as a public referendum) is perhaps surprising, it is IMHO but one of the more obvious signs that our government, particularly at the federal level, is of, by and for the special interests, primarilly those best funded, namely corporate interests, and that the will of the people plays little if any roll whatsoever. And how could it be otherwise, with widespread legalized bribery of congress and only two, equally corrupt, parties to choose from?

--
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
Re:No, more like the Soviet Union by spanky555 · 2002-01-01 17:02 · Score: 1

If you would look at what cliton shredded, it was for his on protection for the most part. Bla.. bla blow job. And for silly reasons such has that.

LOL. Oh, you're killing me here, thanks for the laugh. Are you for real? Are you going to university? Don't believe everything your prof says.
Clinton was THE biggest violator of the Constitution. Here's a very small list:
http://www.webleyweb.com/tle/libe42-19980727-03. ht ml
There are many others, including executive orders SIGNING OVER AMERICAN LAND to be the property of the UN. Then there's his infamous pardons at the end.Then there are all the allegations about the mysterious deaths of folks who maybe were a little too close to him. That's veering into conspiracy-land, but no other president has had so many ties and suspicions circling them, not even JFK. I mean, at least JFK didn't have allegations of outright TREASON circling him (selling secrets to China) And yet, Clinton apologists continue to support the notion that Clinton's perjury was "to save his family" and "just about sex". To think I voted for the no-good piece of white trash in 1992...in any case, I'm sure years down the road, most of the facts will start to turn up. It's kind of scary that Bush signed something preventing a much-needed investigation into Clinton...very odd, but I suspect it's a matter of the powerful watching out for each other.

How long will it take to fix Mr. "Populer vote means nothing" Bush's...

ROTFLMAO!!!! As for the popular vote, it doesn't mean anything, and it never was meant to. I didn't vote for Bush, I voted Libertarian, so I guess I know how the common man might feel cheated. But folks who actually know the system know the electoral college is there so that New York and California aren't the only places where candidates have to go on the campaign trail, and "feelings" on the election matter not at all - facts do. And don't talk of a "stolen election" - the closest thing that can be shown of any rigging was that black REPUBLICAN voters may have been disenfranchised. Hmmmm...it's almost funny (if so many people didn't actually believe it) that Democrats and NAACP-types are claiming that Bush stole the election - how the hell could they do that, when the counties that Gore wanted to recount were Democrat-controlled?

As for "bashing gay and atheists" I haven't seen that, and even if I had, how is "bashing" shredding any Constitution? That's just free speech, unpopular as it may be. Just because someone disagrees with a certain worldview, doesn't mean that person is a homophobe (whatever that word means) or radical Christian. Why is that a person's personal views only matter if they are on the right? If they are on the left, it's never called into question.

Why do liberals feel they can jam THEIR religions/political/economical views down the populace's throat any more than someone on the right? I know, when a conservative tries to do the same, it's hate speech, I forgot. And what economical view is Ashcroft "jamming down" the throat of a country that has strong roots in capitalism anyway? If you want something else (communism, socialism), move somewhere else. Anything Bush's administration is pushing for dovetails quite nicely with what a lot of Americans want, and also with a strong TRADITION of all three: religion/political/economical...did you know that over 80% of Americans claim they are Christian? Where's the problem in having officials who are openly Christian, too? You obviously sympathize with gays; why do you want Christians to be "closeted" any more than you would want gays to be closeted? Why do liberals always want their politics to reflect some perfect utopia in their own mind, rather than reality?

For the record, I am AGNOSTIC, so I don't really care what religious beliefs people in power hold as long as I am not forced to do anything I don't want. They can believe in faeries for all I care. Separation of church and state was only there to prevent something akin to Inquisition, and that's not too bloody likely. People are just WAY too touchy when someone like Ashcroft says he's a conservative Christian, like he's got horns or something. If you grab twenty folks from U.S completey randomly, you're bound to come up with at least one or two people who agree with Ashcroft for the most part.

There are some things done that I have some concern about when it comes to Ashcroft*, but believe me, I feel much more comfortable having him in office after Reno. Good grief, she was in no way even qualified for the job, and the Dems were grilling Ashcroft during Senate hearings like he was the next Hitler, and claiming they were concerned about his personal views, blah blah blah. Meanwhile, Reno should be investigated for her "work" during Hitlery and Bill's reign.

*And military tribunals for non-citizens are NOT one of my concerns. There is plenty of precent for this. My concerns with Ashcroft are kind of nebulous right now, and I can't really name any one thing he's done that I can put my finger on and say, "Now that's just dictatorship in disguise." But I'm watching him. I'm a tad nervous.

Your Perl module is... by willamowius · 2002-01-01 07:01 · Score: 1

Finance::Currency::Convert if you have to do a lot of conversions.

About the coins... by jeti · 2002-01-01 07:02 · Score: 2

You should notice that Euro coins from different countries all have the same frontside. The backside is covered with national symbols. So you won't have to look twice to recognize an Euro coin no matter where you are in Europe.

HOWEVER things like the alloy and weight are not really specified. And this is likely to cause a mess with vending machines, scales and counting machines.

Re:About the coins... by spudnic · 2002-01-01 10:56 · Score: 2

It said on the Euro website that while a country could put whatever they wanted on the back of the coin, it had to maintain a standard weight.

It would be foolish for them to allow coins that are supposed to be interchangeable to weigh different amounts. As for the alloy, I can only assume that that will be a standard also.

--
load "linux",8,1
Re:About the coins... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:52 · Score: 0

I'm in the Netherlands at the moment and going to travel to Finland but first visiting Germany, so I'll have coins from three different countries. I was just wondering how many times cops will be called to check out my "counterfeit" Euros...
Re:About the coins... by mce · 2002-01-01 13:31 · Score: 2

I really wonder where you got that bit of FUD about the alloys. Everything is normed to be exactly the same, with the single exception of the back side of the coins. It simply has to be, otherwise vending machines would not work at all.

The only issues are whether all producers are capable of sticking to the allowed tolerances and whether those who programmed the vending machines didn't stick to closely to the official norm, ignoring (part of) the tolerances. The first issue should be a non-issue, I think. After all, it alos applied to the previous national coins. The second one can be corrected if needed.

--
Linux user since early January 1992.
Re:About the coins... by jeti · 2002-01-01 19:53 · Score: 2

I read up a bit about the topic and it looks
like I have been really misinformed.

I could only find one serious problem mentioned for the one and two Euro coins:
Ring to core interface oxidation problems. If the conductivity of this interface is not controlled very carefully, then coin validators will have to operate with wide acceptance windows, lowering security.
Re:About the coins... by gorilla · 2002-01-02 08:04 · Score: 2

I don't expect this will be a major problem. There are many similar bimetal coins already minted around the world, eg the Canadian $2 coin.

Good question. Simple answer. by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 07:03 · Score: 3, Informative

Your perception that some currencies are weak/strong is wrong.
THe member countries of the Euro have had their currencies locked together for at least a year now (I think more than that, but I don't know for sure). Their values relative to each other, do not flucuate at all. Money markets have been trading the Euro for a long time now; it's only the presence of the physical cash that is changing today.

The whole point is that the member countries move together, not separately. Due to the nature of the Euro, it CANNOT devaluate in one country and not another. As for goods/services, yes, of course... it's still supply/demand.
Withiin the EU, people can travel, work and live in other countries, etc... It's becoming a large customs zone, where once you are in, you are free to move about as you please. You'll notice your first stop in an EU country when going to europe, you will have to clear customs. After that, you are relatively free.. you may have to show a passport, but that's it.

Re:Good question. Simple answer. by Trojan · 2002-01-01 11:53 · Score: 1

The currencies have been locked since January 1, 1999. So for the last three years, these 12 currencies have been 12 different representations of the same thing.

The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by ginkelb · 2002-01-01 07:05 · Score: 1, Interesting

I live in Holland and for the last year i have been fearing the thing that happend this morning. This morning, as everybody knows, the euro became the official currency in the Netherlands and Europe. The comming of the Euro has had a lot of impact in daily life before this morning.

For the last couple of months all prices in supermarkets and all point of sale have been double priced. The prices had to be displayed in the normal currency and the Euro. This was done so the normal people could check to see that the price conversion was made correctly.

The idea was that prices would remain the same. Yehhh, right.

In the last couple of months general prices in the Netherlands were raised bij 15%. Almost all price conversions were made so that the new Euro price was a nice and round figure. 2,95 EURO in stead of 2,72 Euro for example.

These things are the things i have been fearing of. And these fears came through. Not to think of the drop of value of the Euro compaired to the Dollar. The euro was to become a strong currency. But since its introduction in the financial sector a year ago it droped from about $1,20 to $0,85. Now that it is introduced into the general public we will have to see if this value will hold.

The coming of the Euro has been feared by me and others. Im saddend that it has arrived. Not only because of the raised prices that had nothing to do with the normal inflation but also because we have to say farewell to our dutch banknotes and coins.

The Euro is here, and now i always have to use the same currency as the french. And i hate the french.

--
Real programmers don't document.
It was hard to write so it should be hard to understand.

Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 07:09 · Score: 2

Having just visited your wonderful country.. I can say that I will miss seeing your wonderful banknotes the next time I am in The Netherlands.

The cash in NL is definately the coolest I've seen anywhere. No politicians on it, cool abstract artwork, and just plain nice looking notes. Some of the coins lack... but I got a kick out of the 2.5fl coin :)

And I shudder to think of price in Amsterdam going up another %15, it's expensive enough already.
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by Wickie · 2002-01-01 07:29 · Score: 1

For people curious about the look of the Dutch banknotes, you can see them here:
http://home.planet.nl/~j.piers/home.html. My favourite is the 100 guilder note.
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:58 · Score: 0

Well I'm sorry to tell you this but our currency rate has been linked to the French frank for years (as in fixed no chance in rates ever). We have always been a sub currency of the German mark and believe it our not the Euro is a stable currency.

The Euro notes and coins are just the final step in something that has already been with us for years. So what if the Euro is under valued at the moment (the current rate is mostly caused by sentiment and not by the real value of the economy). This will only cause more export ftrom the Euro zone countries and will strenghten our economies.
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by linzeal · 2002-01-01 08:08 · Score: 2

This gold coin from the netherlands is the only exposure I've had in the US yet and I got it in november. It was in a bag of chocolate coins ;)

--
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:18 · Score: 0

The warranty on stuff like refrigerators (and TV's also I believe) is raised from 1 year to 2 year.

Now you may guess one time who's going to pay for that?
(I'll give you one hint. It is not the manufacturer.)
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by akihabara · 2002-01-01 09:53 · Score: 1

believe it our not the Euro is a stable currency

If your idea of stable is losing 30% of its value to the dollar in 3 years, then yeah, it is stable.

And despite the competitive devaluation (that the Frogs always claimed the Brits wanted to pull off - LOL), the European economy still sucks and everyone still wants to in vest in the U.S. and U.K.
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:08 · Score: 0

If your idea of stable is losing 30% of its value to the dollar in 3 years, then yeah, it is stable.

well, you are making the asertion that dollar is stable
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by uebernewby · 2002-01-01 23:36 · Score: 2

In the last couple of months general prices in the Netherlands were raised bij 15%.

Add to this the price increase we had in jan. 2001 when they upped VAT, and it almost seems as if the Dutch government *wants* inflation.

--

News and bla for computer musicians: http://lomechanik.net/
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by sangdrax · 2002-01-01 23:52 · Score: 1

The drop of value of the Euro ain't that bad. It makes international trade flourish because our products become cheaper to the outside world. Ofcourse, American products etc become more expensive to us Europeans, so we are more eager to buy European products instead - boosting economy too.

I hope the prices that went up will go down again soon.. No way to really tell.. Competition generally fixes that kind of stuff pretty well, but all dutch know CompactDisc-prices are already helt artificially high for years now.

BTW, Having a single currency for multiple nations /doesn't/ mean the coin has the same value for every nation! A slice of bread still varies alot in price across Europe.
Re:The Euro is here, i can feel it in my wallet. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 02:25 · Score: 0

Yep, I live in the Netherlands, and am quite sad that the dutch guilder notes are going to disappear. They looked much nicer than the new Euro notes, but I guess that's because they had to make a compromise with the design of the euro bills. Still, I think I will find the Euro very usefull when I'm on ski-holiday in Austria later this month. Finally I won't have to bother changing the left over coins and bills back to guilders.
If you got a kick out of the NLG 2.50 coin, then you should also get a kick out of the 1 and 2 euro coins. They are worth respectively NLG 2.20 and NLG 4.40.
And about the price increases, I don't really think it is going to be a problem. Of course, prices will be rounded to some nice euro amount, and that will probably increase prices somewhat, but I don't think they will increase by 15%, that's a ridiculous amount. Some shop's and restaurants haven't even rounded the prices, but just converted them to euros. For instance, I went out for a pizza yesterday, and paid for it in euros. I had to pay 6.81 EUR, which is exactly the same as the 15 guilders I had to pay before.

10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by Otis_INF · 2002-01-01 07:05 · Score: 2

The funny thing with the new Euro coins is: the thailand coin of 10 baht is almost the same in size and weight as the 2 euro coin. So when a cigarettemachine accepts 2 Euro coins, it most definitely will also accept 10-baht coins and will recognize them as 2 Euro. 10 Baht is roughly 20 eurocent in value, so it's very worth it.

It's so odd that they came up with a design of a coin that looks so similar to a foreign coin with so little value compared to the eurocoin.

Anyone's planning a trip to Thailand soon? :)

--
Never underestimate the relief of true separation of Religion and State.

Re:10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by sconest · 2002-01-01 07:10 · Score: 2, Informative

I read an article on Reuters some days ago. Maker of such machines are aware of that and tested their machine with the bath coin. They said it was rejected 99 times out of 100.

--
Guvf vf abg n EBG zrffntr
Re:10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:50 · Score: 0

The 10 bath coin was made after the 2 Euro coin. The specifications of the 2 Euro coin where already sent out to al banking institutions in the World but the Thai must have forgotten about this. It's a shame I first heard about the 10 bath coin 2 days after may boss left for a vacation in Thailand.
Re:10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by eander315 · 2002-01-01 09:52 · Score: 2, Informative

Most vending machines test various properties of a coin before it is accepted, which reduces the chances of accepting incorrect coins of similar size and weight:
"The key to making a vending machine work is the mechanism that figures out the value of the money you put in them. When you put coins into the machine, it runs a series of tests to find out the coins' dimensions, weight, electric properties, and magnetic properties. This enables it to figure out the denomination of the coin, and whether it is legal tender. The machine rejects coins that fail the tests."
I found this on a kid's site, but it does the best job of explaining the process quickly.
Re:10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by ricudis · 2002-01-01 13:35 · Score: 1

That's actually more common than you'd expect - I remember a particular Swiss coin having the same dimensions and similar weight to an old 50 Greek Drachmas coin.
The coin actually manged to pass the check on some vending machines, but not too many. I suspect they use more intelligent tests than just size and weight (conductivity, perhaps?). It would be safe to conclude that, as coin size ranges are rather limited to be practical, there surely would have been coins with the same size, and vending machine manufacturers are most probably aware of this.
Re:10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:25 · Score: 0

1 and 2 euro coins have sandwiched composition, middle part actually consisting of three layers. Magnetic properties of these coins are quite different from simple bi-metal coins (which 10 baht most probably is), and probably about all vending machines in the eurozone are advanced enough to differentiate these coins.

Also, although coins may look similar, attempts are made to find unique metallic alloys giving the coins unique density and magnetic properties. I don't know the silvery or copperish-looking metals, but the goldish one is "Nordic Gold" alloy designed by finnish metal company Outokumpu. Outokumpu does not collect license fees from using this alloy, and it's used at least in Swedish krona outside euro coins.

In comparison, I found it interesting that on my three-week eastern european trip, lithuanian 2 liti (if I recall correctly) coins looked so similar to 10 FIM coins in most aspects. I kept some of them in my pocket, and tried one on coke vending machine at home - and yes, it accepted it as 10 FIM coin. I'm quite certain that those coins are actually made by Finnish Mint, as they make coins for several small eastern european countries. Win in this case was not too dramatic though, 2 LIT was roughly equal to 8 FIM or so.
Re:10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by Captain_Chaos · 2002-01-01 22:58 · Score: 1

Have you actually tried it?

I don't think it would work, for two reasons: first, vending machines are _very_ particular about the size and weight, so 'almost' the same is probably not good enough. Second, size and weight are not the only properties of a coin checked by a vending machine. It also looks at its composition, thickness, etc.

There are so many different coins in the world that it would be impossible to avoid having coins with similar size and weight as some other coin in the world...

/Pepijn
Re:10 baht coins look like 2 Euro (for machines) by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 02:35 · Score: 0

Newspaper article in Amsterdam a month or so ago pointed out
a) the problem of nearly-identical coins from non-EU countries colliding with EU coins and
b) the Dutch Mint telling the coin-vending machine builders to just deal with it; changing the coin in question was not going to happen.

( Specifically, a Thai coin was identical in dimensions, metals and electrical specifications to the Dutch 1 EU coin )

Yes, it is a problem which can be leveraged by the small number of people who travel around, know about the limitations and have an unmet desire to shove random coins in vending machines.

Do you really think that it is going to be a significant problem (>0.5% of income) for the average vending machine operator? Get real.

What pisses me off is having to change my working currency again, having changes countries a few months ago ;)

--Just another Aussie in NL.

Luxembourg by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:12 · Score: 0

FYI

Luxembourg is:
a) the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg: an independent country
b) the city Luxembourgh: the capital of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg
c) the province Luxembourg: a part (province) of the French speaking part of Belgium.

The Grand Duchy of Luxembourg is a member of the European Union. Before the euro (EUR), its currency was the Luxembourg franc (LUF), whose value was equal to the value of the Belgian franc, because both countries were united in the BLEU Belgian-Luxembourg Economical Union.

Not enough wealth (yet) by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:13 · Score: 0

To create a viable world government would require the support of the wealthy nations more than any others. Unless you can demonstrate that the quality of life in the wealthy nations will rise as a result of one more level of government, you can't make the case, and right now you can't make the argument. Bringing a country like Rwanda somewhere near the standard of living of a Western nation would require a huge investment no one is willing to make so far.

Re:Not enough wealth (yet) by iphayd · 2002-01-01 11:42 · Score: 1

"Bringing a country like Rwanda somewhere near the standard of living of a Western nation would require a huge investment no one is willing to make so far."

Of course the idea of reducing cesspool countries where terrorism can grow isn't an interest of any wealthy nations right now.

As to Archie Bunker's reply:

I don't like the policies of Texas, therefore I don't live there. We are a republic of independent states, with a unifying government which guarantees equal trade between states, unified defense, and some other unified laws (both good and bad.)

I am NOT for abolishing nations' rights to govern their people. I am for free trade, free movement of people, and unified laws for global matters (human rights, pollution.) A global government should _not_ care about drugs, but _should_ care about the trafficking of drugs to countries where drugs are illegal.

In regards to spudnic's comment:

While I said equal representation, I was more interested in not allowing the US to be the dominant force. I also mentioned that I believe that the US's form of republic should be scalable to a global level. I would like to see a global congress, elected by their people.

I think that a global government is forming around us, but it is NOT the kind of government we want. None of the officials are elected. Trials are secret. Its military is ineffective.

When the US was formed, we had truly great people who designed our government. Now we have an idiot who calls a manhunt a war (and that uses the president's wartime right without congress declaring war), who followed a guy that was in the office because "the prez can get chicks", following the idiot's dad, following a bad actor who made an even worse politician.

We NEED someone of Thomas Jefferson's caliber to create a global government, otherwise we WILL end up with the tyranny that is the UN. The problem is that the power is not in the government, and if government is done right, they lose power.

There's a flip side. by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 07:16 · Score: 2

Someone in an area where there is no work now has basically no barrier to entry into moving somewehre else and getting a good job.
Conversley, companies can now open up in other places because they may be able to get cheaper labor. All in all, the freedom of movement and unified currency should help balance things out.

The Euro was introduced two years ago! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:19 · Score: 0

The only thing really new about today is that the Euro currency is appearing. The member nations pegged their national currencies to the Euro two years ago (i.e., the Deutsch Mark became a derivative currency. 1 DM = .6 EUR or so). Thus, the Euro has been the REAL unit since that time.

Honestly, though, the Euro's going to have a tough go of it. Attempting to forge a single common currency among a group of nations with separate governments (and monetary policy) is simply too unstable. What happens when the Italians (the nation with 50 governments in as many years) discover they can capitalize on the more sane (relatively speaking) policies of Germany and start spending like crazy, destabilizing the currency? It'll happen.

Watching all the continental Europeans scramble to abandon their democratically-elected governments in favor of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels is a wonder to behold. This Euro currency is just another brick in the new European bureaucratic state.

Re:The Euro was introduced two years ago! by yggdrazil · 2002-01-01 10:58 · Score: 1

Watching all the continental Europeans scramble to abandon their democratically-elected governments in favor of unelected bureaucrats in Brussels is a wonder to behold. This Euro currency is just another brick in the new European bureaucratic state.

The European Central Bank is in Frankfurt, not Brussels.

The officials/board members of the ECB are appointed by the various national central banks.

National bank officials are not elected by the people, not in the UK, not in the US and not the ECB. They are appointed by their governments, but are independent of government policies. So democratically it doesn't matter wether the central bank is national or European.

Many European countries has had their currencies pegged to the D-Mark for years, if not decades. This was beneficial to these countries' export businesses, but these countries didn't get much say in the German central bank. With the Euro, these countries actually get more say and much less risk. The Euro is basically a European-wide D-Mark.

Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? - See HOWTO by Lennie · 2002-01-01 07:23 · Score: 2, Informative

See the HOWTO:
Google.

--
New things are always on the horizon

not Deutschmark by javaaddikt · 2002-01-01 07:23 · Score: 1

It's just "Mark"... You don't say Punts, Francs, and Americandollars... Furthermore it is Mark singular or plural.

Re:not Deutschmark by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:28 · Score: 0

In German, "Mark" is certainly both singular and plural, but not in English. Secondly, "Mark" (without the "Deutsch" in front) was the currency pre-Hitler. "Deutsch" is most definitely part of the most recent German currency (prior to this Euro), as the name of the Bundesrepublik Deutschland's currency includes the word "Deutsch".
Re:not Deutschmark by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:30 · Score: 0

was,was,was....
Re:not Deutschmark by dbolger · 2002-01-01 08:40 · Score: 1

well, those of us in Australia say "American Dollars", and those of us in Belgium say "French Francs" (or whatever the Belgian way of saying it is). As for "Punt", that's just "Pound" in the Irish tongue.

Dave.
Re:not Deutschmark by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:04 · Score: 0

You're confused. Mark is the (now terminated) Finnish currency.
Re:not Deutschmark by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 21:30 · Score: 0

Well, I'm confused why foreigners keep referring to the Finnish mark by its Finnish name "markka", considering that "markka" is the Finnish word for the medieval weight unit mark, which has then found its way to the name of several currencies.
Re:not Deutschmark by vkt-tje · 2002-01-02 03:08 · Score: 1

You should update your sig. To say "Stupid 7" for example.

Belgians and Frenchmen will both call their respective currency "Franc" (Or "Frank")
There is of course a Belgian franc and a Frensh Franc. 1FRF ~= 6BEF btw...
france != belgium. (though some peaple in both countries would like it to be so)

--

120 chars is not enough!

The Euro and the Dollar by El+Cabri · 2002-01-01 07:25 · Score: 3, Insightful

When banknotes where first introduced over 17th to 19th century, they were viewed as certificates that a certain bank (usually a single "central bank" per country), would exchange for something of tangible value (usually an equivalent in coins made of precious metal). After WWII a monetary system was introduced in which the USD was the only bill pegged to gold, and other currencies were floating against it. The emptyness of the Fed's gold reserve and the oil crisis broke that system in the 70s, replaced for the first time by the complete floating of all currencies agains each other, with none pegged to any tangible good, and the IMF playinga pivotal role of watchdog to ensure this balance does not diverge.

But the USD became used so widely in international transactions, that it became the de-facto standard against which the currencies values were measured. This gave a huge technical priviledge to the US : the USD could be ridiculously cheap, as it was in the early 90s (when a USD was worth the equivalent of about 0.80 euros in the european currencies of the time), without making holders of USD poorer, since the price of goods on international markets was labelled in USD, giving the US industry an artificial competitive advantage.

Conversely, the USD could be ridiculously overpriced, such as in the mid 80s when it was 25% more expensive then it is now compared to European currencies, making it easier for the US government to finance a huge deficit, while still being able to sustain an abysmal deficit in the balance of payments (since creditor institutions used USD as their reserve currency)

The main economic sense behind the euro is to take away part of that privilege from the US, by making Europe a zone where internal business could be made without any influence of the USD's values. Actual euro banknotes allows banks around the world to actually stash the currency, and makes the integration irreversible, and hence more reliable.

So the US has been considerably opposed to Europe monetary integration, and have worked hard, with their British sidekicks, to make it not happen. Actually the changeover might be seen as the biggest thing that has went in the face of US national interest in the last 30 years, maybe since the end of WWII.

Re:The Euro and the Dollar by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:36 · Score: 0

Whatever man.
In trying times people will still flock to almighty $$ leaving Euro where it belongs , trash bin.
Re:The Euro and the Dollar by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:35 · Score: 0

Or so you say.
It's impressive that any thing threatening to change the status of the US Dollar as the god of currencies should create such reactions. I really hope the Euro will represent something different, as opposed to the USD lovers' obsession with money.
Re:The Euro and the Dollar by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:12 · Score: 0

Where do you get the idea that US dollar is/was the only one backed by gold? I swear 90% of the world's people live in a fantasy land.
Re:The Euro and the Dollar by El+Cabri · 2002-01-01 13:33 · Score: 1

By knowing my history, that's all.
Bretton Woods conference 1944.
Re:The Euro and the Dollar by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 14:21 · Score: 0

Please shut up.

Go cut and paste somewhere else.

Your diatribe has been posted to at least 4 other boards. Plus it's incorrect.
Re:The Euro and the Dollar by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 17:25 · Score: 0

Interesting how, this being one of the more interesting and revealing postings, was downrated by (american?) moderators... Used to be score=4, now down to 2... Hmmm...

EURO is a BIG SUCCESS by NigelJohnstone · 2002-01-01 07:29 · Score: 1

I've listen to endless naysayers trying to talk down the Euro, there has been hard attacks on it on the currency markets. Yet there was no Soros like success. Every attempt to break it failed.

Its held firm for 3 years now. The inter-Europe exchange rates have all held firm, no Euro zone country has had to adjust its Euro exchange rate and thats despite the worldwide economic downturn.

ITS A BIG SUCCESS.

Give up naysayers - you lost.

Re:EURO is a BIG SUCCESS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:38 · Score: 0

Going from 1.25 to .90/$ is not exactly a big success, is it ?
Re:EURO is a BIG SUCCESS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:42 · Score: 0

Success, schmuckcess.
Going from nothing to a 300 millions people currency zone IS a big success, and HAS changed and WILL change the world's economy. Already Europe doesn't have to care anymore about exchange rates as far as internal transactions are concerned. The euro/dollar exchange rate is something a lot less important than what the mark/dollar exchange rate was a few years ago.
That's the important thing: OK, the rates have gone down, but it does not matter anymore, or at least a lot less.
Re:EURO is a BIG SUCCESS by El+Cabri · 2002-01-01 09:23 · Score: 1

Going from 1.25 to .90/$ is not exactly a big success, is it ?

In three years, it's nothing exceptionnal.

I don't eat USD. I don't pay my rent and my car in USD. And actually my food, rent and car haven't been 30% more expensive in three years.

The remarkable period of growth that has just ended in the US had begun with a ridiculously undervalued dollar in the early 90s. If you use the FF and DM rates to 1 euro, the dollar was then worth about 0.80 euros, and the Americans were quite happy with it, and the european governments were actually complaining.

1.25$/euro was grossly overvalued. 0.90$/euro is slightly undervalued. That's all.
Re:EURO is a BIG SUCCESS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:42 · Score: 0

There have been no exchange rates since 1999, so they couln't possibly adjust. The Euro has been there as currency since 1999, only coins and bills haven't been introduced until today.
Re:EURO is a BIG SUCCESS by yggdrazil · 2002-01-01 11:04 · Score: 1

Going from 1.25 to .90/$ is not exactly a big success, is it ?

Most of EU countries' trade is with other EU countries. With the euro, companies in the eurozone has zero currency risk trading within the eurozone. This has been a great success for three years already, and will only become more and more important now.

Eurozone businesses will increasingly demand to pay for imports from other European countries in euros, putting the currency risk on imports squarely on companies in non-Eurozone countries.

Dollars to pounds conversion by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:33 · Score: 0

Remember, with the New Year upon us many of us will be converting dollars to pounds after a quick trip to McDonalds. :-)

Euro symbol in HTML by Animats · 2002-01-01 07:34 · Score: 5, Informative

€ is preferably expressed using the HTML character escape "€". Browsers back to at least Netscape 4 understand this. Use of the HTML escape is preferable to using a character code greater than 128, which is font-dependent. Most current HTML editors, like Dreamweaver, will insert "€" from the "insert symbol" menu, rather than using a character code greater than 128.

Re:Euro symbol in HTML by GigsVT · 2002-01-01 08:51 · Score: 1

Looks like a big question mark in Opera 6 in Linux.

--
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by evvk · 2002-01-01 09:36 · Score: 1

Who cares about stupid extra symbols? Just because the yanks have their S with strikes, is a special symbol needed? Why not just use plain old 'e'? I'll keep using that (although I'd rather have stuck to using marks.. eu sucks, a fscking megacorp lobbying organization). (And I couldn't have thought of a worse name for the currency...)
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:44 · Score: 1, Informative

The character code in HTML does not depend on the font (or the encoding, for that matter). Character codes always refer to Unicode.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 11:18 · Score: 1

yeah, the name is completely stupid. The most "European" name for the currency would be the Crown/Shilling/Penny, but it doesn't really fit in well with the EU makeup. Does anyone know where "Dollar" comes from? Dinar? Drachma? Cents are obviously from % or Centime. Seems kind of strange that the USA didn't end up with some kind of Pound variant to me.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Menthos · 2002-01-01 11:53 · Score: 1

Who cares about stupid extra symbols? Just because the yanks have their S with strikes, is a special symbol needed? Why not just use plain old 'e'?
Probably because an 'e' is very ambigous.
I'll keep using that (although I'd rather have stuck to using marks.. eu sucks, a fscking megacorp lobbying organization).
That's one opinion, there are more of them. I think most of them are unrelated to the Euro itself and are more about the EU and EMU. Even EU opponists probably appreciate the fact that they don't have to exchange currencies when they go abroad in Europe, one would think, and that price levels are easier to compare.
(And I couldn't have thought of a worse name for the currency...)
Remember that it has to be easily pronouncable in a lot of languages. Given that, "Euro" (which should be pronouncable as an abbreviation of "Europe" in a lot of languages) is not so bad.

--
GNU/Linux. The Freshmaker.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:20 · Score: 0

Get a real browser. It looks like a Euro symbol in Netscape 4.7x and Mozilla 0.9.x on Linux.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by phaze3000 · 2002-01-01 12:35 · Score: 2

Who cares about stupid extra symbols? Just because the yanks have their S with strikes, is a special symbol needed? Why not just use plain old 'e'?
Personally I quite like the € symbol (works fine for me in Konqueror.. :)), although as I live in that back-water known as the UK I don't get to see it much or use the currency for a while yet.
As for a stupid name for the currency, it's the only name they could come up with that everyone in Europe can pronounce. Alternative suggestions were Florins and Duckets, both of which I think sound quite kool in a Shakesperean kind of way.. :)

--
Blaming GW Bush for the Iraq war is like blaming Ronald McDonald for the poor quality of food.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by GigsVT · 2002-01-01 12:45 · Score: 1

Opera 6 in linux is still in beta. I'm not too worried about it, just letting him know it didn't work.

--
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by JJP · 2002-01-01 13:33 · Score: 2, Interesting

Dollar comes from the Dutch "daalder", an old coin with the value of one and a half guilder (thats EUR 0.68).
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Alan+Partridge · 2002-01-01 14:17 · Score: 1

thanks for that - consider me schooled! in the UK we also had/have the Guinea but God knows whether it's still a real coin with a real value or not. I think race horses are usually priced in Guineas FWIW.

--
That was classic intercourse!
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by csbruce · 2002-01-01 20:40 · Score: 2

Cents are obviously from % or Centime.

One would presume that it ultimately comes from the French word for 100: Cent.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by MarcOiL · 2002-01-01 23:08 · Score: 1

Those names were adopted under the last Spanish presidency of the EU, which, if you don't know, rotates between member countries.

The name of the coin was selected for being easy to pronounce in almost all European languages, but because of the Spanish presidency it's a little easier in latin-derived languages than in German, for example.

As a kind of compensation, the fractionary name (cents, abbreviated ct or just c) is a little difficult to pronounce for Spaniards, who are not used to so many consonants with just one vowel. So they are not using it. Going against EU practices, the Spanish government (and everybody else in Spain) calls the fractionary coins "céntimos", which is what they called a % of spanish pesetas.

As an off-side, we catalans are having a little problem with cents, too. "Cents" in catalan means "hundred", so when you try to say "2 cents", you sound exactly like saying "200". And as most mass media here are Spanish, people are also picking the "céntimos" approach.

--
If I have posted far, it is because I replied to giants.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:37 · Score: 0

Everbody seems to know what E$ means...
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by uebernewby · 2002-01-01 23:44 · Score: 2

The word "Dollar" comes not from the Dutch "Daalder", as someone in this thread said, but rather, both words are descendants of the German "Thaler", which was a medieval coin of some sort.

And one of the finest "European" currency names would have been "Florin" rather than Crown, Shilling or Penny, but then that name would've been perceived as being too Netherlands-centric, as the Dutch currency symbol is Fl. (for "Florin", even though the currency is called "Gulden" (which, incidentally, means "Golden")).

--

News and bla for computer musicians: http://lomechanik.net/
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:14 · Score: 0

The "Thaler" was minted in what's now the Czech Republic, and was apparently a pretty popular coin.
This is where "dollar" comes from.
Incidentally, Slovenia chose "Tolar" as the name for its new currency when it became independent around 10 years ago.
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 13:15 · Score: 0

As you should know, céntimos is a direct translation of the english term 'cents' (go look to a dictionary, man), why should we spanish be using 'cents'?
Re:Euro symbol in HTML by Troed · 2002-01-02 22:02 · Score: 2

Oh? Here in Sweden it started out as being pronounced as "evro" .. now it's "yuro".

(Sweden, where the illiterates voted no to joining the big switch of course .. *sigh*)

--
it's in my head

Re:Euro symbol support in Linux? - See HOWTO by ewan9 · 2002-01-01 07:35 · Score: 1

I've Read the Euro Character Support mini HOWTO - no luck.

Debian Euro HOWTO is probably also useless with RH, but maybe I'll give it a look.

Clarification by Adam+J.+Richter · 2002-01-01 07:35 · Score: 3, Insightful

Just to clarify the parent poster's point, it is theoretically possible for everyone in a country to reduce all of their salaries and government benefits to compensate for their
decreasing productivity. However, it is generally impractical to get everyone to agree to do this in sync, while it is trivial if not automatic if that country has a separate currency.

The situation in Argentina is a bit different, because part of the problem is that the government claimed to back its currency with more US dollars than they actually currently have.

Do NOT use 8-bit code 128 for the euro sign by oddityfds · 2002-01-01 07:37 · Score: 1

Do not use 0x80 for the euro sign. That's a Windowsism, because it is in the windows-1252 character set. Instead, either use 0xA4 (164) and declare your document as ISO-8859-15, or, if writing HTML, insert €, which is the proper Unicode number.

Sadly, code 128 works in Mozilla+X11+Linux. It is still wrong.

Re:Do NOT use 8-bit code 128 for the euro sign by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:40 · Score: 0

Do not use 0x80 for the euro sign. That's a Windowsism, because it is in the windows-1252 character set. Instead, either use 0xA4 (164) and declare your document as ISO-8859-15,

Wrong. In HTML, character references always refer to Unicode code points.

or, if writing HTML, insert , which is the proper Unicode number.

This is correct (should read: € — otherwise it won't display :-)
Re:Do NOT use 8-bit code 128 for the euro sign by oddityfds · 2002-01-01 11:10 · Score: 1

use 0xA4 (164) and declare your document as ISO-8859-15,
Wrong. In HTML, character references always refer to Unicode code points.

Notice how I did not write ¤, but rather just 0xA4, meaning "a byte of value 0xA4". Perhaps I should have been more clear.
Re:Do NOT use 8-bit code 128 for the euro sign by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 15:33 · Score: 0

Sadly, code 128 works in Mozilla+X11+Linux. It is still wrong

User error. Mozilla/X11 doesn't validate character codes, and you obviously have a Windows CP1252-compatible font installed.

(Now, on the Mac, it actually does translate Windows characters to the local encoding, which is a bug if you don't like to be liberal about what you accept.)
Re:Do NOT use 8-bit code 128 for the euro sign by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:57 · Score: 0

Why would you want to use if you can just use € and leave the browser the choice of picking it from a character set it has available or representing it in a different way (as EUR)???
Re:Do NOT use 8-bit code 128 for the euro sign by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:00 · Score: 0

Why would you want to use € if you can just use € and leave the browser the choice of picking it from a character set it has available or representing it in a different way (as EUR)????

Different countries... by El+Cabri · 2002-01-01 07:38 · Score: 2, Insightful

It's true, but contrary to the case of south American coutries which don't have a say about the Fed's policy, the economics policies of European countries are more or less concerted, but more importantly, they are bound by restrictive rules about public deficits and inflation. Actually Argentina was considering sharing it's currency pegging between the euro and the USD, which would have made sense since the Europe, and particularly Spain, is their main trading partner. The European Central Bank has proven in three years that it was truly independant, and deaf to the claims of governments and private financial institutions. This makes it more credible that they are actually solely commited to controlling the only true measure of a currencie's value : inflation (what you can actually buy with your money). Also, ironically, the one government that is pushing the most currently towards a more "flexible" monetary and public deficits policy, is not Italy and Greece, but ... Germany, the only country in Europe that is in a recession, and the one with the worst surge in unemployement and pubic deficits. Remember, the inclusion of former east Germany has made their average per capita GDP lower than the ones in the UK, France and Italy !

Re:Different countries... by DrSpin · 2002-01-02 03:25 · Score: 1

Yeah - the German "recession" is that growth has fallen from 3% to 2%, and the media have hyped this up with words like "freefall". Sure I would not want my growth to decline, but to call a decline in growth "recession" is not even close to the truth.
Germany may be sad, but depressed its not.
Re:Different countries... by El+Cabri · 2002-01-02 03:55 · Score: 2, Interesting

Germany is technically i a recession, just as the US is, and it's been a couple of years since their annual growth has not hit 2%.

Burning books leads to the burning of people by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:38 · Score: 0

You want them to butt out of your life, why don't you butt out of theirs?

What? So it's my fault that some near fascist religious right nutcases started burning books -- an act that alone should be enough to horrify all civilised people?

The point is tolerance. Anything that increases tolerance in the society is OK, anything that restricts the freedom is bad. I let these freaks publish their own religious crap even though I hate all forms of religion because I believe in the complete freedom of speech. Burning books is 100% against the freedom of the speech and should therefore be a serious crime.

It's actually sad that burning a colourful rag is still considered somewhere a crime whereas book burning by these mental midgets is celebrated.

Forgot the link. by oddityfds · 2002-01-01 07:39 · Score: 2, Informative

Sorry, forgot the link: The euro sign in HTML and in some other contexts

Umm... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:40 · Score: 0

Someone show me the wallet capable of carrying 100 gyros?

Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by rcs1000 · 2002-01-01 07:47 · Score: 4, Informative

Well.. I'll (almost) pass on the Argentina situation. Argentina does not have the US dollar as a currency. Indeed, it is considering 'dollarisation' where it does adapt the dollar as a currency. Right now, it has a currency board with insufficient reserves to support its chosen exchange rate with the US$ given:

(1) Argentina's budget deficit
(2) its large (private) US dollar borrowings, and

(3) modest US$ export earnings

In this situation, Argentina becomes a sitting duck for currency speculators. Irrespective of the 'true' value of the peso, it is near impossible to maintain the value of the currency. Add in a crazy political situation (most of the public sector deficit in Argentina is from *local* government - where politicans are from different political parties to central government, and hence much to gain from embarassing the central government...). Result, chaos. And that's even before a long running recession, supply-side inefficencies, etc.

Back to Europe.

There is an economics theory called 'optimal currency zones' which makes much the same case you do: how can the central bank pursue a coherent monetary (ie interest rate) policy, when the different countries that make up Europe have such different economies?

We don't know.

Only experience will tell. But one thing seems forgotten: the US has widely differing economic areas. How closely correlated are tobacco farming in Virginia, car manufacturing in Detroit, optical networking in San Francisco and investment banking in Wall Street? When car making is suffering from Japanese competition, it might seem to make sense to devalue the Detroit dollar - yet no-one has ever suggested breaking the US into regional currencies.

And the advantages of a single currency are huge: greater price transparency for consumers, lower inflation from greater competition, lower long-term interest rates, etc.

Most importantly of all: work or not, <b>everyone</b> should hope the Euro is a success. Neither the US, the UK, nor Asia will benefit from an economically weak Europe.

And I'm really looking forward to getting hold of my first Euro notes and coins when I go to France on Friday!

--
--- My dad's political betting

Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by InigoMontoya(tm) · 2002-01-01 11:14 · Score: 1

Only experience will tell. But one thing seems forgotten: the US has widely differing economic areas. How closely correlated are tobacco farming in Virginia, car manufacturing in Detroit, optical networking in San Francisco and investment banking in Wall Street? When car making is suffering from Japanese competition, it might seem to make sense to devalue the Detroit dollar - yet no-one has ever suggested breaking the US into regional currencies.

The big difference here is mobility. Despite the different economic areas in America, there are far more similarities between them than differences: a common language and culture, common systems of government and political parties (Reps, Dems, Libs, Greens) and common legal structures (the US court system and relatively uniform state court systems.) Mobility comes in where a person loses his/her job as a dot-commer in San Fran, and moves to Seattle/Atlanta/NY/Chicago to do something else there. You don't see quite as much mobility in Europe, because there is a stronger identification with nation (France, Germany, etc.) than with continent. In America, you don't have people who identify themselves primarily as Michiganders (stupid name, I know) or Californians or Ohioans, but as Americans. (With the exception, maybe, of Texans.)

Thus in America one can move to another state and retain one's identity as an American, suffer little to no change in culture or language (regional dialects and peculiarities aside) and remain under much the same system, with much the same options, as where one came from. That's just not quite as possible in Europe, where culturally one identifies oneself with the history of one's nation (perhaps because of the richness of national histories there as compared to the glorious history of, say, Indiana) rather than with all of Europe.

InigoMontoya(tm)

--
This signature is self-referential.
Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by rcs1000 · 2002-01-01 11:34 · Score: 3, Interesting

Yes. Labour (labor) is much more mobile in the US than in Europe.

And Yes, that does mean 'asymetrical shocks' can be more easily absorbed than in Europe.

But that does not mean an Indiana steelworker can easily become a networking expert. (Or, in the current environment, the opposite.)

Even inside countries, people are surprisingly unlikely to move. How else can you explain the persistently high unemployment rates in some parts of the US? The statistics tell a story: very few people change 'region' in the US during their lifetime. And an even smaller proportion change for economic, as opposed to life-style, family or educational reasons.

And at the 'high end' of the emplyment spectrum - by which I mean skilled professionals - locational mobility is increasingly becoming the rule rather than the exception. Find the major investment bank in London where 'brits' make up the majority of senior positions.

I am uncovinced by cultural arguments: I know many Scottish nationalists working in London; many opposed to further European integration find themselves working on computing contracts in Brussels, Frankfurt or Paris.

I could well be wrong, but the evidence does not yet point clearly to either (a) labour mobility being *that* important or (b) people being *much* more unwilling to move - at least temptoraily - around Europe than around the US.

--
--- My dad's political betting
Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by pcb · 2002-01-01 17:28 · Score: 2, Interesting

...the US has widely differing economic areas. How closely correlated are tobacco farming in Virginia, car manufacturing in Detroit, optical networking in San Francisco and investment banking in Wall Street? When car making is suffering from Japanese competition, it might seem to make sense to devalue the Detroit dollar - yet no-one has ever suggested breaking the US into regional currencies.

I just wanted to add something here. While your post is excellent, there have been several arguments made from some very prominent economist (cf. Jane Jacobs or John Kenneth Galbraith ) over the years that this is precisely the reason for the rather large difference in economic development between various regions in the US.

I could write for hours on this topic, but I don't have time. Suffice it to say that it is their opinion that the US should not have a single currency. In fact it would be much better for all if each state had their own currency to reflect the economic reality that exist in each state. This idea is not a new one, but I don't know why it is never taught. Though out most of European history, it was very common for each city to have its own currency and they seemed to manage well enough. Anyway check out the above books if you're interested. Check out the reviews as well. Talk about differing points of view.

For what it's worth, I think the ECB is nuts creating a single currency. France and Germany will benefit well enough, but Greece, Spain and Portugal are going to get screwed. They well become simple supply regions for central Europe; industrialization will stop or be significantly reduce, just like in Mississippi or Tennessee.

--
'Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions.' B. Pascal
Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by mpe · 2002-01-01 21:04 · Score: 3, Interesting

Despite the different economic areas in America, there are far more similarities between them than differences: a common language and culture, common systems of government and political parties (Reps, Dems, Libs, Greens) and common legal structures (the US court system and relatively uniform state court systems.) Mobility comes in where a person loses his/her job as a dot-commer in San Fran, and moves to Seattle/Atlanta/NY/Chicago to do something else there. You don't see quite as much mobility in Europe, because there is a stronger identification with nation (France, Germany, etc.) than with continent. In America, you don't have people who identify themselves primarily as Michiganders (stupid name, I know) or Californians or Ohioans, but as Americans. (With the exception, maybe, of Texans.)

The difference is that European nations have existed for a long time, in some form or other. Whereas the states of the USA are mainly creations for their own sake. Most of the borders between US states are simply lines drawn on a map with no reference to geographical features in the area. Very few of the US states have ever been nation states.
I'm not convinced about the common language and culture. In the West and South West of the US the echo of the Hispanic empire is quite apparent. Also there are plenty of distinct ethnic groups, who are often refered to as X-Americans where X is some other part of the world. However there is still the lack of identity with specific US states.
Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by mpe · 2002-01-01 21:16 · Score: 2

Suffice it to say that it is their opinion that the US should not have a single currency. In fact it would be much better for all if each state had their own currency to reflect the economic reality that exist in each state.

Whilst this sounds a nice idea in theory one big problem is that the US states are entities with mainly artifical borders. They may or may not work with independant economic entites. Also you'd probably find some of the US states seeking to be independant nations, especially those which once were...

This idea is not a new one, but I don?t know why it is never taught. Though out most of European history, it was very common for each city to have its own currency and they seemed to manage well enough.

This was also the case in North America up until quite recently. As for the not being taught how much actual history gets taught in the US anyway?
Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by awol · 2002-01-02 01:57 · Score: 2

Government has essentially two levers by which they control the "heat" in the economic engine. Fiscal policy and Monetary policy. Most governments have abrogated the use of fiscal policy as a means for controlling the economy for a number of reasons and so in most countries (and I use the word in terms of areas governed by a single monetary policy) governments are resrticted to using monetary policy to control the economy. Even further, in a lot of countries they leave the detemrination of interest rates (the handle on the lever) to some external independent body (eg the Federal Reserve in the US)

Anyway, if one is to suggest that the same monetary policy is appropriate for Greece and Germany, or Italy and Holland, then methinks they are fooling themselves. EMU is folly. I am not predicting disaster but staying out of EMU is good for _lots_ of reasons. A single monetary policy (for that is what EMU is all about) is really only appropriate when the cultural forces that determine social utility can be aligned in such a way thet there is some homogeneity of purpose amoingst all those affected by the policy. When the policy forces major regional problems as will happen if things go pear shaped in EMU, then things can get quite unpleasant.

--
"The first thing to do when you find yourself in a hole is stop digging."
Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by rcs1000 · 2002-01-02 02:40 · Score: 3, Informative

Thanks for that: I shall check out those books.

The argument as I see it is very much unresolved: do lower transaction costs and better transparency outweigh greater inflexibility?

And for all the words written on Slashdot, we just don't know.

As a Brit, I must admit I would not join the Euro in the first wave. But, that does not mean it cannot or will not work. It is 'a grand experiment'.

I look forward to reading the reviews of the Euro one year in!

--
--- My dad's political betting
Re:Advantages of a single currency (or not!) by Jor · 2002-01-02 11:19 · Score: 1

There is an economics theory called 'optimal currency zones' which makes much the same case you do: how can the central bank pursue a coherent monetary (ie interest rate) policy, when the different countries that make up Europe have such different economies?

We don't know.

Well, only time will tell for sure, but several european countries (germany, italy, france, austria ...) with federal government and central bank have pretty much experience with monetary coherence. Especially Germany with the former DDR regions (east vs. west) and Italy with extremly different economies (south vs. north) have a shitload of experience with handling such a situation.
Of course the Eurozone is considerably larger so this experience now has to be scaled up.

--
Jor

The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:50 · Score: 0, Troll

The control of this currency rests with the German Government. Unlike the presidency of the EEC, which rotates so that each country can have a turn at running Europe, the control of the Euro is fixed with the Germans.

This is not fair or right.

The UK is the most powerful economy in Europe, and its government is clearly the best at managing an economy. If anyone should be running the Euro, fixing the interest rates and running the inevitable European tax system, its the Bank of England, and NOT the Bundesbank.

Either way, whoever is running the Euro, giving control of your currency to another nation is suicide.

Can you imagine the US Treasury accepting the control of the Dollar and the US economy from Canada or Mexico?

That is precisely what is happening in Europe. This is totally wrong, and everyone here is being brainwashed into accepting the Euro because it is superficially convenient.

Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:54 · Score: 1, Interesting

giving control of your currency to another nation is suicide.
When will you nationalists finally get it. There is no "other nation" in a united Europe. Hopefully we'll get rid of the national borders and governments as soon as possible too.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:19 · Score: 1, Interesting

There is no "other nation" in a united Europe.

You are wrong. The German Govt. is not elected by the Irish population, and it is the German population which controls the new money, therefore, the German people control, unilaterally, the economy of all the other EU nations.

This is a fact.

Any of the EU nations can "derrogate" from EU laws, including the human rights legislation. The statement that the european nations are connected and in some way equal is a fallacy.

The Euro is an undemocratic currency. Period.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:30 · Score: 1, Informative

Eeeh... maybe you are confusing the fact that the European Central bank hasits headquarters in Frankfurt?

There is no national control over the Euro the European Central bank is an instution that has decisiomakers of all Euro coutries in its boards. The current president of the European central bank is Wim Duisenberg. He is not German he's Dutch. When Wim retires a Frenchmen will take his place.

For a US comperisson which US state controls mr Greenspan. Which US state contols the dollar?

And sorry to burst your bubble but the UK's economy has been in trouble ever since the end of WW II and the German economy (even after the reunification) is far stronger than the UK's. Whats more the UK is fat becomming the low wage, little taxation little unuion infuence country ofdf Europe (thank the near bankrupt Torries for that).
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by uradu · 2002-01-01 08:32 · Score: 1

> The control of this currency rests with the German Government.

You should really stop reading those British rags, they're bad for your mind.

> The UK is the most powerful economy in Europe

Which cereal box did you read this on? The UK doesn't even have the second-largest GNP in Europe.

> If anyone should be running the Euro [...] its the Bank of England, and NOT the Bundesbank.

Oh, so you're really just upset that it's not England then? Never mind that they're not even adopting the Euro.

Good thing you're posting as AC, because you're just a clueless tart.

-
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:39 · Score: 0

The Euro is an undemocratic currency.
Personally I don't give shit if the currency is democratic or not as long as it is a strong and stable one.
Do you really believe that the national currencies have been independent and democratically controlled up until now? Wrong.
Decisions regarding the national economics have long been more strongly influenced by the status of the global economy and organisations like IMF than the will of the people. Having a common currency for 300 million people is strength and strong currency is good.
I don't miss my local currency a bit. Nationalism has caused more grief in the human history than religions. Good riddance to all of its symbols.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:39 · Score: 0

The fact is that the European Central Bank is an unelected body, that does not represent the populations in the individual EU states.

It is wrong for a French man or a Dutch man to be in control of the econonmy of any country other than his own.

To whom do these people in the ECB owe their allegiance? In the case of the National banks like the Bank of England, the allegiances are clear. In the case of the ECB, there is no direct line of trust between the head of the bank and the WHOLE population of the EEC.

The French director will take his orders from the French Govermnent, the Spanish man will take his orders from Juan Carlos and so on. The only way this danger can be stopped is if Europe itself becomes the state of all Europeans, and national governments are abolished. Then these issues of trust would be moot.

Europe is, by any measure, un-democratic. If they had built it from pure democratic principles in the way that America was built, then there would be far less mistrust of the EEC and the unrepresentative lawmakers from Brussels.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:42 · Score: 0

Actually he is probably posting it anonymously because of the new EEC arrest warrents that can be issued for Xenophobia and disrupting the Euro!
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:48 · Score: 0

Personally I don't give shit if the currency is democratic or not as long as it is a strong and stable one.

Good for you. You are free to use Euro. Just dont try and force it down someone elses throught because you happen to like it. Thats the problem with Euorpeans; if you dont go along with them, then you are "stupid" "wrong" "arrogant" "$insult".

The brits dont want the Euro; 300m of you do. What is your problem with that? Leave them out of it. Let them choose without your relentless pressure and propaganda.

just my US 2 cents.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by uradu · 2002-01-01 08:52 · Score: 2

> The Euro is an undemocratic currency. Period.

Good thing you're not joining the Euro then. Go to the pub tonight and get pissed in celebration.

-
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:53 · Score: 0

To whom do these people in the ECB owe their allegiance?
What allegiance? Oh you mean the stuff when people utter oaths about how they will (selfishly) only serve their own nation. Then everything would be better? Ridiculous. Do you believe that we necessarily stoop down to nationalistic squabbling like your kind do?
You're trapped in the obsolete, nationalistic "us vs. them" mindset. If I were a high ranking EU official I'd defend the EU and her institutions against foreign and domestic threats. I wouldn't hesitate moving against my own nationals if the greater good of the union required it.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:56 · Score: 0

Go to the pub tonight and get pissed in celebration.

That was last night. And we paid in our own currency.

Oh and by the way, when the next enemy comes to destroy you, dont bother to call us this time to save your pathetic slave backsides.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:58 · Score: 0

Nobody's forcing them to join -- if it's not the economic necessity within a few years.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:01 · Score: 0

And we paid in our own currency
Awww... isn't that just cute.
As if the currency would somehow matter.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by El+Cabri · 2002-01-01 09:03 · Score: 1

Poor guy. I don't know if you've been intoxicated with propaganda or if you're trying to make some new yourself.

There's no control of the German government on the euro. Actually there's no control of any government on the euro. And the German government in particular has spent the last year pleading for relaxing interests rates, and the ECB didn't budge, because it's a truly independant institution.

As for the UK economy the most powerful in Europe... That's a joke, isn't it. British finance ministers are locked out of European councils on economic policy because the UK is not in the euro zone. There is no hope of having a british commissioner on competition or trade negociations, which are the only people in Europe who really have a say on the world stage of economics. And the living standards of people outside of the City are really miserable, with low wages and high prices for everything.

The UK is just a little shitty country stuck between having to do most of their business with Europe and wanting to be a boot licking whore to Washington. They are just as narrow minded and NIH affected as their American masters, except they're a very little country.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:04 · Score: 0

If I were a high ranking EU official I'd defend the EU and her institutions against foreign and domestic threats. I wouldn't hesitate moving against my own nationals if the greater good of the union required it.

We dont have a problem with that. We just dont want to be a part of you and what you believe in. That does not make us stupid, rediculious or any of the other insults that you bandy about.

The fact that you cannot accept that there are different oppinions and ways of living and government makes you an unfit neighbor; this is 100% the problem between the Europeans and the rest of the world. You believe, above all other people (hmmm where have we heard THAT before) that you know what is best for humanity, and are uniquely placed to guide the destiny of three hundred million people.

I dont buy that for an instant.

But Im happy to live next door to you as long as you dont try and make me live like you.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by andr0meda · 2002-01-01 09:05 · Score: 5, Insightful

The control of this currency rests with the German Government. Unlike the presidency of the EEC, which rotates so that each country can have a turn at running Europe, the control of the Euro is fixed with the Germans.

This is not fair or right.

The UK is the most powerful economy in Europe, and its government is clearly the best at managing an economy. If anyone should be running the Euro, fixing the interest rates and running the inevitable European tax system, its the Bank of England, and NOT the Bundesbank.

Either way, whoever is running the Euro, giving control of your currency to another nation is suicide.

Can you imagine the US Treasury accepting the control of the Dollar and the US economy from Canada or Mexico?

That is precisely what is happening in Europe. This is totally wrong, and everyone here is being brainwashed into accepting the Euro because it is superficially convenient.

First of all, stating that the UK is the most powerfull economy of europe is bullshit. Expressed in growth, Ireland wins. If you consider the value of the pound to be the measuring tool, then might I remind you that a strong currency makes export (selling, profits) harder. Most of the european countries are exporting much more than they are importing. The reunion of germany has been payed with the germans giving up their strong DM. This was negotiated by Jacques Delors, Mitterand and Kohl. So give the germans credit where due, they are pulling something off that Europe in itself has yet to make true, political and total unification. It takes time, it hurts, and it is certainly not easy. But in the end it makes us all stronger and brings more stability in our fortress than ever before. I think it's simply the right way to tackle the bigger battle at stake here: The economic wars with the US and Asia.

By the way, the euro is not 'fixed with the germans' as you said. I consider that a typical narrow visioned patriotic view on the matter, but not a clear thinking one. The euro is controlled by the european central bank, which is headed by dutchman Wim Dhuisenberg. Germany is economically still the driving force behind it, because they are simply plain good efficient commonsense hardworking people. That is not to say other states don't work as hard, they simply are not as efficient (and by culture, they usually didn't need to be)

I'm sure this sounds horrendous, but London shopping malls say they ARE accepting and returning euro currency. That's right. We will not need to change currencies and pay taxes whilst doing so in your country, whch is of course a shopping benefit and a way to make sure tourists don't go to Paris instead because of the money thing. People can travel and shop with on single currency. It will make trading goods fairer, and will in the long run slowly integrate a respect for foreign cultures and standards through the pricing of the same goods in different parts of europe. Like Prodi said, we carry Europe in our pockets now, it's not just a far from our beds thing. I'm proud of it, and as far as I am concerned there cannot be enough Europe!

Stating that Brittain needs control of the currency is a laugh, you don't even want to be part of it, but oh look, now that we've got it you want to control it ? That sounds like a envious kid in pre-school. We need Brittain in the system, because yes we want your strong country to support the currency, talking on the same level that every other nation does, and we're sure that in the long term the UK will come to acknowledge the benefit of the Euro. It's not about control, it's about Unification. The UK is no longer an island, but it takes some time for people to see that, along with Denmark and Noorwegen.

- Positive thinking Belgian.

--
With great power comes great electricity bills.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:09 · Score: 0

We dont have a problem with that. We just dont want to be a part of you and what you believe in.
Hey.
You don't speak for the entire nation, buddy.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by orbitalia · 2002-01-01 09:18 · Score: 1

Listen Mr Positive thinking Belgian,

We've had to save your butts from the Germans two times already WWI, and WWII. No doubt we are going to end up sacrificing our nation to do it again. I've been to Belgium, I've seen the graveyards full of millions of British dead. Can you not understand our inherent distrust of anything that seems to be formulated and driven by Germany (by your own admission).
Please learn how to spell the name of our country before flaming us , it's spelt 'Britain'.
Britain has the fourth largest economy in the WORLD. I think that counts for something doesn't it. We weren't talking about expressing the size of an economy in growth, but in SIZE.

Lets just see what happens with this Euro before we say more on the matter.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by orbitalia · 2002-01-01 09:22 · Score: 1

ooh goodie goodie
can we all start speaking esperanto straight away too!
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:24 · Score: 0

Britain has the fourth largest economy in the WORLD.

This is correct. The UK does not need to enter the Euro. Japan does not need to join a single currency with China. New Zealand doesnt need to do it with Australia. Canada and America in a single currency? Fugheddaboudit.

The UK has taken enough influence and control from Brussels. Most recently, the insane adoption of the EEC arrest warant, under which you can be arrested for "Trafficking in Cultural Drugs".

Europe is good for Europeans. The Brits, who spent 1000 years refining and perfecting democracy dont need undemocratic money and laws polluting its shores.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Drakin · 2002-01-01 09:32 · Score: 1

Just a bit of irony here, while the UK might have the most power economy, the German mark is favoured by international businesses just behind the American Dollar.

Want to know something even more funny?

Organised Crime has a short time to convert any hard cash from marks to euros or they'll be worthless.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by tsinterface · 2002-01-01 09:49 · Score: 1

You are not right, when you state that the German Government politically controls the European Central Bank, that's not true, as it is an institution of the EU.
But certainly Germany is economically the most powerful of the participating countries and tries to get the financial politics under its control. The "stability rules" which all participating countries have to follow, were forced upon them by the export-oriented politics of Germany.
When the decision for the Euro was made, the French government tried to get equal power as Germany, and then proposed that the ECB should be located in Germany, but its president should be french. So even when it's a dutchman now it was a victory for the German government to show France, that it will be in the second row in future Europe.
This is just a hint, how german dominated the EU is. I'm german myself, so I can say this unbiased.
Oh and you shouldn't forget that the Deutschmark is/was official currency in occupied Kosovo and in pro-forma-yugoslavian (sp?) Montenegro, and is still inofficial currency in large part of Eastern Europe.
Some historians think, that the economic control of Eastern Europe which Hitler tried to get by occupation has now been achieved by Germany through the backdoor.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:51 · Score: 0

Hmm.

I thought we were saved by the Americans, the French, the Russians and the Britains.

BTW: what does this have to do with the current discussion?

(german reader)
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:00 · Score: 0

Some historians think, that the economic control of Eastern Europe which Hitler tried to get by occupation has now been achieved by Germany through the backdoor.

How can even some of you Europeans believe this and STILL the Euro has been brought about??

As I understand it, in many cases 49% of people are against thie Euro.

Its all pretty insane looking from over here (USA). We would never allow another group of people control the dollar, no matter what the incentive was.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:25 · Score: 1

Which cereal box did you read this on? The UK doesn't even have the second-largest GNP in Europe.

Last time I looked, only one of the U.S., Japan and Germany was in Europe. Everyone else, including France, has at least a 5% smaller economy than the UK.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by uradu · 2002-01-01 10:51 · Score: 2

> Last time I looked

Again, cereal boxes don't count.

-
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 10:53 · Score: 2

We've had to save your butts from the Germans two times already WWI, and WWII.
First off, we were saving our own butts, just as the Yanks were when they finally entered the war after Hitloer declared war on them and Japan attacked them.
When I discussed Europe with Ted Heath he said that the reason he took the UK into the then EEC was precisely because he lost half his school friends in WWII. The whole point as far as he was concerned was to integrate the European economies to the extent that 1) no European country would ever again fall into the level of chaos that allowed Hitler to come to power and 2) would pre-empt any Facist type argument for invading other European countries.
I've been to Belgium, I've seen the graveyards full of millions of British dead.
The last time the UK suffered casualties on anything like that scale in Belgium was at Waterloo. Even then Wellington's force was nowhere near a million men, and the casualty rate was 50%. Oh and the only reason why we won rather than lost was that Blucher's Prussian guard (also known as Germans) arrived in time.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by andr0meda · 2002-01-01 10:54 · Score: 2

Oh come on, not the WW thing *again*. That was half a decade ago. We have NOT forgotten those who died in Ieper, and we play The Last Post every night for those brave men who gave up their lives to free europe from Hitler. Yes yes yes we've seen it, we hear ya, but I'm sorry to say, we moved along. It's another world out there today. Geez..

The issue at hand here is the Euro, the currency used in the *west* european market. Whether Britain (sorry about the typo, too much Ultima) controlles/controlled lots of colonies is pretty much irrelevant, imho (leaving aside the fact that colonisation is an outdated principle, but ok). Do however tell me, what excatly does a patriotary superiority feeling, being the 4th power in the world and all, bring about besides extremism, fascism and fundamentalism? Let me sum it up maybe.. Congo, India, pakistan, Israel.. Yes , I said Congo, yes. Exactly.

To put it another way, cuz I don't want to be patronising and all, we *do* want Britain in the Euro, but the UK is afraid to simply join forces and give up it's historical rooted Empire-feeling. We understand but we think it's a missed opportunity. Lately there's only one law: "compete or become". And that's all, folks.

"Wait and see", says Captain Blake.

--
With great power comes great electricity bills.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by yggdrazil · 2002-01-01 11:11 · Score: 1

Either way, whoever is running the Euro, giving control of your currency to another nation is suicide.

The euro is our money. It's not a foreign currency. It is our currency. Eurozone countries control it together, through the European Central Bank.

Can you imagine the US Treasury accepting the control of the Dollar and the US economy from Canada or Mexico?

Can you imagine the US without a common currency?
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by akihabara · 2002-01-01 11:14 · Score: 1

Again, cereal boxes don't count.

That's lame.

How about some cool hard facts instead of your fantasies?
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:27 · Score: 0

1. In GNP terms, the UK is no. 5 in the world,
not no. 4
2. Within the EU, it is the third largest economy,
but
3. On the basis of per capita GNP, the UK occupies
the 10th rank among all EU countries (only the
mediterranean countries plus Portugal are doing
worse).

Were it to join the Euro, that last point would
become palpable for many a little Englander.
Now that might really hurt their national pride ...

Besides, for the UK to join at the current
exchange rate would be madness. They will have to
find a way of bringing down the Pound by about 20
per cent (without stoking up domestic inflation
in the process) before this becomes a realistic
option. This may take another few years.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Jeff+Kelly · 2002-01-01 11:33 · Score: 1

The control of this currency rests with the German Government. Unlike the presidency of the EEC, which rotates so that each country can have a turn at running Europe, the control of the Euro is fixed with the Germans.

This is just plain wrong. We Germans do NOT control the euro. Actually in Order to introduce the euro we had to sacrifice our control of the european financial market by sacrificing the "Bundesbank". There is no such thing as the "Bundesbank" anymore. The ECB may be physically located in Franfurt a.M. but we do not control it. Every member state of the EU can appoint members of the board.

The UK is the most powerful economy in Europe, and its government is clearly the best at managing an economy. If anyone should be running the Euro, fixing the interest rates and running the inevitable European tax system, its the Bank of England, and NOT the Bundesbank.

There is no such thing as a bundesbank. Apart from that ROTFL.

That is precisely what is happening in Europe. This is totally wrong, and everyone here is being brainwashed into accepting the Euro because it is superficially convenient.

You should stop reading the newspapers with the big headlines and switch to publications which actually don't brainwash their readers.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Jeff+Kelly · 2002-01-01 11:54 · Score: 1

Its all pretty insane looking from over here (USA). We would never allow another group of people control the dollar, no matter what the incentive was.

But at the same time you tolerate that the dollar is in many countries virtually the only usable currency and therefore YOU are controlling their economy. I do not agree with my fellow countyman but even if it were so then the US were not very different from us Germans. And germany does NOT control the Euro we actually relinquished control of the european financial market by sacrificing our "Bundesbank"
The ECB may be physically located in Frankfurt but we do not have more control of it than california controls the US federal bank.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Jeff+Kelly · 2002-01-01 12:05 · Score: 1

But certainly Germany is economically the most powerful of the participating countries and tries to get the financial politics under its control. The "stability rules" which all participating countries have to follow, were forced upon them by the export-oriented politics of Germany.

The stability rules ARE important for ensuring the stability of the Euro currency. Actually now our german government tries to "weaken" those criteria because due to the recession they do not think they can keep up with them. But with no avail.

This is just a hint, how german dominated the EU is. I'm german myself, so I can say this unbiased.

the EU is NOT german dominated but germany wants to get more control because they have sacrificed the most of their power and also pay the most money of all EU members. Your comparison with Nazi Germany is inappropriate and incorrect. Nobody invaded another country and forced anybody to join the EU.

Every country had a choice and joined by their own free will. Those countries of whom you refer adopted the Mark or the Euro not because it was forced on them but because it is the one of the stabelest currencies second only to the US Dollar.
I cannot see any signs of a perceived german imperialism as you do.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:26 · Score: 0

...to tackle the bigger battle at stake here: The economic wars with the US and Asia.

Shades of 1984. Bring on the never ending wars big brother.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:44 · Score: 0

Typical unbending German twaddle.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:47 · Score: 0

The euro is our money.

That is ver batim the propagana line fed to you by the EEC. You dont even have the imagination to use your own words.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by ph0tek · 2002-01-01 13:02 · Score: 1

The UK is the most powerful economy in Europe, and its government is clearly the best at managing an economy. If anyone should be running the Euro, fixing the interest rates and running the inevitable European tax system, its the Bank of England, and NOT the Bundesbank.

hmmm ... interesting argument ;)
how do you define "powerful economy" ? which economic indicators do you use ?

let's take the GDP (Gross Domestic Product) and check some statistics (sorry, from 1999-2000 but the only I found in just a few minutes, estimated but you get the idea ;] )

http://www.geohive.com/charts/ec_gdp1.php

rank ... country ... ppp 2000 est. ... ppp 1999 est. ... change 1999-2000

1. United States 9,963,000,000,000 9,255,000,000,000 7.65

2. China 4,500,000,000,000 4,800,000,000,000 -6.25

3. Japan 3,150,000,000,000 2,950,000,000,000 6.78

4. India 2,200,000,000,000 1,805,000,000,000 21.88

5. Germany 1,936,000,000,000 1,864,000,000,000 3.86

6. France 1,448,000,000,000 1,373,000,000,000 5.46

7. United Kingdom 1,360,000,000,000 1,290,000,000,000 5.43

8. Italy 1,273,000,000,000 1,212,000,000,000 5.03

9. Brazil 1,130,000,000,000 1,057,000,000,000 6.91

ooops ... it seems that the "most powerful" economy in europe has been kicked in the a** by the Krauts (not for the first time ;> ) ... and look ... what a shame ... even the French do better than this BSE-contaminated little island

you see the facts: GERMANY is the MOST POWERFUL ECONOMY in EUROPE (who else ?)

so keep your mouth shut and bow your head in shame
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:09 · Score: 0

Whoa .. boot licking whore to Washington.
How is that different than being whore to Berlin or Brussels?
When one has to be a whore ( and it seems like that is the case) one should chose its masters carefully and , so far, Britain did well with US.
If I were British I would hardly trust France ( which abandoned Britain more than once) and definitely not the Germans which are Europe biggest predator ( next to Russia but since Russians are of the field for a while I won't mention them.)
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:13 · Score: 0

"and is still inofficial currency in large part of Eastern Europe. "

What are you smoking ?
If anything, when I visited Poland 3 years ago, USD was the currency to have.
I never even hear about German Mark.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:44 · Score: 0

hey man, don't hold back, how do you really feel about this?
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 14:36 · Score: 0

Norway isnt a member of the European Union!!
I asume You mean Sweden (Member of the union, but not in EMU).

I live in finland and it SUCKS big time that sweden isnt amongst the EMU-members. I usually spend my holiday in the sweden/norway (Tärnaby/Hemavan fjällen!)
And by the way 1 is 5.94573 FIM and 1 FIM is 0.1681879 .
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by uradu · 2002-01-01 14:39 · Score: 2

Well, maybe they should stick to hardware reviews, instead of quoting figures published by a communist government as hard facts. That "article" was about as substantial as a mid-summer night's dream. Go check the CIA figures, or The Economist or some other more credible source, where the employee's day job is actually in a relevant field.

-
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by uradu · 2002-01-01 14:43 · Score: 2

My German twaddle to your jingoistic British Empire wet dream anyday, AC!

-
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by El+Cabri · 2002-01-01 15:12 · Score: 1

How is that different than being whore to Berlin or Brussels?

Simple : people in European countries get to vote for those who will represent them in the European institutions. Do you get to vote for who's president of the US ? Even Americans don't, after all : they're now like the British, they just pick the son of the previous head of state and designate him hte new one.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 15:53 · Score: 0

Ranking by 2000 GDP, courtesy CountryWatch.com.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by csbruce · 2002-01-01 19:51 · Score: 2

The Euro is an undemocratic currency.

All central bankers are appointed; none are elected. Monetary policy is too important to be subjected to the usual corruptions of pandering to the incoherent will of the ignorant masses.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by EnglishTim · 2002-01-01 20:41 · Score: 2

GDP isn't a particularly good measurement, as it doesn't take into account the size of the country.

GDP per Capita is much better. Interestingly Luxembourg comes out on top followed by the USA. The UK comes in at 20 (for the 2000 stats)
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by andr0meda · 2002-01-01 22:08 · Score: 1

Yep, sorry, you're right, I somehow keep switching them, though I know it's TOTALLY NOT the same ;) Guess I should pay them a visit or something :)..

--
With great power comes great electricity bills.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Illume · 2002-01-02 01:09 · Score: 1

The control of this currency rests with the German Government.

I hope that's not a common misbelief. Please note that the German Government didn't even control the Deutschmark. At first it was controlled inderectly through the US. (There was a fixed exchange-rate simmilar to Argentinia.) But after the US used their printing machines excessively in order to finance the vietnam war control was transfered to the "Bundesbank" which is owned but not controlled by the government.

It's not comparable to the ICANN which currently is controlled by the US-government.

There is no such thing as a bundesbank.

Actually the Deutsche Bundesbank still exists and I think there are no plans to close it.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by jazzyjez · 2002-01-02 01:14 · Score: 1

>The UK is just a little shitty country stuck
>between having to do most of their business with
>Europe and wanting to be a boot licking whore to
>Washington. They are just as narrow minded and
>NIH affected as their American masters, except
>they're a very little country

Well, not all of us are, and a large and growing number of us would like nothing better than to be fully inside Europe and to get as quickly away from American economic policies as possible.

Unfortunately most people like me don't get heard because most of the press is controlled by that jackbooted reactionary Murdoch who we continue to allow to give us all a bad name despite the fact he's Australian. The Tories had a lot to do with it too, as I believe someone may have mentioned ;)

Anyway, the typical xenophobic stuff you read in the British media makes me very ashamed, so please give people like me a break and don't assume we're all narrow minded freaks - we're just a bit quieter than them, so you have to listen a bit harder to hear us.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by jazzyjez · 2002-01-02 01:20 · Score: 1

Yeah, then we can be like the US and have a huge gap between the rich and poor, massive crime, a totally disenfranchised working class, a criminally expensive healthcare system and a crap corporate-sponsored education system! And then, once we've done that, perhaps we can go and blow up some people in other countries when their governments argue with us! Bring it on! When the US learns the meaning of social justice perhaps it can join the EU too...
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:39 · Score: 1

Hear, hear -- this is a very pragmatic attitude. He has effectively stated what a large number of Britons feel without resorting to europhobic hyperbole. When not couched in those terms, the British position seems reasonable. They will join when economic conditions make it the sensible thing to do.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Jeff+Kelly · 2002-01-02 03:25 · Score: 1

The control of this currency rests with the German Government.

You misquoted me. The sentence above was not by me but by a previous poster.

There is no such thing as a bundesbank.

Actually the Deutsche Bundesbank [bundesbank.de] still exists and I think there are no plans to close it.

To clarify it the Bundesbank still exists it just doesn't control the german currency or the german financial market anymore. Conrol of Interest Rates, issuing of currency etc. got transferred to the EZB. The Bundesbank has still some purposes however like being the german Zentralbank but the great power asociated with it is gone. So in a sense there is no such Thing as THE Bundesbank anymore :-)
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 04:41 · Score: 0

Thats exactly what we are saying. You stay with your twaddle, we stay with our masturbation. We wont bother you. You dont bother us.

The difference between you and us is that YOU WONT LEAVE US OUT OF YOUR TWADDLE.

Why do you all want us so badly? Is your twaddle that hot?
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by krbonne · 2002-01-02 06:38 · Score: 1

We've had to save your butts from the Germans two times already WWI, and WWII.

Right. And what has been done to make this wouldn't be necessairy anymore in the future?
It started with the European cooperation on coal and steel, later became the European Economic Community, next the European Community and it is now called "the European Union".
The whole political reason the EU exists is to avoid a forth war between France and Germany (1870, WW-I and WW-II) by 'interlocking' the two countries economically.
The latest phase into this process (which now goes well into Eastern Europe, hopefully helping to avoid another civil war ala Bosnia, Cosovo, etc.) is called "the Euro".

Perhaps, in a couple of years, we can return you the favor and use the euro to save the pound the next time people like Sorros tries to speculate on the fall of the pound! (As he did when it was forced to leave the EMS).

Cheerio! Kr. Bonne?
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by andr0meda · 2002-01-02 07:32 · Score: 1

Curious enough, the big problem for the UK is not the fact that it doesn't need a single currency, as it has allways controlled such a currency (Pound) and is now in the (slow) process of letting go of it's own 'Common Wealth' idea.

I think the big issue here is the slight identity crisis which has silently crept in since last decade, and which makes it difficult to belong to something bigger, without risking to lose complete control over it's own identity. Losing the pound would mean another hit in that direction. Germany has had a bit of the same problem since it's reunion.. in any case it's too early to judge about good and bad of joining for the UK, but the mainland needs this.

But we'll see.

--
With great power comes great electricity bills.
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by uradu · 2002-01-02 08:03 · Score: 2

> Why do you all want us so badly? Is your twaddle that hot?

Well, yes it is, but that's another story. The question is, who exactly is forcing the UK to do anything they don't want to? Who sued the inch-measuring and pound-weighing shop keeper(s)? It sure wasn't Hans Krautburger from Frankfurt, it was the Brits themselves. I'm afraid you're your own worst enemy.

-
Re:The real reason the Euro is BAD NEWS by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-03 03:32 · Score: 0

You say historians, I say racist bigots who won't let lie what your grandfather did to my grandfather, lets call the whole thing off.

Sorry, that was flippant. I just find any recourse to Hitler comparisons to be rather dodgy. Historians by their nature try to look for continuing themes over time; I on the other hand think that if any country is likely to deeply distrust neo-nazi arguments its Germany. Sins of the (grand)father and all that are no reason to hate the current generation.

Re:wrong wrong wrong by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 07:50 · Score: 0

With a global government the government has less incentive and power to act locally. It's easier to blend in with the crowd.

Even at the height of the Communist oppression in the Soviet Union there were regions where people still thought they lived under the Czar's rule.

dollar coins by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:03 · Score: 0

It is possible to get them. I had my bank get me a box ($1000 in 40 rolls of 25 coins). It took them 1 week.

I used them exclusively for 2 months, just to get them into circulation. Some bars hated them, but kids love them. Restaraunts give you weird looks when you drop down rolls instead of bills. "Spare change?" took on a whole new meaning.

Get a belt though, as the wieght of 100 of them in your pocket will pull down your pants. :)

D'oh by popeydotcom · 2002-01-01 08:16 · Score: 1

The three countries I spend most time in (UK, DK and SE) are NOT 'in' the Eurozone as it were. So I still have to carry 3 currencies around... 4 if I go to a Eurozone country too.. Never mind, I give it 4 years MAX and we'll all be in.

Re:D'oh by krbonne · 2002-01-02 06:16 · Score: 1

Greetings,

Don't worry. The euro will be accepted in large parts of Denmark and as will be the case in the major UK cities.

Euros coins and notes and a good credit-card will get you most places you want to go.

Cheerio! Kr. Bonne.

Re:Nationalism is a positive force! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:16 · Score: 0

I don't understand what your nation could have done to you to get you that mad, but I hope that some day you'll come to see why supporting only your own kind of people is the right decision. Have some pride in your nation's history!

I teach you the superman.

Man is something to be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?

-- Friedrich Neitzsche, Also Sprach Zarahustra

Ah Punt was pegged to de pound tilll the Euro came by DABANSHEE · 2002-01-01 08:28 · Score: 2

& So was the Irish pound,

I've got a Irish pound left over from my holidays in 76 & its says 'redeemable for one pound sterling in London' on it, well something to that effect.

For the whole period of the Irish Free State the Pound was pegged, then during the Republic the pound was pegged & it was still pegged to the UK pound when it became the punt, it only got unpegged from the Brit pound I think about 3 years ago when the Euro was introduced for everything but cash purposes, when it became pegged to the Euro instead.

So really its with the Euro that Ireland got full monetary independence from the UK.

Spot the Tory! by Tim+Ward · 2002-01-01 08:31 · Score: 1

(Note for American readers: in the UK "conservative" is normally a term of abuse. Unlike the USA, where one gathers that "conservative" is normal and "liberal" is a term of abuse.)

(Further note for American readers: "Tory" means "Conservative".)

Re:Spot the Tory! by uradu · 2002-01-01 08:35 · Score: 2

> Unlike the USA, where one gathers that "conservative" is normal and "liberal" is a
> term of abuse.

Depends entirely on your circle of friends. Within my social radius "conservative" is a lethal word, topped only by the Lethal Joke.

-

Macedonia & Kosovo are using the Euro too by DABANSHEE · 2002-01-01 08:31 · Score: 2

as their currency.

Also the 20 official countries of the African France & the 15 odd unofficial African Franc countries are in a way going to be in the Euro zone too. Because now the African Franc is pegged to the Euro instead of the French Franc

Re:Macedonia & Kosovo are using the Euro too by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 08:50 · Score: 0

That shouldnt change anything for the US sponsored drug dealers and terrorists there who prefer deutchmarks and US dollars.

After all, the US army is protecting the Albanian terrorists who control 70-90% of the heroin going into Europe and it'llbe easier for them to finance the Albanian terrorists in Macedonia that the US supports too.

Oh wait...terrorists are only bad when they attack the US....otherwise they are just fine.

s.
Re:Macedonia & Kosovo are using the Euro too by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 00:59 · Score: 1

Well it changes everything for the ones that prefer Deutschemarks. They'll have to change them all to Euros before the end of February.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:Macedonia & Kosovo are using the Euro too by thogard · 2002-01-02 02:08 · Score: 1

Is that like Tahiti using the French Franc? Everything except hotel rooms were about 1/3 cheaper if you used the US$ there and since their major bank is in Hawaii, it sort of makes sense to to use the currency that your bank prefers.

In Egypt (and most of Africa) it wasn't unheard of for locals to buy land using US$. Off thing about the $100 bills floating about that part of the world is they were printed on the best presses the US goverment could buy and had give to Iran (\bq?)
I wonder who forgot to remove the plates. Its difficult to use a real $100 in Egypt, they much prefer the fake ones.

Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by wiresquire · 2002-01-01 09:02 · Score: 5, Insightful

The biggest thing that will happen initially will be that the Euro will appreciate. This is simply because of supply and demand. And initial euphoria of a happy new year!

But the bigger threat is inflation. It's simple and happens anytime there are changes to standard pricing schemes, be that a GST/VAT, exchange rate, whatever.

Manufacturers don't want to receive less than what they've previously been getting. So they round up.
Distributors don't want to receive less than what they've previously been getting. So they round up.
Retailers don't want receive less than what they've previously been getting. So they round up.

It all gets passed on to the consumer (me). Now I need more money to pay for this, so I ask for a raise....That's the classic price/wages spiral.

Economics 101 says that inflation is inversely related to the exchange rate. So that means if inflation goes up, then the exchange rate will go down.

As Germany (the driver of EU commerce), has just officially gone into recession, this inflation pressure is going to be a serious confidence issue in the Euro. As the currency depreciates, there will be the "I told you so" bleating...

Britain, by not taking part of the Euro, is best placed to benefit in the short/medium term. Short term means less than 2 years. Medium term means 2-5 years in financial circles - IT has different time lines.

The only thing that concerns me is the effect this has on the German economy. If there is serious inflation over short/medium term, this could all come undone. If there's not, and the German economy kicks in during this period, then the Euro will take off.

--

So does Anonymous Coward have good karma?

Re:Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:30 · Score: 2, Insightful

The biggest thing that will happen initially will be that the Euro will appreciate. This is simply because of supply and demand. And initial euphoria of a happy new year!

They said that at the beginning of 1999. So far, they're down 30%.

As for supply and demand, that all happened since 1999. Plus, all that money now coming from under the bed is sure creating a lot of supply of currency, but no more demand.

Still so sure? I bet we see the Euro go under 0.80 U.S. this year.
Re:Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by DrSpin · 2002-01-01 11:30 · Score: 1

One day, people will realise that its not the Euro going down, its the dollar going through the roof.
And the high dollar helps the US Economy? I don't think so.
Just wait till the Arabs accept payment in Euros for oil - then see where the dollar is! You'll have to scrape it off your boots.
The Euro is stable, because its credible. The majority of currencies are not, and sink like lead bricks.
when someone says having your own currency means having sovereignty over your financial policy, what they mean is "your politicains have the ability to f*** with the currency at election time". You DO NOT NEED IT.
Re:Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by DrSpin · 2002-01-01 11:39 · Score: 1

Economics 101 is a pile of sh*te. WHatever the various parties WANT, they still have to survive.
Re:Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 13:21 · Score: 0

And USD is unstable ?
You are stupid.
Thank you.
Re:Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by Illume · 2002-01-02 00:04 · Score: 1

> But the bigger threat is inflation.
Actually the Euro already significantly decreased inflation. But now this might even be a problem because people want to get raises "as usual" but the industry can't pay 7% more when the prices only climbed 2%.

And please not that the 2.x% inflation we have in germany are mostly caused by increased fuel taxes.

I heard that Portugal still has some problems with inflation, but this will mostly affect consumers and not the industry: the commercial trades with foreign countries can be calculated in advance and invesestors can rely on a stable currency.
As Germany (the driver of EU commerce), has just officially gone into recession
IIRC the USA "officially" went into recession. But Germany will probably follow in a few years.

(Then Asia will get stronger and even later Japan will get out of recession, if the analysts are right.)
Britain, by not taking part of the Euro, is best placed to benefit in the short/medium term.
I never heard this opinion before, but then again I'm no financial expert. I thought britain is afraid to become the looser of a "united europe" and therefore tries to keep better relations to the US than to its european neighbours. If not switching to the Euro would be a disadvantage for the other contries their advisors wouldn't have agreed to it.
Re:Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:21 · Score: 0

Economics 101 says that inflation is inversely related to the exchange rate. So that means if inflation goes up, then the exchange rate will go down.
As Germany (the driver of EU commerce), has just officially gone into recession, this inflation pressure is going to be a serious confidence issue in the Euro. As the currency depreciates, there will be the "I told you so" bleating...
Money exchange rates is almost never correct. (Check historical stats, if you don't believe me). For instance, during last Germany recession (in the 80s I think), the value of the Deutch Mark was doubled with respect to the dollar in a few years.
Re:Appreciate, inflate, depreciate... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:41 · Score: 0

And USD is unstable ? You are stupid. Thank you.
What are you comparing the USD with? If your only reference is the dollar, then I understand 1 dollar = 1 USD.

Its recession if they don't join by DABANSHEE · 2002-01-01 09:10 · Score: 2

Because British exports to the continent are just not going to be competitive unless they either devalue or join the Euro zone.

Look at Oz its the devaluation of the currency that has had Oz had about the best peform economy relative speaking from the Asian monatary crisis & dott.bomb crash to now.

It makes Aussie exports cheap & imports expensive, which is giving us monthly trade surpluses & just 6% unemployement, without needing 'working poor' wages like the US, while still being a welfare state (well compared with the US any way)

Re:Its recession if they don't join by Derwen · 2002-01-01 09:44 · Score: 2

Because British exports to the continent are just not going to be competitive unless they either devalue or join the Euro zone.

When will this myth die? As I said above , the UK is a net importer from the rest of the EU.
As for Oz - they would be more able to withstand external fluctuations if they hadn't made such a mess of their agriculture (the same could be said for the British Isles ;-)
- Derwen

--
http://fsfeurope.org/
Re:Its recession if they don't join by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:19 · Score: 1

Because British exports to the continent are just not going to be competitive unless they either devalue or join the Euro zone.

Dude, how to you explain the last 6 years? Britain has way outperformed all of Europe during the time it's "overvalued" currency was going to kill off all its companies. And we're still growing faster than them. When the facts don't fit the theory, maybe you should reconsider your fundamental assumptions?
Re:Its recession if they don't join by Trojan · 2002-01-01 11:27 · Score: 1

Uh... you're both saying the same thing.
The pound is valued too high wrt other currencies, therefore British exports are not competitive, making the UK a net importer.
Re:Its recession if they don't join by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:51 · Score: 0

That's silly. We trade with the world, not just with Europe. What difference does it make whether we're a net importer or exporter with regard to other EU members?
Re:Its recession if they don't join by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 01:39 · Score: 1

The UK is a net importer because it's cheaper to buy stuff from abroad than to make it here. If the pound was weaker, it might be cheaper to make it here.

The manufacturing sector of our economy has been in recession for about the same amount of time that the pound has been strong against the Euro. That might be just a coincidence of course...

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe

Punt has not been pegged to Sterling since 1979 by Ryano · 2002-01-01 09:12 · Score: 2

The Irish Pound (also called the Punt), was pegged to the Pound Sterling on its introduction in 1928, and remained so until 1979. This was because the vast majority of the country's trade in that period was with the UK. Entry into the EEC in 1973 began to change this however, and by 1979 it was no longer desirable for the two currencies to remain linked. At that point Ireland joined the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), one of the fore-runners of the Single Currency project.

In the period between 1979 and 1999, the Irish Pound floated freely against other currencies, until the euro exchange rates were irrevocably fixed on January 1st 1999. For the past three years, 1 Irish Pound has equalled about 1.27 euro.

One other interesting point to note is that during the period of British domination, Ireland had its own currency from 1783 to 1826. This was worth slightly less than the Pound Sterling, and fluctuated according to economic conditions on the island, but was abolished in 1826.

It would not be fair to say, however, that Ireland did not have monetary independence from Britain until 1979, or indeed until 1999. Ireland had full control over its monetary policy, and could have ended the link with Sterling at any time. However, we were not yet economically independent from Britain, so it would not have been prudent to do so.

Re:Conversion rates by hughk · 2002-01-01 09:23 · Score: 2

The conversion rates fluctuate constantly. What's to say that one day, we charge 500 for a gold ring, and then going to the bank to exchange it, it's then worth 90% of that? That's lost money to us. We can't afford to be dealing in currency fluctuations. Both the pound and the US Dollar are stable enough to be dealing with, but I won't put my corporation's trust into the Euro.

First of all, if you are wanting to fix an exchange rate, then just talk to your bank. If not, then just take the Euro at the daily adjusted price. You only have a single transaction at the bank and that is end of day when you bank thr currencies. Expect anyway that the cost of Euro cash handling will be driven down by competition and demand.

Many organisations dealing with visitors, such as souvenir shops and museums have already promised to take the Euro. You will find that this will create a demand for cheap cash handling facilities.

As a final point, the pound/dollar are not stable in relation to each other.

--
See my journal, I write things there

Like all the british people you are DUMB by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:24 · Score: 0, Flamebait

You are fucking dumb like all british people.
Euro doesn't mean loss of independence
Damn ignorant british people
Stick your queen up your *** !!!

Arithmetic? [was Re:Congrats to the Brits] by Derwen · 2002-01-01 09:24 · Score: 2

Yeah, well done Britain, who now can't export anything as their currency is overvalued against the Euro, and who will probably end up using the Euro whether they like it or not, despite having no control over it.

Are you saying that weak currencies are good?
If exports are more expensive, then imports are cheaper. In the UK vs the rest of the EU, you will find that the UK is a net importer from the other european states. Exports mostly go to the USA and other former colonies :-)
- Derwen

--
http://fsfeurope.org/

Re:Arithmetic? [was Re:Congrats to the Brits] by Sanity · 2002-01-01 11:17 · Score: 2

Are you saying that weak currencies are good?
No, I am saying that a disparity between currency values is bad. Of course the UK doesn't export much to Europe right now because of exactly the problem I am describing. Don't you think that it is better to export to countries closer to you, rather than those further away? So why can't the UK? Yes, you guessed it, because Sterling is overvalued against the Euro.
Re:Arithmetic? [was Re:Congrats to the Brits] by Derwen · 2002-01-02 02:15 · Score: 2

Don't you think that it is better to export to countries closer to you, rather than those further away?
On environmental grounds alone? - yes.

So why can't the UK? Yes, you guessed it, because Sterling is overvalued against the Euro.
Actually it may have something to do with the systematic destruction of the UK manufacturing industries which once exported to (the rest of) europe :-(
- Derwen

--
http://fsfeurope.org/

Re:Yet another Zionist conspiracy by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 09:28 · Score: 0

You do realise that the Jews became leaders in Finance and Banking not because they were permitted the power of commerce, but because in Europe in the Middle Ages, Christians and Muslims were forbidden by their religion from running banks that charged interest??? Since the Xtians+towel-heads weren't allowed run banks, that only left the bignoses to run the banks.

Fast forward a few centuries, and you have load of Xtians complaining about the Jews controlling the world's banks! - Stupid Xtians, it's their own bloody fault - their stupid religion FORBADE Xtians from running the Banks!

It has been made impossible! by Flu · 2002-01-01 09:28 · Score: 1

Actually, all EURO countries adopted the Euro some years ago as their official currency, with a fixed ratio between the currencies. For example, 1€ = 1.95583 DEM=1936.27 ITL.

However, the coins and notes of the old currency were kept in circulation until enough EURO notes and coins had been manufactured (as of today, that is); so - since then - giving someone a 1 DEM note has just been the only possible way of giving someone a ~0.50 EUR coin. Most people never thoght of that in that way, though.

Several years before that, all countries coordinated their economic policies so that the inflation and exchange rations for each country had to be kept within limits that had been agreed upon in advanced.

One of the reasons (there were many others as well) for creating a single currency, was to strengthen the smaller countries during periods of high inflations and protect them from speculations done by George Soros and other powerful individuals on the currency-exchanges, in order to avoid what currently happends in Argentina.

/Fredrik (designs software for machines that handles EURO coins, BTW)

The REAL reason is because of currency trading by argoff · 2002-01-01 09:36 · Score: 2

When you have a relatively small economic base (like say Hong Kong), and your currency is backed by the "good faith of the government" - it is possible for a group of billionaire investors to get together, call your bluff, and make a fortune when you can no longer back up your money. This is the real reason why everyone now has Euro fever. By putting everyone under one puffed up currency, "calling the bluff" takes allot more cash up-front and allot more risk. It is also the reason why strong economies like Britain and Switzerland are staying away.

The currency convince explanation is a farce. All the people who do real business in Europe have this automated by computer anyhow. Even though it will make things easier on the average citizen, it is actually poor economic and social policies that are holding Europe back.

Of course, the real solution is to have currencies backed by market value and not by the "good faith of governments". Eventually this is going to burn everybody, including the USA.

Re:The REAL reason is because of currency trading by thogard · 2002-01-02 01:11 · Score: 1

It seems that Hong Kong and Tiawan have quite stable countries... the US$. In dealing with compaines in both area, we could never pay in local currency, only US$

Any way to get the currency outside of Europe? by DarkEdgeX · 2002-01-01 09:38 · Score: 2

I've always been fascinated with foreign currency (specifically, the printed variety), and the Euro is the most interesting to come around in a long time. Is there any place online one can order printed currency or coin ala the US Mint? (http://www.usmint.gov/ for coins or http://www.treas.gov/ for printed currency-- US Mint apparently handles international orders for those curious about US currency, not sure about the Treasury.)

--
All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.

Re:Any way to get the currency outside of Europe? by Bram+Stolk · 2002-01-01 10:25 · Score: 1

If you want euro coins, simply bid on my official eurokit at ebay.
Surf over to
ebay listing

Bram

--
Bram Stolk http://stolk.org/tlctc/
Re:Any way to get the currency outside of Europe? by ksheff · 2002-01-01 12:37 · Score: 2

Call your bank and ask them when they will have Euro notes available. If all else fails, go to an airport (and pay rotten exchange rates).

If you are in a major metro area, there will probably be at least one bank that will have some foreign currency on hand. I did this when I went on vacation a couple years ago so I would have some local currency when I stepped off the airplane.

--
the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
Re:Any way to get the currency outside of Europe? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:45 · Score: 0

> If you want euro coins, simply bid on my official eurokit at ebay.
Capitalist scum!
Re:Any way to get the currency outside of Europe? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 09:18 · Score: 0

Try http://www.euro-coincollection.nl/ for coins.

Not too uncommon! by Flu · 2002-01-01 09:46 · Score: 1

That is actually a very common problem among the currencies of the world. I work as a software designer for a company that manufactures coin-sorting machines that are able to identify and reject coins that was incorrectly accepted by your local cigarette-automat, and we get reports of collisions between currencies all the time.

Just think about it; There are some 200 countries in the world. Assume they all have 10 different coins in circulation (some of the coins are old and have been replaced by newer versions, but still). That makes 2000 different coins in the world.

The mints only have a few parameters to work with; physical size being the most obvious, but also the metal combination and alloys in different layers.

Also, since there are several manufacturers of coin-accepting modules used in the various automats, there are several different methods used to identify the coins, and a certain collision may be present in equipment from one manufacturer, but not from another.

/Fredrik

Notes from Frankfurt by hughk · 2002-01-01 09:49 · Score: 5, Informative

I live just outside Frankfurt am Main, home of the European Central Bank. I mostly do systems work for financial securities houses and exchanges. I am a Brit with experience of living and working in various EU countries as well as further afield.

The exchanges and markets have been working in Euros for the last year. This makes a unified market within the Euro-zone countries. However, until we had a real currency, there was a crisis of confidence.

I duely went out and got my 20DM worth of Euro coins in December. This was part of the so-called familiarity and to try to front-load the system to help with the problem of small change.

A couple of days ago, I had a guy at a bookshop at Frankfurt airport try to pass me off with two 10 year old banknotes of a withdrawn design. I objected because the notes could only be changed at a bank, and he gave me modern notes. The old bank notes were in very good condition and probably genuine, but I still refused.

Well I was out last night, spending Deutschmarks in a pub all night. Did I rush out to get my Euros, no as I anticipated a queue at the cash-points. I stayed away from the ECB because I didn't like the crush.

In the morning, I noted that the region transport company, the RMV seemed to have a lot of ticket machines out of order. However, I was able to get money from an ATM w/o queueing and without problem.

We are relatively lucky in that the exchange rate is set close enough to 2 at 1.95583. However, the retailers have been given a little too much leeway in setting their prices, so there is a lot of retail price inflation (already apparent during December). In France, they introduced a price freeze for three months to prevent this.

In real terms, it will probably start being useful on my next ski-trip. No more currencies to worry about apart from the Swiss Franc, and already, some resorts in Switzerland are saying that they will accept the Euro. Many have been taking Deutschmarks and French Franks already for things like lift-passes.

I expect that there may be some problems tomorrow when the first real business day for the shops starts, probably with availability of change as the public have practically none. Shops should give change in Euros, even if you spend DM.

--
See my journal, I write things there

Re:Notes from Frankfurt by akihabara · 2002-01-01 10:48 · Score: 1

In France, they introduced a price freeze for three months to prevent this.

LOL, and they probably think it'll work too.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 17:28 · Score: 0

Hey you wombat, do you know if the ESOC cafeteria coffee machine will use the euro or do I have to go to Eumetsat one everytime where they have these cartdriges expresso machines hidden in kitchens.

Seriously, where are you based?

:>
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by octalman · 2002-01-01 19:15 · Score: 1

Few denizens of the USofA relate to withdrawn banknotes or coins because every coin and every bill ever issued by the United States of America is still acceptable as legal tender. As I recall, the three cent coin (early 1800's) is the only coin ever demonitized; but it effectively remained valid anyway. Gold notes (all issued before 1933) were recalled, but remained in use, just not convertable to gold.

I have a Saudi note and a UK 50 pence coin that were demonitized - no big loss, but annoying anyway. Not to mention perfectly valid Canadian and New Zealand 1 cent and Irish 1 penny coins foisted off on me as US 1 cent coins because they are the same size :-)

Those who travel between European countries can expect some benefit from not having to change currencies so much - the fees are outright predatory at some Bureaux de Change. This might not be a big problem to those who travel frequently, but to the inexperienced and those who travel infrequently, it can be a real, unexpected expense. Plastic is best, but you still have to have some cash.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:19 · Score: 0

In France, they introduced a price freeze for three months to prevent this.

Nop, there is no price freeze in France, the thing that you are referring to is more like a "gentleman agreement" not to raise price from july 2001 to july 2002.

But nobody is forced not to raise prices, and in fact few people do when it comes to small businesses (baker, butcher and so on).

And despite of all the french government have said, there will be no price controls, since no law has been voted to force business to froze there prices.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by hughk · 2002-01-01 22:26 · Score: 2

Old notes are not demonitised, but not everyone accepts them. Same applies to US currency, try using some old $100 notes outside a major bank.
Newer money is preferred because of the reduce risk of counterfeiting.

--
See my journal, I write things there
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by hughk · 2002-01-01 22:35 · Score: 2

Actually most places have been working overtime to get their vending machines updated. With limited availability of coins for checking, I'm sure there are going to be some real fun problems. Some of the RMV automats were extremely picky about German currency, so heaven knows how they will cope with the slightly differring
As noted, I usually work in Frankfurt, most recently at the Boerse but I live up in the Taunus at Oberursel.

--
See my journal, I write things there
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by hughk · 2002-01-01 22:43 · Score: 2

Sorry for the misinformation, I only got it from the Economist!
The issue here is that a price of DM199 should be converted to €101.75. Of course, the shop doesn't want such prices, so they call it €104, or even worse €109.
Price creep on majo items isn't so bad percentage wise but on small items in the supermarket, whoa!!!!! We are seeing an average increase of about 5% or so.

--
See my journal, I write things there
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Muad'Dave · 2002-01-02 02:41 · Score: 1

I never thought about this before - how difficult is it to get a cash machine to handle bills of different physical sizes?
Here in the US it is difficult to find a cash machine that handles anything other than $20 bills. Some will do $20's and $5's. 7-Eleven (a large convenience store chain) used to have a machine that would give exact amounts to the penny (it was intended as a paycheck-cashing machine). I don't know if they still have them or not.

--
Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by tdye · 2002-01-02 03:24 · Score: 2

Boy is this going to sound like a troll... but since I'm an American living in a Euro country (Ireland) I get to say it anyway:

Until the problem in quotes is resolved, the European continent will never, ever, ever have as strong an economy as the USA:
However, the retailers have been given a little too much leeway in setting their prices, so there is a lot of retail price inflation (already apparent during December). In France, they introduced a price freeze for three months to prevent this.

How many of you Americans had this phrase jump out at you... and how many Europeans missed it altogether?

The retailers have been given too much leeway?!? Do you see the problem here? It's not the job of governments to decide how much a retailer gets to charge for his goods! The retailers should be able to tell their governments to fuck off, and charge what they can get... but they aren't allowed!

But the more fundamental problem is deeper: Many Europeans don't agree with this idea, and they are MUCH more in favor of tightly regulated markets... so much so that they don't think about it. It's an accepted precondition, and so you get comments like the one I quoted.

The truth is, the price inflation happens because the retailers will inflate to whatever level they are allowed by their govermnemts. If it were a real market, they would inflate to whatever the consumers were willing to pay for the goods... but this doesn't occur to many (if not most) Europeans, and it's such a foreign idea that it's hard to even explain. So you get France freezing retail prices for three months! Why do people put up with it?
Because they don't understand, on the fundamental level that Americans do, what a FREE market is, and what it does for the people who succeed in it.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by hokanomono · 2002-01-02 04:00 · Score: 1

Usually we don't have price regulation, it's just an exception because many conservatives would not accept the new currency without it. Many old people have bad experiences with one or more currency changes. Of course it was different circumstances (e.g. some countries were occupied and forced to a currency change), but people feel better with a price freeze.

Because they don't understand, on the fundamental level that Americans do, what a FREE market is, and what it does for the people who succeed in it.

The free market is an illusion. People don't get all the information they would need to decide where to buy their products. This is not a big problem under usual circumstances, but a change of currency is a bit unusual. People have to get used to the new prices, because they don't want to use a calculator all the time.

I think we europeans do understand, what a free market is; we just don't believe in it. The "free market" is not our religion.

--
This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Jhan · 2002-01-02 05:18 · Score: 1

Yadda, yadda...
Because they don't understand, on the fundamental level that Americans do, what a FREE market is, and what it does for the people who succeed in it.

Hmmm.... It makes them into egomaniacal bow-before-my-might-puny-mortals, all-your-base-are-belong-to-us billionears like Bill Gates ;-) ?

Oh, and lets not forget what a FREE market does to those that don't succeed so well in it... The USA has one of the largest precentages of homeless of the first world countries.

--
I choose to remain celibate, like my father and his father before him.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by tdye · 2002-01-02 05:37 · Score: 2

And this is why people get arrested in France for working more than the allowed hours/week. With all the import/export issues, price controls, artifically inflating prices to protect piss-poor market performance and inferior products, I don't see the free market. Ask Irish Eircom customers where the free market is.

This is exactly what I mean. It's not a religion... but the govt. shouldn't be ABLE to freeze prices, even if it wants to. It's none of the Republic of Ireland's business what I charge for a widget... all that matters is if my customers think it's a fair price.

The idea that it's possible to force an entire country's retailers to freeze their pricing across Christmas because the govt. is worried that people don't want to use calculators is madness. Caveat Emptor, and if you're worried, then let the govt. buy Euro calculators for everyone.

You'd think, if this were a real collection of Democratic societies, that the same people who voted to change their currency would be able to manage to convert it without having to be patronized and shielded from the market by their own governments.

(But wait... most people didn't vote to change this, did they?)

Do you see what I mean? Your government shouldn't have the ability to dictate anything at all with regards to your pricing, whether they want to or not, whether they think it's better for people or not. You can't retain the ability to arbitrarily manipulate commerce like that and expect a powerful united economy to rival the USA.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by tdye · 2002-01-02 05:43 · Score: 2

LOL

Well, first of all, what's wrong with being rich? USA has a larger percentage of rich people per capita than the rest of the world, too, and we whip ass in charitable giving as well.

***SHAMELESS BIAS WARNING***
As for homeless, I suppose you have to decide whether you want to be a society that brutally taxes your successful people so that the failures can have a nice house and a car, or a society that says you get what you work for, and you work for what you get.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by hughk · 2002-01-02 06:19 · Score: 2

Sizes are not a major issue. It recent times, the guilotining of bank notes has been far from perfect. Our ticket machines have previously accepted DM10 and DM20, but have not accepted DM50. Perhaps that was a worry about vulnerability to counterfeiting? Anyway, the season ticket machines didn't take cash, rather direct debit. I have no idea which Euro notes will be accepted.
The problem is with the coins because we have about half a dozen or more regional mints. Sometimes the physical characteristics have upset the (Swiss made) ticket machines.
Now we have coins carrying differing designs and being sourced from throughout the Euro-zone. I hope this works.
I should add after another visit into town this afternoon that there is a higher than normal demand for cash in the banks and from the ATMs, and paying is generally a little slower as people get used to the currency and the prices, but otherwise it is ok and the currency seems popular.

--
See my journal, I write things there
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 11:34 · Score: 0

However, the retailers have been given a little too much leeway in setting their prices, so there is a lot of retail price inflation (already apparent during December). In France, they introduced a price freeze for three months to prevent this.
How many of you Americans had this phrase jump out at you... and how many Europeans missed it altogether?
The retailers have been given too much leeway?!? Do you see the problem here? It's not the job of governments to decide how much a retailer gets to charge for his goods! The retailers should be able to tell their governments to fuck off, and charge what they can get... but they aren't allowed!
But the more fundamental problem is deeper: Many Europeans don't agree with this idea, and they are MUCH more in favor of tightly regulated markets... so much so that they don't think about it. It's an accepted precondition, and so you get comments like the one I quoted.
This is a typically American comment. "Free market is unconditionnaly good, governement should never interfere... yada yada... that's why Europe is completly falling apart". The problem is that's free market is only proven to work on a very restritive set of assumptions. One of them is perfect information, and rationality. The problem is that obviously, when you are changing money, "perfect information" (if you suppose you had something approaching it) is partially lost, because you don't know any longer what is actually expensive, or not, at first sight. For instance, I can tell with my normal currency if something is "a bit expensive", with a 10% precision. I cannot with the Euro.
Obviously, retailers have the "perfect" information, since they are doing the conversion, but for instance, the old lady has not, unless she does a conversion (which a sizable percentage of the old ladies won't bother to do, if they are just, say, buying their bottle of milk).
So the retailers have better information, so they can take advantage of it, inflating (for a short amount of time, no doubt) the price, going unoticed for a sizable amount of customers. Not only that, but if they act rationally (or are respectful of their shareholder money) they should do that.
How can you miss something so simple?
The truth is, the price inflation happens because the retailers will inflate to whatever level they are allowed by their govermnemts.
No, see below.
If it were a real market, they would inflate to whatever the consumers were willing to pay for the goods...
Your argument is extremely weak. THE LIMIT APPLIES. Do you think people are buying things inflated to maximum allowed, ABOVE the price they are willingly to pay ? This is stupid.
The truth is 1) they inflate to whatever the consumers are willing to pay for the good OR whatever is allowed, whichever is lower. 2) customers are "willing" to pay more for the goods, than they would objectively accept, because they lost their references (and thus "perfect" information). If prizes weren't fixed, then rationnal retailers would inflate to whatever the consumers can be lured to pay, without losing too many of them (obviously there is a tradeoff ; but prices are above the balance that would occur in perfect information free market).
It's the job of the governement to protect the citizen from abuse, or to regulate what is going wrong in a free market here. It is so, not because it is a natural immuable law, but because Europeans tend to vote for governements acting so. Americans can decide with whatever system they go in the US, i.e. for free market with minimal regulations. That's democracy.
So, you not only fail to understand the problem, and the solution, but you also criticize them without a clue.
Because they don't understand, on the fundamental level that Americans do, what a FREE market is, and what it does for the people who succeed in it.
You're right but I would put it in another way: Europeans are not behaving like if "FREE market" was a absolute god, or a religion which as to be inconditionnaly followed "no question asked". If something looks wrong or unfair, the governement can attempt to regulate it. It might fail, it might succeed, but we tend to vote for it to regulate in some case.
So you get France freezing retail prices for three months! Why do people put up with it?
Because we don't belong the the sect of "Free Market! Always! In all circumstances! This is the path to Paradise! Regulation is EVIL!". So, on one hand, we don't care about frozen retail price, we take it that three months is short enough not to damage the economy. On the other hand, we're happy that buying whatever good in Euro to our traditional shop, there won't be a silent hidden 5%,10 or 20% inflation hidden somewhere on some product.
So on average, we are happy. What's the problem ?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 12:16 · Score: 0

And this is why people get arrested in France for working more than the allowed hours/week.
People don't get arrested, the employer is fined. And govt. said this regulation isn't enforced on managing positions, engineers and other high level jobs. Basically it's a way to prevent managers to pressure workers into working more and more.
This is exactly what I mean. It's not a religion... but the govt. shouldn't be ABLE to freeze prices, even if it wants to.
We voted for the governement. And we are keen to vote govts which enforces such regulations. Or to put it in a more interesting perspective, parties advocating "free market all the way, and govt. should dramatically decrease" tend to fail miserably here, electorally-wise. So draw your own conclusion. Who are you to decide what govt. should or shouldn't be ABLE to do? Sounds like religion.
(But wait... most people didn't vote to change this, did they?)
In my country we had a referedum which included this precise question (among the general idea of closer economic cooperation), i.e. for/against the Maastricht Treaty. Inversely, for instance, the Danes voted "no" to the very same treaty, and thus didn't change currency yesterday. And our presidential elections aren't a big circus either, nor is the richest candidate the one winning in 80% of the cases.
You'd think, if this were a real collection of Democratic societies, that the same people who voted to change their currency would be able to manage to convert it without having to be patronized and shielded from the market by their own governments.
And we think exactly the reverse, so what.
Do you see what I mean? Your government shouldn't have the ability to dictate anything at all with regards to your pricing, whether they want to or not, whether they think it's better for people or not.
Says who? We decide.

You can't retain the ability to arbitrarily manipulate commerce like that and expect a powerful united economy to rival the USA.
Is this the goal? Look up in the CIA World Book facts, USA section, how much of the US population benefited from your economy growth those 20-30 last years. On the other hand, Europe went to productivity per hour worked equal 50% of the US in 1945, to productivity equals to 90%. The difference is that we have more people on welfare, and we work less.
You may think it's better to spent no or little time with your children and family, and earn $40,000 per year than to spent much more time with them and have leisure time, and earn $30,000. I don't, since I do live quite decently with $30,000. So what?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 12:31 · Score: 0

Well, first of all, what's wrong with being rich? USA has a larger percentage of rich people per capita than the rest of the world, too, and we whip ass in charitable giving as well
Not international charitable giving per capita, and your charitable giving is not as much what you get from European welfare can redistribute, plus charitable giving is "unfair" to the people you dislike more.
As for homeless, I suppose you have to decide whether you want to be a society that brutally taxes your successful people so that the failures can have a nice house and a car, or a society that says you get what you work for, and you work for what you get.
Your view is it's better to have many rich people AND not to tax them to much... Our view is it's better to have fewer poorest people.
You want the truth? I don't care a little bit about how many rich there are. Not how they will be forced to downgrade from a Ferrari to a mere Mercedes because of the taxes.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by tdye · 2002-01-03 03:52 · Score: 2

Ye Gods, a reasoned response! I love those.

First, let me dismiss (again) the idea of Free Merket = religion. I don't support that. You're right, it doesn't always work, but that's not quite my point anyway. I don't think it's fair to say that the idea of a butcher being able to ignore arbitrary price controls created at the whim of a government afraid of political backlash equates to me saying free markets are arbitrarily good, or that Europe is falling apart... but that's neither here nor there. BTW, where's the enforcement end of that? Does the butcher get thrown in jail for overcharging for his lamb chops?

The problem is that's free market is only proven to work on a very restritive set of assumptions. One of them is perfect information, and rationality.

Then the job of government is to educate the people, not to protect them from their ignorance. You'd think that would be the obvious step, right? By that rationale, any population that could be shown to have poor enough math skills could vote to force retailers to price everything in even numbers, and they'd have to do it. Ignorance is not a good foundation for regulation, and certainly not a good place from which to begin governing a people. "Right, we all know many of you can't type in a number and hit that Euro/Franc button, so we're freezing all prices for 3 months, regardless of availability, no matter how much it screws the retailers over the Christmas season. We know plenty of you are stupid, and we're here to protect you from that.".

Or even worse, the people declare they're too confused to understand it all, so the govt. responds not through increasing education and reducing ignorance, but through forcing the retail market to halt price changes so the ignorance doesn't get any worse!

It's the job of the governement to protect the citizen from abuse, or to regulate what is going wrong in a free market here

I agree in the case of abuse, but taking advantage of ignorance is not the same as abuse... if it were, by God the user-car market should be regulated immediately!

And I think you miss the point. When you hand off the job of fair pricing to the govt, you've reduced democracy. The retailer is not a robot with no rights to conduct business in the fashoin he chooses, and it's not *wrong* to charge more if you can get it. Caveat Emptor! The result is more freedom for the individual, less power for the government. Regulation begets LESS democracy, less individual freedom, and more govt. control.

What I'm criticizing (and to be honest, what I'm constantly amazed by) is the willingness of the people to hand off personal responsibility to the govt, and the willingness of the govt. to take whatever powers over the people they can get, regardless of the fact that they are playing the society against itself. Think about this: What has the govt. in France said by freezing prices? They have said that business owners are not to be trusted, and that govt. must protect ordinary work-a-day people from money-hungry capitalist thieves who will screw you however they can. Thank God we were here for you! That's a destructive idea to sow amongst your people, unless you don't care how many of them rely on the govt. for their livelihood.

If I'm buying your bread, you'll damn well do what I say.

So, you not only fail to understand the problem, and the solution, but you also criticize them without a clue.
So I'm clear on the real problem, I think the typical European solution is 'out of the frying pan, into the fire', and I'm criticizing the system by which many Europeans tend to dodge personal accountability and responsibility in favor of govt. protection and coddling, which the ministers are more than happy to provide.

This is why 'the dole' in the USA is viewed as a necessary evil, and in Europe as a semi-legitimate lifestyle choice.

Europeans are not behaving like if "FREE market" was a absolute god, or a religion which as to be inconditionnaly followed "no question asked".
Ahh, but the 'no questions asked' attitude is exactly the one you're taking by freezing prices. While I don't think a free market solves all problems, it's certainly better than an attitude of "Just make it simple for me, keep me safe, and to hell with whoever it hurts in the process... I don't want to ask questions about pricing." Why does your desire to pay the same thing for milk trump the shopkeep's desire to make a few cents more when he can? In a REAL fair system of government, regulation would be out of the question unless it was clear milk pricing was so far beyond the pale that it couldn't be excused. Even in cases where you need a thing to survive, the US govt. rarely regulates prices directly. When heating oil got unbelievably expensive at the start of winter last year, did the govt. cap oil prices? No, it increased availability, which causes prices to naturally lower. Do they cap the cost of electricity in Chicago in the summer, when the heat can kill folks with no central air? No, they give away free fans and help pay your bills. In fact, if commerce in the US doesn't cross state lines, the Federal govt. can't really regulate it at all... even when they want to!

If something looks wrong or unfair, the governement can attempt to regulate it. It might fail, it might succeed, but we tend to vote for it to regulate in some case.

Unfair to whom? This is one of my points. For large issues, I understand sometimes, but what right have you to force the local shopkeep to charge what you want him to? Why is he less of a citizen than you, because he's selling and you're buying?

It's this kind of situation that makes me believe govt. should stay out of the way. Playing the workers against the middle class is BAD government, even if the workers *want* to use the regulatory stick to beat up on the retail sector. Taking any sort of stand re: who is a more deserving citizen is ultimately destructive to the economy and the society... you condition people not to desire success, because it's better to be on the winning team. In the US, success is where it's at; successful people are not viewed with veiled suspicion, and not treated by their govt. as second-class citizens.

So, on one hand, we don't care about frozen retail price, we take it that three months is short enough not to damage the economy.

You might care if you were the butcher and the price of beef doubled in December... of course, the govt. would prevent that as well. Do you see the kind of snowball effect this meddling creates? When you start mucking around in the economy with the goal of keeping people happy, you end up with... a crappy economy. The extreme examples: East Germany and the USSR. On the other hand, you have the USA extreme, where people do get screwed sometimes... look at the price of CD's. But, if you were to pick, which one would you have? Most European govts lean decidedly more toward the USSR model than the USA one... and this schism between you and the shopkeep perpetuates it. Why do businessmen in Europe feel as though they have to justify their actions to me? I think it's great that they're making money hand over fist! But, again, many Europeans view that kind of success with skepticism and distrust, and the govt. just plays along. In fact, it makes the businessman MORE dishonest! Instead of being honest because he knows screwing his customers a few times costs him YEARS of business, he takes what he can get because the customer half-expects to get cheated already, and there's no chance of trust.

On the other hand, we're happy that buying whatever good in Euro to our traditional shop, there won't be a silent hidden 5%,10 or 20% inflation hidden somewhere on some product.

Regardless of whether or not the shopkeep happens to actually be losing money or getting persecuted by his govt. to keep you happy...right?

So on average, we are happy. What's the problem?

I suppose the problem is that you rely on the govt. to create and safeguard that happiness, at the possible expense of others in your own society. It's not your government's job to make you happy! It's your job. IMHO, you're better off failing on your own than partaking of govt.-mandated happiness.

The other problem is that regulation impacts your economy's ability to create wealth in the populace, which makes people less able to prosper, which requires more govt intervention, which requires more severe taxation of the few who are successful despite earlier regulation, which discourages people from being highly successful in the first place, which creates more govt dependency and less economic potential, which doubly impacts the people's ability to create wealth...

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by tdye · 2002-01-03 04:21 · Score: 2

Okay, briefly: Check out some of my other response to another comment regarding playing the society against itself. I feel pretty confident in assuming that the retail industry either a) didn't want the price freeze at all, or b) went along with it because they knew no one would trust them otherwise. That's using govt to divide a society, instead of getting the regulatory bodies out of the way in favor of consumers makine informed choices. That is... bad!

Next: What do you mean, who am I to decide? I'm the same as you, and that's what I think. It's not religion... but I think your complacency and desire to have somebody else do it for you erodes your freedom in ways you'll eventually find particularly unpleasant. And, of course, you aren't a shopkeeper... so your opinion is better.

I do notice that free-market parties tend to get beaten soundly, and regularly. It's got to be a tough sell to try and get a population that's comfortable with handouts to get up and do for themselves... especially when the govt. creates a culture in which success is not to be trusted.

Next: So what? So, wouldn't it be better to educate your people, rather than ask the government to save you from ourselves? (side note: you're arguing against yourself by saying on the one hand that your population is intelligent enough to make good decisions about the desirability of heavy government regulation, and on the other that it recognizes it's inability to convert a Franc to a Euro and accepts the need for drastic government intervention as a result)

Says me, if I'm a shopkeeper. Why does your ignorance make you more deserving of government intervention? Why are you more important than me, the shopkeep? Why the hell should you be able to tell me what I think the price of a steak should be? If you don't like it, don't buy it! Either I'll figure out I'm charging too much, or I'll go broke. It's not the job of government to act as a cudgel beating me into submission so that you don't get cheated out of 50 cents. Caveat Emptor! The result is more individual freedom. Can that be bad?

Next: Wasn't that the stated goal of the Euro Zone? To create a powerful economic base, to unite Europe into a trading power that rivals the US market? What the hell are you doing this for anyway?

Next: Actually, I think I think lots of things would be better than £30K a year and lots of time at home. For example:

I think it'd be better to be so successful as a shopkeep that I can stay home and hire someone to mind the store, making $60K a year or more and working hardly at all.

Or maybe better to work constantly to make 300K a year and send the kids to Harvard.

Or best of all: To not have to settle for 'quite decently' if I don't think that's enough. The point? It's so hard to get to 'stupid crazy rich' in Europe that hardly anyone tries, even if that's their fondest wish. Regulation, taxation, and the acceptability of welfare create a culture where you're punished for wanting great financial success, and practically prevented from getting it no matter how hard you try. In the states, if you wanna love on $30K a year, bully for you. It's easy to do in 90% of the country. But if you want to strike it rich, it's at least relatively possible... and certainly not demonized by a lazy and jealous welfare class who refuse to admit how much they depend on the success of the relative few, with the tacit complicity of the govt. itself.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by tdye · 2002-01-03 04:40 · Score: 2

Of course not per capita... but that doesn't matter! In raw money, we give away more than anyone else... and that doesn't even factor in the international aid the US government provides. We hand out trillions of dollars in relief, aid, grants, loans, and debt forgiveness. Also, redistribution of wealth is a great way to end up as a socialist society instead of a democratic one. Also, isn't it better to give my money to those I consider deserving of it? It is MY money, you know. Why is it better that I be forced to give it to those on whom I feel it's wasted?

Your view is it's better to have many rich people AND not to tax them to much... Our view is it's better to have fewer poorest people.

This is incorrect. Our view (generally... there's plenty of "discussion" about this) is that it's better to give people the opportunity to succeed or fail on their own merits, and not to restrict either overly much. Your view is that the failures should be suported by the society, no matter how little they've tried to succeed. To accomplish this, it's required to redistribute vast amounts of wealth... which is a Bad Thing. See my other replies in this thread...

You want the truth? I don't care a little bit about how many rich there are. Not how they will be forced to downgrade from a Ferrari to a mere Mercedes because of the taxes.

Ahh, but you DO care! If you didn't, you wouldn't have made that comment. It does highlight what I've been saying, though, which is that class warfare is rife here, and rich people are undeserving of their wealth when there are poor lazy bastards on the dole who 'need' it more. You ought to care about taxes on rich people , if only because you might become one day. It's more likely, though, that you'll lose out on a job a rich person might have given you, because he's lost too much money via wealth redistribution to hire anyone else.

Not exactly my idea of a robust economic and social system...

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by achim · 2002-01-03 04:41 · Score: 1

So far, major retailers (ALDI, PLUS, Handelshof, to name only some) have cut their prices to (to use a typical example of DM 1,99) €0,99. Other retailers live with "ugly" prices at the moment, but will probably not be able to raise them because of the reatilers that lower.
Of course, this does not account for the next months or for more expensive goods, but when people get used to the new numbers, everything will be like before.For expensive things it simply pays to use a calculator.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-03 12:54 · Score: 0

Of course not per capita... but that doesn't matter! In raw money, we give away more than anyone else...
You give internally in the US, again, that's because your welfare system is much lower, and not all people are equals in front of the charities.
and that doesn't even factor in the international aid the US government provides. We hand out trillions of dollars in relief, aid, grants, loans, and debt forgiveness
That's one of the great American myths.
US give less than EU. To tell the truth, US give less than Japan, and on some years US gave less than France alone. Before 11th september, US didn't even bother to pay their due to UN. Interesting, isn't it?
Also, isn't it better to give my money to those I consider deserving of it? It is MY money, you know. Why is it better that I be forced to give it to those on whom I feel it's wasted?
Interestingly, after the Argentina disaster (which is much debated here, because Argentina was IMF's darling for adopting the strongly suggested pro-libertarian laws/privatizations, compared to, say, protectionist Brazil - although this aspect is heavily censored out on the US media I read), I went to the IMF site. I saw that, first US contributed for less that 15% of the IMF money (less than Europe, and even less per capita), and second, that apparently US unilateraly reformed alone the IMF with an American commission (Meltzer Commision) appointed by the US House. It's an interesting use of European money, don't you think, use our money to push libertarian-like systems we don't agree with, and unilaterly decide how to shape the organization using it. I would mind less if US contributed, say 50%, but no, they contributing less than EU, 15% of the total.
Your view is that the failures should be suported by the society, no matter how little they've tried to succeed.
Yes. And I don't equate success with hard work.
A child of worker as much less chances to get a Bachelor degree, (or a got job), than a top-middle class child.
So what happens when two different such children are only working "decently": one is much more likely to get a good social status
For my view of fairness, this is not fair. So I'm all in favor of compensation. Also since I've done long successful studies, the worker, parent of the child, has paid also part of my studies (which were mostly free), and the son of his son will pay part of my retirement.
Our motto is freedom, equality, fraternity (French Republic). You want to argue the motto should be freedom alone. Here it is not.
To accomplish this, it's required to redistribute vast amounts of wealth... which is a Bad Thing.
No this is a choice. There are drawbacks and advantages... the advantage is that no matter what my mother, my children, my friends and myself will be "supported by the society". And interestingly the European country which has the highest GNP per inhabitant in Europe, and the best productivity per hour worked, happens to be Danemark, which is one of the top European country for the size of the Welfare (gov. expenditures are 55% GDP).
Ahh, but you DO care! If you didn't, you wouldn't have made that comment. It does highlight what I've been saying, though, which is that class warfare is rife here, and rich people are undeserving of their wealth when there are poor lazy bastards on the dole who 'need' it more.
No, it is just that I don't care. There are rich people, and there are poor people. Who has the most serious problems? The poor. I don't care about the rich. They have their money problems, but they don't seem to be insurmontable: a mere Mercedes versus a Ferrari.
Your view is that poor people are always just losers, so they deserve their own shit.
You ought to care about taxes on rich people , if only because you might become one day.
I'd be very happy to be among the most taxed people. BTW, the highest marginal rate has gone considerably down from the 90% there was in 1920s, it's steady at probably a mere 60% or less, so know it is perfectly ok. It's not like if there was a 100% marginal rate after some point.
It's more likely, though, that you'll lose out on a job a rich person might have given you, because he's lost too much money via wealth redistribution to hire anyone else.
Here you are arguing on economic grounds... you are telling basically, redistribution is creating a scarcity of capital. According to the economic figures, it's not true. In fact, the reverse is true, in the US more and more money is going to the richest because simply there is less redistribution, which is your choice. So no, what you are fearing doesn't happen ; in fact the marxist prediction of a demand scarcity created by over-acculumation of money by capital at the expense of salaries [creating over-production and total doom in Marxist mythology], is closer to happen for the US, although it's now clear it will never happen, and it's today mostly invalid because there "classes" are heavily blurred to the point they aren't the pertinent factor.
Not exactly my idea of a robust economic and social system...
It's a balance, and the European one is horizontal. The American one is bending towards the richest, but it isn't falling, and you like it that way.
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-03 15:23 · Score: 0

I don't think it's fair to say that the idea of a butcher being able to ignore arbitrary price controls created at the whim of a government afraid of political backlash equates to me saying free markets are arbitrarily good, or that Europe is falling apart... but that's neither here nor there. BTW, where's the enforcement end of that? Does the butcher get thrown in jail for overcharging for his lamb chops?
He get an appropriate punition. Probably, he gets fined a symbolic amount, which is a minor issue, except that if this is part of a larger multi-million scheme, designed by one of large network of supermarkets, by a bunch of clever corporates, who want to seize the opportunity to have a small boost to their stock options and to their careers.
Oh yes, and in Europe, jail is not the only solution ; if you own money, the person you own money to, can call special authorities so that some of your bank account, or goods are seized. In contrast to the US (I think), if you don't pay some of your due to the governement, you can be pretty sure that one day, you will be made pay by one way or the other, even if it involves seizing and selling your TV on auction. In some countries, though, you are then bankrupt (if you actually didn't have enough money), and can resume a normal life with no debt.
Then the job of government is to educate the people, not to protect them from their ignorance. You'd think that would be the obvious step, right?
No. Government is BOTH educating the people (ads campains, free help brochure), and protecting people from their ignorance. It's not up to you (alone) to decide what is the job of the government anyway, it's up to voters.
By that rationale, any population that could be shown to have poor enough math skills could vote to force retailers to price everything in even numbers, and they'd have to do it.
Possibly. The answer is that the cost is surely too big, and the people able to count only with even number is too low, so the tradeoff is not worth it. On contrary, gov. decided for Euro change, the tradeoff was worth it.
Right, we all know many of you can't type in a number and hit that Euro/Franc button, so we're freezing all prices for 3 months, regardless of availability, no matter how much it screws the retailers over the Christmas season. We know plenty of you are stupid, and we're here to protect you from that.
1) I have better things to do than type ever price on a calculator convert to Euro, and yes there is a cost to that, because my time is not free, and second it's an extremely boring and tedious task.
2) So the govt. freed people from this boring task, and added in exchange a burden on retailers.
I can accept that.
I agree in the case of abuse, but taking advantage of ignorance is not the same as abuse... if it were, by God the user-car market should be regulated immediately!
Wrong. There are just different degrees of abuse (from slightly misleading marketing to criminal abuse), on a continous scale. Obviously you are ready to accept an higher threshold of abuse. And also in US viewpoint, you would sue AFTER, instead of having govt. regulate BEFORE. But it's just a CHOICE.
And I think you miss the point. When you hand off the job of fair pricing to the govt, you've reduced democracy.
No. Retailer are losing freedom (3 month aren't 30 years, not), and consumers are gaining safety. It's not a lose-lose situation, it's a tradeoff, it's a choice. But who said freedom was the only goal. The European point of view could well be that "who doesn't want to trade some of its freedom for some safety, deserves neither" in opposition to US opinion.
The result is more freedom for the individual, less power for the government.
Definitly
Regulation begets LESS democracy, less individual freedom, and more govt. control.
No. The more and more the government has power, the more and more my vote is worth. And my goal might not be to maximize my freedom, but to get enough freedom AND safety so that I feel happy. And I have different wishes than you.
They have said that business owners are not to be trusted, and that govt. must protect ordinary work-a-day people from money-hungry capitalist thieves who will screw you however they can.
Possibly. I trust corporations less than governement. For instance, Corporations(Entrepreneur) Union just tried to redefine how the unemployment welfare was redistributed, ("what is good for corporations is good for France", was the motto), in an obvious attempt to get cheaper labor the easy way, and libertarianize the society. The governement said: "stop, we our word to say". A compromise was found, of course. A tradeoff.
That's a destructive idea to sow amongst your people, unless you don't care how many of them rely on the govt. for their livelihood.
Again this is a tradeoff. Europe total mandatory "taxes" (including retirement, social security), is about 50% which is exactly half-way between pure free-market and pure communism. You don't seem able to grasp the concept of "tradeoff". The people WILL rely partly on the governement AND WILL partly on themself. It is a tradeoff, and it is accepted that way, and we like it. For instance, welfare is not unlimited in all cases ; if you have money, you can pay for non-state run hospital or doctors ; you can save to get better retirement, you can pay a private school, and the unemployement welfare money you get decreases with time (old system, unless you choose the new system which keep it steady but don't have the choice to refuse a small amount of given job offers), at which point you are on the basic welfare and get much less than a normal salary.
I'm criticizing the system by which many Europeans tend to dodge personal accountability and responsibility in favor of govt. protection and coddling, which the ministers are more than happy to provide.
It's a choice. Our ministers aren't multi-millionaires nor are receiving (or can receive) huge gifts from lobbyists. In fact, my Prime Minister was a professor at one point (economy and political science, I think), but the cabinet tend to be more in touch with economy and reality. So there is no need to HATE the miniters. If there is 50% personal accountability, and 50% governement help, why should it be bad ? It has been that way for about 50 years now in Europe - only in contrast to US who made a 180 degree turn around from Keynes to Friedman, but who were never very dirigist anyway.
Unfair to whom? This is one of my points. For large issues, I understand sometimes, but what right have you to force the local shopkeep to charge what you want him to? Why is he less of a citizen than you, because he's selling and you're buying?
He is no more, no less. If he is artificially inflating the prices, the gov. is rather on my side... If I take legally advantage of some slight loophole in his systems to gain a few % free, the gov would tend to regulate against me. If he is not artificially inflating prices, it's ok then he would have to wait for 3 months.
In a REAL fair system of government, regulation would be out of the question unless it was clear milk pricing was so far beyond the pale that it couldn't be excused.
That's not because an ideal can't be reached, we have to give up completly the idea of implementing some fairness, and focus exclusively on freedom. It's a tradeoff and a choice.
Playing the workers against the middle class is BAD government, even if the workers *want* to use the regulatory stick to beat up on the retail sector.
I doubt a 3 month freeze is big deal ; after all Euro #1 stated goal is to prevent inflation.
You might care if you were the butcher and the price of beef doubled in December... of course, the govt. would prevent that as well. Do you see the kind of snowball effect this meddling creates?
How often do you think THIS is happening? How much do you think the problem is big in millions of Euro? If regulation is bad (i.e. the tradeoff changes), the governement changes the regulation or remove it. OF COURSE! No snowball effect, if the ball is to big, we suppress it.
When you start mucking around in the economy with the goal of keeping people happy, you end up with... a crappy economy. The extreme examples: East Germany and the USSR.
USSR is a failed communist approach, the same when Argentina is nowadays a failed "free market" approach, in both case because the governement was undemocratic and corrupt. I do not believe that communism work. If you had to choose, what would you choose Argentina or Hungary ? It's not clear.
Most European govts lean decidedly more toward the USSR model than the USA one... and this schism between you and the shopkeep perpetuates it.
I think you are completly missing what happening. First Europe doesn't "lean towards", the taxe rate has now been steady for 20 years. It a stable, self-perpetuating system. Secondly it is half-way between a dirigist/regulationist approach and the USA approach. USSR is not a good model, because dirigeants were clueless dictators... It's just like saying some random African country with a president-for-life, is a good example of how democracy fails. In fact there are three issues: control of production, regulation, and redistribution. USSR governement had a monopoly on the three. Europe is/has switching from the first one "control of production" (which was still advocated partly 20 years ago, and is no longer), to the second (regulation) ; for redistribution, it's viewed as a fundemental cornerstone. Note that you can have 100% redistribution (i.e. the State gets all wages company willingly to pay for employes, and redistributes all the wages - possibly all equal for all), and pure free market other than that: you get one form of communism. Or it can have a monopoly on production plus free market. Or it can strongly regulate production, possibly without any free market (fixed prices) but still no redistribution. Or whatever. The debate is much more complicated than between "USA - free market - good", and "USSR - communism - bad". Europe is a social-democracy system: redistribution and regulation. Note also that Russians are in a much worse economical situation now than during the USSR, free market isn't a magic bullet, it has to be enforced properly with people knowing their jobs, the same way that social democracy/regulations aren't magic bullets, then have to be enforced properly by people who are responsible.
Regardless of whether or not the shopkeep happens to actually be losing money or getting persecuted by his govt. to keep you happy...right?
Be realistic for a while. He won't lose millions, and that's exactly why the law was passed. If this assumption get wrong, the law changes - most likely the govt. would enforce a tax rebate covering his losses. The losses are mutualized. Actually if the law is properly done, he would be allowed to increase his prices whenever he is losing more money (there is no reason not to design the law that way). This is not USSR.
I suppose the problem is that you rely on the govt. to create and safeguard that happiness, at the possible expense of others in your own society. It's not your government's job to make you happy! It's your job. IMHO, you're better off failing on your own than partaking of govt.-mandated happiness.
Amazing how you shifted the discussion. The governement enforced a law to prevent abuses. Since you can't argue abuses are cool, you are focusing on the 0.01% losses which could occur IF THE LAW WAS BADLY WRITTEN, and blow theses losses out of proportion. You fail to understand this: the governement has written a law to prevent the case. This might have undesired side effects, but OF COURSE, the governement had considered this and decided that 3 months was the good balance between my hapiness/the potential abuses, and the potential cost for retailers (because they aren't a bunch of evil guys, trying purposedly to do everything to ruin the country, in a great conspiracy). If free market fails (no more perfect information), the goevernement can attempt to regulate it. Choosing not to regulate it IS a political choice, not a natural order endicted by god or science.
IMHO, you're better off failing on your own than partaking of govt.-mandated happiness.
No. This isn't "1984" either or a "brave new world".
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by tdye · 2002-01-04 03:39 · Score: 2

Okay, so I want to go point-by-point through some of this, but before that there's an overall thing that we're disagreeing on here, and I don't know that it's surmountable at all: It's not a lose-lose situation, it's a tradeoff, it's a choice. But who said freedom was the only goal.
In the US worldview, freedom is not a goal. It is a fact of human existance which must not be infringed upon. The goal is to achieve the best result without infringing upon the inherent freedom of the individual. Freedom is not a goal, not an end which can be achieved to a greater or lesser degree based on the decisions of government. Freedom is not a commodity gifted to the people by the rulers or by the political documents which describe the system. It is an inherent quality of humanity which cannot be restricted by other humans without the consent of the individual.
You spoke frequently of trade-offs. You can't have a 'trade' unless both parties consent, and empowering a government to restrict my freedom in exchange for your convenience or happiness is fundamentally wrong, even if the government compensates me after the fact.

This fundamental difference in what freedom is shades the entire discussion. Your lawsuit/regluation comparison for example: If someone lies to me about a car, I can sue them after the fact. That's one individual calling up judgement against another for a dishonest act, arbitrated by an impartial member the government. If you regulate honesty before the fact, however, you must restrict personal freedom to acomplish it.
If freedom is a commodity, that's fine. The govt. can force you to relinquish some of that commodity, and gift it to others in the form of a guarantee. But if Freedom is a basic human right, then you cannot allow the government to diminish the right of one person for the benefit of another. Punishing dishonesty protects freedom, enforcing truth diminishes it.

I don't think it's possible to go beyond that difference in view, but onward to the rest of your comment:

Regulation begets LESS democracy, less individual freedom, and more govt. control.

No. The more and more the government has power, the more and more my vote is worth. And my goal might not be to maximize my freedom, but to get enough freedom AND safety so that I feel happy. And I have different wishes than you.

First off: with no inherent personal freedom, what's to stop the majority from trading ALL their freedom for safety? I certainly have different wishes than THAT, but individual freedom having no sanctity and no protection, I guess I'd just be fucked in that case, eh?

As government gains power, you gain power over others, but THEY also gain power over YOU.
Again, if freedom is a commodity, than maximizing it might not be your goal. But if it is a basic human right, then my different wishes are just as valid as yours, and you shouldn't be able to restrict my basic human rights for your convenience, even if everyone else in the country agrees with you. Protection of individual freedom is the only way to prevent a tyranny of the majority.

don't seem able to grasp the concept of "tradeoff".
I grasp it well enough. When you're talking about a welfare system, it's perfectly legitimate to discuss. IMHO, it's an outrage to take HALF of what I work every day to earn, and give it to someone who is unwilling to work at all. To me, that seems like a disincentive to work at all... or at least, to make sure I stay medium enough to avoid the taxman. If medium-ness is your eventual societal goal, then I guess that's good... but I believe that government should create equality of opportunity and let the chips fall where they may, without regard to how even the wealth ends up.
BUT
When you're talking about the government, through the engine of a frightened, ignorant, greedy, or uncaring majority, forcing a reduction in my inherent personal freedom in exchange for a percieved 'good' level of happiness, convenience, or safety, IT'S NOT A TRADE! It's a tyranny, and it's no different in principle than the French government forcing you to allow a soldier to live in your house, to "protect" your family against a potential "threat", even if 99% of Frenchmen believe it's a good idea.

I doubt a 3 month freeze is big deal
First, regardless of whether it's a 'big deal' or not, It's still bad for the govt. to play the workers against the middle class... which is exactly what that does.
Second, I'd hope you were CERTAIN (not just doubtful) that it was no big deal before you used your majority power to bludgeon the retail sector into doing it. Since they can't protect themselves from you because their freedom is a commodity which can sometimes be ripped from them without their individual consent, I hope you make sure to vote wisely...

If regulation is bad (i.e. the tradeoff changes), the governement changes the regulation or remove it. OF COURSE! No snowball effect, if the ball is to big, we suppress it.
No, your govt tries to supress it (not you). We all know, government is woefully sluggish and rarely able to act rapidly to changing market conditions, which means your regulations will always be a bit behind the curve, and someone will ALWAYS be getting screwed somewhere by the government, to the detriment of their business and their rights. That has a depressing effect on the entire economy.
At least, in an unregulated market economy, you don't get businesses punished by the government with bad regulation until they can convince someone that they're getting creamed in the market by companies that are unfetterd by government interference. If you loose your arse, it's generally your own fault, not that of an uninformed majority or a slow beurocratic engine.

In fact there are three issues: control of production, regulation, and redistribution
This is an interesting way to frame it, and one I hadn't heard before. At least here, we can agree to part ways in an amiable fashion, withut stomping on the rights of the individual too terribly much. Since it's clear that controlling production is a dumb idea, we're really just back to the welfare question anyway.

100% redistribution (i.e. the State gets all wages company willingly to pay for employes, and redistributes all the wages - possibly all equal for all)
IMHO, equality of opportunity should be the goal, not equality of outcome. It's wrong to ask a brilliant brain surgeon to take the same compensation for his work that a garbage man takes, and it devalues everyone in the society. Equality of outcome guarantees a systemic lack of ambition for your population and an eventual spiral into debt and ruin for the whole country.

He won't lose millions, and that's exactly why the law was passed. If this assumption get wrong, the law changes
True enough, but in the meantime he's had to forcibly submit to the government and hope for redress at some later date. It's the principle that's important, not the financial loss... Freedom is not a commodity. When the govt takes your freedom and your money, you might get your money back but it's practically impossible to get back your freedom.

Since you can't argue abuses are cool, you are focusing on the 0.01% losses
First, I would argue that abuses of that sort are just fine! Caveat Emptor! Let the retailer ruin himself with dishonesty.
Second, I'm not focusing on the financial loss really, I'm focusing on the constriction of a basic human right and the lack of protection of individual freedom that the act highlights. So what if it's only a few cents, for a few months. It's not so bad, right?
That was George III's argument, too. It's the freedom you lose that can't be regained without a fight.
Of course, if freedom is a tradeable commodity, then perhaps you can get some of it given back to you... if enough other people agree, of course. Because if freedom is a commodity, and unprotected as a basic fact of human existance, then you only have as much of it as you can convince others you should have. God help you if the others decide you shouldn't have any, because in that system, no one else is going to.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:Notes from Frankfurt by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-05 05:27 · Score: 0

Okay, so I want to go point-by-point through some of this, but before that there's an overall thing that we're disagreeing on here, and I don't know that it's surmountable at all: "It's not a lose-lose situation, it's a tradeoff, it's a choice. But who said freedom was the only goal."
In the US worldview, freedom is not a goal. It is a fact of human existance which must not be infringed upon. The goal is to achieve the best result without infringing upon the inherent freedom of the individual. Freedom is not a goal, not an end which can be achieved to a greater or lesser degree based on the decisions of government. Freedom is not a commodity gifted to the people by the rulers or by the political documents which describe the system. It is an inherent quality of humanity which cannot be restricted by other humans without the consent of the individual.
I just double checked these are really insurmontable differing view. US constitution is based on the views of the philosopher Locke summed up well, that indeed freedom and also property, are basic rights, and goes on saying that a democracy with a minimum is the best way to keep them.
However, France, and more generally, Europe (after Napoleon swept the European monarchies, which, when he lost, had to be re-installed but this time with stuff like "Charters"), were under the influence of the "Enlightenment"'s philosophers. The most important philosopher for the principles on which the society must be built, is Jean-Jacques Rousseau, with the idea of "Social Contract". To Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the central problem of society, lays in the fact there might be conflicts, and the solution is then "a social contract [...whose basics...] reduce to one unique : the total submission of each member with all his rights, to the whole community". The citizen signing this contract, are then sharing "the persons and their powers under the supreme commandment of the general will". As you see, democracy is then a natural implementation of this idea, but property is only a byproduct of the "community" deciding to grant this right (under its own terms). Note that Jean-Jacques Rousseau himself said casually "property is the source of all problems".
Jean-Jacques Rousseau was not the only philosopher on which the Revolutions were based (there were probably about 10 which had fundemental ideas, plus a whole network of other ones), but this very idea of the basis on which the Republic is built was so widely accepted, an French aristocrat which had flew to Great Britain, said "it is the Koran of all those philosophers".
And second you have to consider how this makes complete sense historically. Historically, Europe has been ruled by aristocracy for centuries ; in France and in other catholic countries, the Church had also an extreme power (there were taxes for the Church ; and King power was legitimated by the fact that his power was gien by god). The 1st French revolution was just focusing on combatting this: the arbitrary power of a few on the most. The privileges of the aristocrats was extremely resented - unbearable. After sweeping aristocracy and the Church (all property from Church were seized by the laic 1st republic), there was a phase of chaos, then Napoleon, then the installation of a constitutionnal monarchy, then various monarchies, republics, democratically elected Emperor (Napoleon's nephew), and a rightously failed communist revolution.
You have to understand that after Napoleon, it's the top-middle class who partly remplaced the aristocracy as a leading class in France, and that they tried their best to impose their views (only the rich had the righ to vote, union were strictely forbidden, etc...), and that's exactly why you got some strange things like Napoleon III being elected and winning a referedum for being emperor(and note that it's Napoleon III, not middle class "republics", which gave the right to strike, and to create unions) - Germany had also popular Bismark. You have to understand that after the revolution for instance, land was given to peasants... However due to the randomness of agriculture, many had to borrow to survive some year(s), and then, on the next bad year(s), loss their land to middle class owners ; they had to come to town in mass and live in complete misery to accept the worst jobs with almost no rights (no vote, no strike, no unions) in some monarchic republics governed by middle class ; where unregulated capitalism was systematically creating economic crisis about every ten years. On the other hand, middle class land owners, who could live without working at all became numerous.
The life of peasants who became workers was worse under those republics than under aristocracy (exactly like life is much in today capitalist Russia than in USSR) ; and unlike US, there was no new frontier the poorest could explore in order to earn their life and save it.
A good description of those times is the french masterpiece "Les Miserables" from Victor Hugo ; an equivalent are probably Charles Dickens' works.
It's no wonder, at those times, there was a huge surge in the development of theories about socialists systems (of all kinds ; Marx was only an example, and "marxism" was never properly implemented) ; that's exactly why Prudhon said, in 1840: property is theft (while US argued that "taxes" are).
This is another reason, after aristocracy, why the focus on both equality and freedom, was kept.
By the way, and on a side note, there is an idea becoming increasingly popular, that what happened at those times, is a bit similar to what is happening to Third World countries, thus the "drop the debt" or "anti-" globalization protests of all kinds ; in strong opposition to the "pure free market" religion endicted by libertarian economists working in IMF, Work Bank, WTO, etc... which is benefitting to Western Country essentially (the average money flow is the equivalent of one "Marshall plan", going from poor countries to Western countries, PER YEAR, due to the enormous debts - in long term, 1/3 of those countries are dead).
You have to throw in the fact that there were 2 world wars in Europe, which killed a tremendous number of soldiers/people... You can't say "go fight at the risk of your life, for the salute of our Great Country", and then back from war, "heck no, there is no equality, no fraternity, freedom is the only right ; if I became rich while you fighted, well it's only that I deserved it, stop being a freeloader with my money.".
If freedom is a commodity, that's fine. The govt. can force you to relinquish some of that commodity, and gift it to others in the form of a guarantee. But if Freedom is a basic human right, then you cannot allow the government to diminish the right of one person for the benefit of another.
We agree on this.
First off: with no inherent personal freedom, what's to stop the majority from trading ALL their freedom for safety? I certainly have different wishes than THAT, but individual freedom having no sanctity and no protection, I guess I'd just be fucked in that case, eh?
Yes. Note that in a libertarian system, it's not clear that everything goes fine and dandy, if, say, 90% of the economical agents make an union on some point ; which is the equivalent of what you fear from a democracy.
I grasp it well enough. When you're talking about a welfare system, it's perfectly legitimate to discuss. IMHO, it's an outrage to take HALF of what I work every day to earn, and give it to someone who is unwilling to work at all.
It's not HALF of the money which goes to people who are unwillingly to work, it's HALF of the money which goes to the governement which pays military expenses, jails, justice system, education (including University), social security, public research, infrastructure (roads, airports, ...), EU institutions, retirement or retired people, some small part of public TV, EU contribution, foreign aid, etc... It's only a small part of the money, say 0.1 % to 10% which goes to free loaders.
In this context, "Taxes = paying the lazy" is simply bullshit. This is a point of view which was heavily spread during the Reagan/Thatcher years: "HATE that lazy welfare queen who is stealing all your hard earned money and dares to buy luxury items you won't never be able to afford!". IMHO, it's more based on feelings than on rationality. The neat result is you letting hard-working poorer people (and Black) live in misery, just on the fear of the 20% hidden there that would be free-loaders. In anycase, it's interesting how US dismantled a perfectly working welfare system (in the 1960s), and made it a harsh system (with now the strongest number of people in jail per capital, highest murder rate than most third world countries, etc...), on with effective diffusion of this system in the population.
In the 1960s, actually at the apogee of Keynesianim, conservatives were thought definitly dead: it was genuinely said: "There Is No Alternative" [to the social system]. 20/30 years later, the exact same sentence is used, with acronym even "TINA", to meant the idea of reduction of social system ; and even in UK Tony Blairs was recognize as the "best conservative of the year", by a conservative journal.
I hope that this
Second, I'd hope you were CERTAIN (not just doubtful) that it was no big deal before you used your majority power to bludgeon the retail sector into doing it. Since they can't protect themselves from you because their freedom is a commodity which can sometimes be ripped from them without their individual consent, I hope you make sure to vote wisely...
Yes it is a big deal. Think of all the 5 FF, 10 FF coin vending machines, which translate to 0.76 EUR and 1.52 EUR ... there is strong incentive to make them go to "1 EUR" and "2 EUR" coins respectively, and in fact looking at vending machines at a railway stations, I precisely saw some new prices of "13 FF" which WILL be changed in "2 EUR" when the machine gets upgraded. Same for all those prices "9.90 FF, 19.90 FF", etc... There is strong incentive to round them to the next same "marketingly-friendly" price.
It's governement job to prevent such arbitrary inflation .
Second, I'm not focusing on the financial loss really, I'm focusing on the constriction of a basic human right and the lack of protection of individual freedom that the act highlights. So what if it's only a few cents, for a few months. It's not so bad, right?
Your freedom [to inflate artificially prices] can really be traded in favor of the public good (including your, by not letting the capital you own in your retailer shop, have a declining value because of inflation).
Let the retailer ruin himself with dishonesty.
He won't ruin himself (because of precisely loss of information on customer sides, free market laws don't apply perfectly, and he can take advantage of this), and he will incur a cost on most of us, by triggering ECB intervention for controling the generated inflation.
Of course, if freedom is a tradeable commodity, then perhaps you can get some of it given back to you...
Yes. For instance, the new 35 hours working limitation was discussed with employee AND employer unions, and employers got greater "flexibility", i.e. more lenient rules on some precise points. The good point about such a system, is that Europeans don't tend to argue religiously using immutable principle like "freedom" (and the derivative "inefficient governement", "bureaucratic regulations", "theft taxes"), but always on the pro-side and the con-siden and negociate. This is more or less marked depending on the country of course.

Haven't Germans already exchanged their marks? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:00 · Score: 0

The Eurozone market, with a population of 300 million people, will be cashing in their Punts, Francs and Deutschmarks in favour of the new common Euro currency.

Actually, from what I have read, Germans are not cashing in their DM now--they already have. Nobody is required to accept the mark as legal tender as of Jan 1 2002, although as I understand it, stores have the option to accept the old currency for a couple of months if they wish, but are not required to.

Check out this timetable for more info. It looks as though Germans can still cash in their marks, but only at banks, not at merchants. As I understand it, merchants in other EMU countries are accepting both euros and the country's "legacy" currency for now, in a kind of "dual currency" period lasting approx. two months.

I'm in the USA, so I don't have firsthand information about all of this, it's just the best info I could glean from various sources. Can anyone confirm Germany's "cold turkey" approach to the Euro?

Re:Haven't Germans already exchanged their marks? by knups · 2002-01-01 11:10 · Score: 1

You're absolutely right about this. Merchants *may*, but don't have to, accept DM until Feb 28. Banks *have to* accept DM until Feb 28. If you are in Germany and still got some DM left on May 01, you can exchange them in the so-called "Landesbanken". We have 16 of them all over Germany, and you can exchange DM for Euro there until the end of time.
Re:Haven't Germans already exchanged their marks? by -brazil- · 2002-01-01 11:42 · Score: 1

While it is optional for stores to accept DM, the vast majority of shops, especially larger chains, will do so. However, on the first day it looked like most customers already used the Euro, so they may decide to stop accepting DM earlier than planned.

--
The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer.
--Henry Kissinger

that small change comes in handy when you're broke by DABANSHEE · 2002-01-01 10:19 · Score: 2

Here in Oz we have $1 & $2 coins. Whenever I come home I dump the contents of my pockets into a shoe box ontop of my telly.

Every time I'm broke & I'm fanging to buy a shot of smack, or a case or beer, or a bottle of bourbon, I dump the contents onto the bed, push all the crap to the sides (glasses, pieces of paper, receipts, prescriptions, tissues, pens, etc) & tally ap all the 50c, $1, & $2 coins, & it useally adds up to over $60. Which works out to at least 2 2doz cases of beer or 3 bottles of generic borbon, or about 3 shots of smack (at my current tolerance)

owned euro trash faggot? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:19 · Score: 0

I think so.

Afro ? by line-bundle · 2002-01-01 10:21 · Score: 1

Will that ever happen?

Re:Afro ? by loudici · 2002-01-01 11:33 · Score: 1

many western african countries use the 'franc CFA' as currency, which was linked to the franc and is now linked to the euro.

--
Dev elpizw tipota, dev phoboumai tipota eimai lephteros http://euclidian.org
Re:Afro ? by 17028 · 2002-01-01 18:25 · Score: 1

On the back of the coins, the will have the silhouette of a guy with a giant 'fro! ;)

Re:United States of Europe New Currency THankful.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:25 · Score: 0

Learn to count electors votes? Please learn something about the government of the United States before posting ignorant bullshit.

Smack as in heroin? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:31 · Score: 0

What the fuck?

But you'll have nothing else to do by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 10:41 · Score: 0

It's not like you have an empire worth a fuck anymore to defend.

Paper money/Digital cash rocks [Re:the coin route] by jbf · 2002-01-01 10:42 · Score: 2

Men have no practical way to carry change... As soon as I get home, I also dump all my change in a bin. Unfortunately, I never have time to sort it out. What that means is a lower velocity of money and a higher savings rate, but that savings never makes it out as a loan, so it doesn't cause more monetary growth.

When I traveled in Europe and Canada before, the high denomination coins annoyed me (the Canadian twoonie and the 10ff coin are notable offenders), since I felt obligated to carry them and use them, or I'd never have a use for them when I got home. Italians must feel equally miffed, since their largest coin is 500Lira (about 25 cents) and you probably could go a week in Italy without ever using a coin.

The right solution if you're worried about reissue cost is smart cards and cryptographically anonymous cash. One reason I use credit cards everywhere I can is to reduce the amount of cash I need to keep around. I'd definatly carry a smart card around if it were legal tender...

Re:oh yay by spudnic · 2002-01-01 10:50 · Score: 2

The problem with that is the equal representation bit. Why should some tiny country with a few hundred thousand citizens have the same amount of pull as the US? It shouldn't.

What would be needed is like what we have here in the US with two houses of Congress one where the number of representatives is determined by the size of their constituency and the other with equal representation.
Anyway, the only thing that will ever cause the nations of the world to join is a common threat to our lifes, freedoms, or money from a force outside of Earth.

.

--
load "linux",8,1

change the keyboard, change ASCII ... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:01 · Score: 0

... to incorporate the Euro sign.

Re:change the keyboard, change ASCII ... by AnimeFreak · 2002-01-01 16:16 · Score: 1

Actually, Microsoft has introduced a patch to incorporate the Euro into Windows 3.1, NT 3.x, 95, and (I beleive) 98. Windows NT 4.0, 2000, XP, Windows ME, and 98 SE had it already incorporated.

Linux (and other Unices) probably have them already built-in.

I think it also has to do with the font, yet I am not sure what character the Euro has replaced as the Pound is still there.
Re:change the keyboard, change ASCII ... by tempfile · 2002-01-01 23:25 · Score: 1

Fontwise, no character has been replaced because the Euro has always had its Unicode point. Encodingwise, the "international currency sign" was killed off in favor of the Euro in Latin-9, and again, no problems in Unicode.
Re:change the keyboard, change ASCII ... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:07 · Score: 0

I suggest replacing exponent "^" or underscore "_" for the Euro sign. These two are less frequently used than other keys.
Re:change the keyboard, change ASCII ... by mikera · 2002-01-03 03:36 · Score: 2

Some of us who write code actually find those keys quite useful.....

Amazing... by slipgun · 2002-01-01 11:06 · Score: 1

This decision has been made without any kind of referendum among the people. It has been a decision forced on them by bureaucrats and politicians. It is an absolute disgrace; 2/3rds of Germans, for example, would rather keep the Mark (which was once the third strongest currency in the world) than join the Euro.

At least in Britain, we are going to have a referendum (election) on whether or not we go into the Euro. Interestingly, the Irish people voted against the Nice treaty last year, yet their European 'partners' are still forcing the Nice treaty on them.

The European Union is an undemocratic syndicate of nations, formed without the will of the people. The sooner we can get out of it, the better.

Just thought I'd provide the other side of the story, since the BBC (British Bullshit Corporation) is fanatically pro-Euro. I wish /. wouldn't link to it so much :-)

--
SpamNet - a spam blocker that really works

Re:Amazing... by dirtyhank · 2002-01-01 11:46 · Score: 1

Let's face it, people wouldn't join the euro much more coz of historical/sentimental reasons than after analyzing the pros and cons in the country's economy.

BTW, probably 2/3 of Germans or Brits (or put_your_favourite_country_here) believe in God but unfortunately that doesn't mean he exists, you get the picture?.
Re:Amazing... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:36 · Score: 0

Erm, Ireland here had a referendum for the Maastricht Treaty in the early 1990's. This effectively was a Euro referendum, and it was voted IN, so the people did in fact have a choice in this.

I can't understand the common British attitude to Europe/The Euro these days. It sounds like they'd rather have the entire EU using sterling instead ;p
Re:Amazing... by mce · 2002-01-01 14:00 · Score: 1

Europeans, ... cannot understand what real democracy is about.

Says an inhabitant of a country that doesn't even have something as basic a constitution, in which the head of state is not elected, and in which parties that get 40% of the votes of the people routinely end up with 60% of the seats in parliament.

--
Linux user since early January 1992.
Re:Amazing... by Enzo90910 · 2002-01-01 14:03 · Score: 1

It doesn't seem as if Germany or France were about to make a revolution about the new currency. The worst I've been hearing about on the radio is retailers complaining about not having enough "Euro-cash" to make change.
If the UK has a referendum to decide whether they want to be a part of their own future, that's allright.
The Euro is already accepted by a vast majority of the people living in the Euroland and also by a majority of person in each country of the Euroland .
I just wonder how long the rest of Europe will be able to look the UK waiting for the Brits to understand what's happening. It sure is good fun right now.

--
I don't have much to add.
Re:Amazing... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:14 · Score: 0

This decision has been made without any kind of referendum among the people.

wrong, you should inform yourself before saying stupid things
here in France we choose the Euro by referendum
Re:Amazing... by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:28 · Score: 1

Bunreacht na hEireann (the Irish constitution) requires a referendum on any legislation that affects our sovereignty. There were referenda for the Single European Act, the Maastricht Treaty, and of course, the Nice Treaty, which was unfortunately and imfamously voted down. Hopefully the Union can communicate more effectively in future with the citizens of its member-states we can continue.
Re:Amazing... by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:31 · Score: 1

It may not written down but it's well documented. The UK *does* have an effective and accepted constitution, in fairness.

I sympathize with you by Stalcair · 2002-01-01 11:12 · Score: 1

The European Union is an undemocratic syndicate of nations, formed without the will of the people. The sooner we can get out of it, the better.

I know of a couple other mutlinational groups like that. *cough* UN *cough*

What is funny (not in the 'haha' way) is that so many people believe that propoganda (why stop there, how about just plain ol Tyranny and coruption) is ONLY corporations or government. Yet, here we see yet another example of how they are so very similar. Government being basically a very over bloated and innefficient and all around poorly run company, but where the people have ZERO choice (as opposed to very little which is often the case with many conglomerates). So sad. Hang in there, some people actually read their history books instead of burning or rewriting them.

--

I seek not only to follow in the footsteps of the men of old, I seek the things they sought.

New World Oorder by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:14 · Score: 0

There will be three superpower in the world

Re:Simple Answer by DrSpin · 2002-01-01 11:17 · Score: 1

If Britain joined the Euro, then the banks would not be able to charge 4% (or more) for changing the money used to pay for all our imports (food) and all our exports).

Ie the banks would no longer be able to tax us 8% of our GNP.

Hence the banks are prepared to spend a colossal amount of money on "save our pound", and buying politicians and media tycoons.

How many housewives that you known realise that joining the Euro would meen 4% off everytihing in Tesco, Sainsburies, and Asda? Not to mention Ford, BMW, etc

Your mom by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:17 · Score: 0

>growth in the first quarter of 2002?

Much growth in all her quarters.

>keep inflation

Much inflation, very sensible

>interest rates

No sexual interest by the opposite sex, very sensible

>growth of the economy?

By helping food producers from all over the world.

Argentina disqualified... by Suburban+nmate · 2002-01-01 11:18 · Score: 1

For cheating.

The government is bent as a corkscrew... A lot of the economic trouble came from dodgy dealings behind the scenes.

Inevitably, the bubble burst and it was the the people who suffered... Those riots were for food, although granted the odd TV set or 2 got a 5 finger discount here and there...

The same happened in Japan... Land value skyrocketed because the banks were lending progressiveley more and more for the same piece of land. *POP* Someone has a worthless piece of land and a gigantic loan to pay off.

Power corrupts. Same old.

Now watch the UK go the same way. Blair is gonna stab us all in the back just so he can be king of Europe. And as for the £350 pound [worth] Euro note, that'll be the crimelord special.

Ali [ at london d0t c0m ]

--
"Windows and Linux can co-exist on the same machine." - Microsoft Corporation.

Re:Argentina disqualified... by pit_bull · 2002-01-02 03:40 · Score: 1

[quote]And as for the £350 pound [worth] Euro note, that'll be the crimelord special.[/quote]

Not likely. In Holland we had the 1000,- guilder note. (About £350 also..) Never heard anything about big trouble. Most stores wouldnt accept it, but its nice for paying building constructors/plumbers and so on.

I held one once. Weird having a piece of paper in your hand that could blow away so easily, thats worth that much! (One of those "what if" moments: Hmm, lighter in my pocket, 1000,- guilder bill, ... what if..")

--
_ Light travels faster than sound. That is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.... -

A degree of ignorance by rcs1000 · 2002-01-01 11:23 · Score: 1

What is really frightening about living in the UK is the degree of ignorance, not just about the Euro, but about Europe in general.

If you read the English tabloid press - The Sun, The Star, and the like - then you would be left with the impression that Britain is by far the pre-eminent European country and economy.

Yet - and here I grope for my Economist World in 2002 - Britain is no longer at the top of the European economic heap. France, Germany, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, Finland... all richer in terms of GDP per head. And when adjusted for PPP (purchasing power parity - ie what you £1 or $1 or 1 of currency actually buys you) Britain turns out to be a pretty second-division Europan power. People in Britain are, outside London and the South-East, *poorer* than their European peers.

Maybe, instead of ranting about European beaurocracy and red-tape, we in Britain should ask 'why has Europe become so rich, while we have stagnated.'

(And before anyone comes back to me with unemployment figures - go check the ILO unemployment numbers, or better EMPLOYMENT numbers. Our so-called low unemployment is largely a statisicians dream.)

--
--- My dad's political betting

Re:that small change comes in handy when you're br by John_Booty · 2002-01-01 11:23 · Score: 2

That's a pretty smart idea, 10 out of 10 points for ingenuity, to be sure. On the other hand, I'm going to say, negative several million points for the smack use, if you're talking about heroin and you're not kidding, which is entirely possible.

--

OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.

When the rest of the world switch to the Euro ? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:25 · Score: 0

When the rest of the world switch to the Euro ?

Re:When the rest of the world switch to the Euro ? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 11:39 · Score: 0

When the rest of the world switch to the Euro ?

When people be learning how to speak Engrish.
Re:When the rest of the world switch to the Euro ? by El+Cabri · 2002-01-01 16:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

Well actually it would make sense.
Unlike the dollar, the euro is constructed as a multi-state currency, and many thirld world countries that have dollarized their economies, but still make more business with Europe than they do with the US, might adopt the euro, or the peggind of their currency to the euro. Do you imagine the Fed and the US government concerting their monetary policy to take into account the interests of Brasil and Argentina ? I don't, but I can imagine the ECB letting them in, as a partnership with spain and portugal for example.

It by j7953 · 2002-01-01 11:33 · Score: 2

You don't say swiss francs? I also use US$, and even those from the US frequently do so, to avoid confusion with Australian and Canadian dollars.

Also

--
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)

Re:Simple Answer by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 11:35 · Score: 2

If Britain joined the Euro, then the banks would not be able to charge 4% (or more) for changing the money used to pay for all our imports (food) and all our exports). Ie the banks would no longer be able to tax us 8% of our GNP.

In the first place your math is off, you are double counting.

in the second, the fraction of GNP that is imported or exported at all is not 100% (try 40) and of that much is third-party trade that does not touch the UK at all (i.e. the UK port shippers Ware selling to the USA). The proportion of UK trade with the Eurozone is much smaller still

thirdly, commercial exchange rates are nowhere near 4% which is pretty high even for tourist rates

I may agree with you conclusion but I see no excuse for a deceitful argument, or are you one of the Tory moles paid by Smith sq. to write garbage in Internet chat rooms so that other plants can trump it? The name Dr spin and your inability to tell the truth suggests so.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/

Cuba using the Euro now too by torklugnutz · 2002-01-01 11:36 · Score: 1

For years (since 1992) Cuba has been valuing their money to the US Dollar, but they are no going to use th Euro as their model. 45% of their international trade is with Europe, so this actually makes sense.

This story was running on the ticker of CNBC Europe at 11am GMT.

When I check the exchange rate, it's still 1 Peso to 1 US Dollar. Anybody else got any info on this?

--
Often in Error, Never in Doubt.

It's two different languages by j7953 · 2002-01-01 11:42 · Score: 2

(Sorry, hit enter too early on my previous reply.)

It's too different languages. In German, "US Dollars" are called "Amerikanische Dollar." The same way, in English, "Deutsche Mark" (and yes, that actually is the official name, it was never named just "Mark") is "Deutschmark." What's wrong about that?

--
Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)

NOT TRUE Re:One simple reason why it won't work: by Uncertain+Bohr · 2002-01-01 11:52 · Score: 1

As an Italian in Germany, you must first be able to get a work permit to be able to work in Germany. There is NO truelly free labor motion in Europe.
Commerce is the same thing... I bought an Alpine car CD player in France and live in Germany. Guess what? I cannot get it repaired under warranty here and need to ship it back to France. As long as this is the kind of things happening in Europe, the economy will lag that of the US. It will take years for the "old Europe" mentalities to die...

Technically, it is Deutsche Mark by Ethelred+Unraed · 2002-01-01 12:27 · Score: 2

As a matter of fact, the official name is "Deutsche Mark" (so it says on the banknotes). This is to differentiate them from the earlier Reichsmark of the Imperial/Weimar Republic/NSDAP days and the so-called "Ostmark" (i.e. "eastern Marks") of the former East Germany.

FWIW I still have some 1,000,000 RM notes around here somewhere from the late Weimar Republic period -- from 1931, I think. Ain't I special.

In everyday language, yes, people in Germany just say "Mark", with no difference between singular and plural. But in the same way people say "US dollars" as opposed to "Canadian dollars", so too do people say "Deutsche Mark" (which is often corrupted to "Deutschmark").

After all, the abbreviation for marks *is* "DEM" or "DM"...

Cheers,

Ethelred

--
Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.

hmmm what? Re:Picture of bills with US bill by piecewise · 2002-01-01 12:28 · Score: 2

> When a country can't control its own monetary policy, it is more likely a symptom of a serious problem, not a cause.

Huh?
Wouldn't the "serious problem" be the cause?
I thought everything happened because of a cause. Isn't that the definition of cause?

Oh well...

--
The next comment I write will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and see it early!

Most importantly, it works for pizza by Ethelred+Unraed · 2002-01-01 12:34 · Score: 2

I ordered a pizza tonight and paid for it in Euros (€5.80 to be exact). And the delivery guy was surprised and amused -- we were the first people to pay in Euros today (he had to carry around two change purses, one for DM, one for Euros).

Goody. I can claim to be the first guy to have bought a pizza with Euros in my city. (Well, okay, maybe not...)

So hey, maybe the economy will go to hell, but at least I can buy my extra cheese pizza.

Cheers,

Ethelred

--
Everyone wants to be Ethelred. Even I want to be Ethelred.

Re:United States of Europe New Currency THankful.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 12:38 · Score: 0

yeah, dontcha know it's a plutocracy, man?

Re:hmmm what? Re:Picture of bills with US bill by dgroskind · 2002-01-01 12:48 · Score: 1

I thought everything happened because of a cause.

Perhaps a reference to the post hoc fallacy would clarify my point.

Pretty dollars by dnight · 2002-01-01 13:14 · Score: 1

Since the exchange rates of the euro and the US dollar are so close, I hope we get an "Amer-euro" dollar here in the States soon.

This booger-green money is depressing to look at - well, at least the $3 in my wallet is. If they were prettier, maybe I'd be happier.

Still broke, but happy... so happy...

Re:Pretty dollars by csbruce · 2002-01-01 20:23 · Score: 1

This booger-green money is depressing to look at - well, at least the $3 in my wallet is. If they were prettier, maybe I'd be happier.

Move to Canada. The older money is multi-colored with various images of wildlife, and the newer tens look rather "European" in style.
Re:Pretty dollars by MudDude · 2002-01-01 21:02 · Score: 1

I bet, with money, the more banknotes you have the prettier they become and the happier you are.

This will probably continue for quite some time, until you reach a physical maximum. In
which case every added banknote will become ugly and make you depressive.

Regards,

--
You don't need to see my .sig. This isn't the .sig you're looking for...

Re:oh yay by spanky555 · 2002-01-01 13:18 · Score: 1

Create a global constitution, get most of the people (not politicians) to sign off on it, and we should have a world where human rights are better in all countries, pollution is minimized , and the government is still slave to the people (unlike the UN)

Speaking for paranoid types like me, the UN is aiming to make sure to IGNORE all the good sense you displayed above - they view our Second Amendment as a human rights issue - as a strike AGAINST human rights. Pretty strange, since the Second Amendment should really be the First Amendment, since it's arguably one of the most important key to remaining free. Apparently the EU is already displaying the same kind of sentiment - they are coming down on people who happened to speak out on the EU - freedom of speech is okay in the EU, as long as you don't criticize the EU, apparently.

Personally, I can think of nothing worse than one world government - even if it is cast in the style that the U.S. was...because governments tend to attract little people with big plans for you and me...and they rarely involve freedom for the little guy. If there would be no place to flee oppressive governments, what would individuals and corporations that are being treated unkindly do? The only recourse would be a violent revolution. Not good. And if you think Islam has radical factions NOW, wait until they actually WOULD have to live under the rule of the "infidel". And radical Christians even here would view a New World Order (which a one world government would be to them) as a sign of the impending Apocalypse. They probably wouldn't hijack planes and try to kill innocent civilians like cavemen savages who have barely discovered fire and think we are living in the 12th century (al-Qaeda), but I doubt their behavior would be something we want, either.

A few points by Kallahar · 2002-01-01 13:19 · Score: 2

It should be noted that all the mentioned currencies have had their exchange rate fixed to the Euro since 1999. Now is only the first time that people have actually been able to touch the new money.

Euro by eap · 2002-01-01 13:23 · Score: 1

I believe the correct spelling is "gyro".

Re:Nationalism is a positive force! by Genjuro+Kibagami · 2002-01-01 13:36 · Score: 1

When I was a kid I was taught to respect the God, your family and country (in that particular order). A strong nation of a collective of people who are tied together by blood and common culture -- not by some fancy hobby like computing. How can you even compare hundreds of years of common history and culture to Linux?

What is more important, where we are, or where we came from? How can a person discount hundreds of years of common history and bloodlines merely because the result of the aforementioned circumstances bears little to no resemblance to themselves?

How can you discount many millenia of common evolutionary bonds with other living humans of the world and support the wholesale slaughter of people halfway across the world because of the actions of a radical minority in your own country?

I'm not necessarily trying to tell you what's wrong and what's right, but try to keep perspective. Personally I reject the theory that I owe my fellow human beings a damn thing in the entire world simply because I happen to be the same species as them, and I only feel slightly more obligation as the link becomes closer and terminates with the family, the point where if a member of my family was not a worthwhile person to know, I would treat them the same as someone who was not a member of aforementioned family.

To me, it doesn't matter where we came from or what we've gone through, it matters where we are and what we're doing.

F the USA by SubtleNuance · 2002-01-01 13:47 · Score: 2

vive l'Europe!

Yes, indeed. Happy New year Brothers.

My question is; How does Canada Join the E.U.?

Europe seems to be going in the right direction...how do we come astride????

Re:F the USA by joens · 2002-01-01 14:12 · Score: 1

The Canadian Government should meet some requirements for admittance (respect of human rights, abolishment of death penalty, etc...), but basically if you manage your government to ask the European Parliament, I think it could be arranged quite fast. ;-D
Re:F the USA by csbruce · 2002-01-01 20:18 · Score: 1

The Canadian Government should meet some requirements for admittance (respect of human rights, abolishment of death penalty,

The death penalty was abolished in the 1970's, if my information is correct. The only human rights violations are w.r.t. Quebec language policy.
Re:F the USA by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 03:15 · Score: 1

Je vous remercie, mon frere Quebecois -- vive Quebec et vive Canada.
Re:F the USA by SubtleNuance · 2002-01-02 11:00 · Score: 1

L'ami d'Im pas Quebecois, mais moi conviennent: Vive Canada comprenant mes frères du Quebec.
Re:F the USA by easter1916 · 2002-01-03 06:46 · Score: 1

D'accord.

Re:NOT TRUE Re:One simple reason why it won't work by Teun · 2002-01-01 13:48 · Score: 1

I know it's a nuicanse but they can not refuse you the permit. The same is valid for me when I work in Italy for an Italian employer, as long as I work there through my Dutch company it's not an issue.

--
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."

Agreed. by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 14:15 · Score: 2

But I think that's largely cosmetic. I traveled around europe... exchanging currency wasn't what I'd call a hassle.. it was just something you had to do (along with finding a hotel, finding food, finding a party, etc..).
Of course.. I guess I'm not an American tourist.. so maybe my standards of convenience are different.

I found the different currencies part of the fun.

Thanks. by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 14:35 · Score: 2

Actually, Northern Ireland is part of the UK, and uses the British Pound Sterling.

Ireland uses the Euro (formerly the Irish Pound, or 'Punt')

So what do you think makes a republic then? by mindstrm · 2002-01-01 14:53 · Score: 2

republic (r-pblk)
n.

a) A political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.
b) A nation that has such a political order.

A republic is a type of political order, or a nation using such an order. Eire certainly fits this description. If you think otherwise.. what kind of nation is Eire? Empire? Kingdom? Territory? Nope, it's a Republic.

The really amazing thing: by uradu · 2002-01-01 15:01 · Score: 2

most noise and fanfare about the Big-Brother-EU comes from citizens of the leading Big Brother state in the world, the country that brought you the total video surveillance society, America's salesman of Echelon to Europe, in fact the country that introduced the very notion of Big Brother to the world: the UK.

-

OT:Ireland *has* changed to the Euro by Prior+Restraint · 2002-01-01 15:29 · Score: 1

I can't find it online either, but it is The Onion (it's not in their archives, though). I do, however, have a copy of their "Finest News Reporting". As luck would have it, it's on pages 64-65. Hmm... the "Maple Leaf State". Sounds quaint.

How would we tip at strip clubs? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 16:35 · Score: 0

Club-issued funny money?

A folded $5 bill in the garter?

Or maybe some really indecent way to give-up $1 coins?

Since 1954 freedom of mouvement has been offcial by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 17:09 · Score: 0

This was signed at the rome treaty by the core members state when creating the Community of Coal and Steel. Belgium, Nederland, Luxembourg, Germany, Italy and France started building a Europe for employers and the heavy industry. The only thing required ever since is to register your residence in the country you have moved after 6 months. That's all, just like going and moving to Maryland for instance.

I am from France, lived 4 years in the UK, 4 years in Germany and I do contract in Holland or Belgium some times. My passport has expired ages ago and I never really used it except for opening accounts or signing checks.

The US bashing issues and all, drop'em, it's dumb and counter productive. But I have to admit, EU citizens are not very aware of the laws.

oh my god... by root_dev_X · 2002-01-01 17:16 · Score: 1

Do you know what this means? The Italian Lira has become virtually worthless!!!

--
===== Warble://VX

It seems Europe has caught up with North America by nick_burns · 2002-01-01 17:20 · Score: 1

Both Canada and the United States have both been using the dollar for the longest time.

(Disclaimer: If you can't figure out the fallacy in the comment you shouldn't be reading the comments on slashdot.)

The US was the same one time... by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 17:36 · Score: 0

I've read quite a few comments that seems to mix modern history with ancient facts, a common sin nowaday but look closer into history. The $ sign comes from the escudo and the cent sign from the centao, the only widely money adopted when monetary unity was a dream in a continent colonised by different people. Ever heard of dixie? Well that is a term for the bill used south, the bill of Dix or ten in French.

So you see, USA had to do it at one time and it's even part of our common life. So yep, the Euro adoption seem full of practical problems, but would you like to surrender your dollars to see the States under 3 or 4 different currency zones?

Ancient history, what am I saying? I'm talking the late 1800 here, blue and grey uniforms figthing in the country, that wasn't so far away in fact.

The Euro is fourth-dimensionally foolish by KlomDark · 2002-01-01 18:29 · Score: 1, Flamebait

Time goes on. Economies rise and fall, or at least cycle. The Euro economy will go through a low part of the cycle, or a depression-type thing, and all of Europe will be down.

Before, it was just Germany, or Italy, or France, that could be having a bad economic time at a certain snapshot of history. Sure, usually the European economies follow each other pretty much, but not always. However, with all countries linked at their core by the Euro - ALL European countries (That use the Euro anyway) will be in a depression at the same time. Hard to recover from.

I think it's a really stupid idea, and will end in tears or war. And this is coming from someone who is really not affected by this, as I live in the United States. But you people in Europe should really be careful, your government, or the Euro-people, somebody anyway, is really pulling the wool over your eyes when it comes to the long term prospects for the European economy. Dangerous experiment, have fun!

Re:The Euro is fourth-dimensionally foolish by csbruce · 2002-01-01 20:06 · Score: 5, Informative

I think it's a really stupid idea, and will end in tears or war.

Economic integration is a strong factor in preventing wars, not starting them. Why invade another country when you can get its riches merely by trading? After WW2, the elite of the world got together and said "Never again!", and globalism was born.

With 300-million people on board, the EU will be able to go toe-to-toe with the US economy. As a US citizen, you will be mildly effected by this, as the world outside the US has become a little more competitive, and you, reciprocally, a little less so.

In response, the US has joined free-trade zone of the Organization of American States. This zone has a greater population than the (present) euro-zone, though, besides Canada with a relatively small population, the OAS includes mostly third-world and emerging nations with massive debts.

The long-term prospects for the EU are excellent.
Re:The Euro is fourth-dimensionally foolish by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 23:53 · Score: 0

Europe just got over a huge war 50 years ago. Everybody is just about able to live in peace with each other. Previous centuries were full of European wars.

It was working; so why do something as dangerous as this, when you finall have a chance for centuries of peace and prosperity?

"If it aint broke, dont fix it" we say in the states. You people are playing with fire. You inherited a peace that someone else payed for, and now you are in most cases, throwing it away like it was worthless.

If any of the Europeans in charge today had fought for thier independence, they would never sign up for this currency. The problem is that they dont value freedom and democracy. They want more centralization, when everything over the last century screams decentralization.

What makes this even worse is that oppinions that are against the Euro are being not being advertized by campaigns financed in the hundreds of millions of government funding. The argument is totally one sided. Even so, 2/3 of Germans dont want it.

It can still be stopped.
Re:The Euro is fourth-dimensionally foolish by geekoid · 2002-01-02 06:09 · Score: 2

With 300-million people on board, the EU will be able to go toe-to-toe with the US economy. As a US citizen, you will be mildly effected by this, as the world outside the US has become a little more competitive, and you, reciprocally, a little less so.

sure, on paper.
The global market buys from whoever has what they want at the best prices.
The thing that the US produces that people want, are still only available in the US, so they still have to come to the US.

The purpose of the euro is maintaining the status quo of the controlling parties. I.E. Rupport Murdoch.

You can make a lot of money manipulating exchange rates. That allows corporations to compete with the existing large corporations.

By making one currency, this allows the entrenched to stay entrenched and to ensure there legacy in the WTO. BTW the WTO board will be the world government. This is obvious when you relize that the WTO "rules" come before individual country laws.

I was a programmer for a bank in an african company, we createed a system that bypassed certian entrenched banking methods, man there was hell to pay. That was when I relize every move made by any large monetary system is only made to keep people in power.
Do you think the people who put upo the money to back the euro idea are doing it because its a good thing for the consumer? or because that can mae money from it?

--
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
Re:The Euro is fourth-dimensionally foolish by TicTacTux · 2002-01-02 11:58 · Score: 1

The long-term prospects for the EU are excellent.

...and if all should fail, consider moving to Switzerland. According to recently published figures we're in desperate need of people who can read, write and count...

That said I wish Euroland a huge success. Not out of fear of being overrun by 'fremde Fötzel' [*very* derogatory term for people from abroad] but in the vague hope our backwards-oriented 'people's party' [ha!] will have to admit that 'independence' is just an euphemism for having no friends...

--Ben (Zurich [Switzerland])

--
Use The Source, Luke!

Re:NOT TRUE Re:One simple reason why it won't work by garethwi · 2002-01-01 18:45 · Score: 1

That's strange, because when I worked in Germany, I didn't need a work permit. Perhaps it's something to do with Italians ;-)

--

Find funky gifts

Re:Paper money/Digital cash rocks [Re:the coin rou by RSevrinsky · 2002-01-01 19:15 · Score: 1

Men have no practical way to carry change...

Absolutely wrong. I use a film case for all of my change, and have no problem carrying it around and paying with exact change once I've accumulated enough. I was even tempted to devise a spring-loaded case so that the jingle of the coins would be muffled, but I never got around to it.

- Richie

Nightmarish "Progress" by Baldrson · 2002-01-01 19:28 · Score: 1, Troll

The Euro will become worthless unless one of these two conditions are met:

It is tied to a commodity.
A pan-European government is put into place that demands payment of taxes in Euros.

The second is the more likely outcome, and it is nightmarish to contemplate for reasons that are even more compelling than the arguments for federalism in the United States:

European states do not have a unified language nor cultural history -- and even in the United States, where such disparities did not exist, the abandonment of the laboratory of the states was a major loss to humanity.

--
Seastead this.

Re:Nightmarish "Progress" by vidarh · 2002-01-01 21:20 · Score: 2

Neither is required for the Euro to succeed. Within half a year none of the currencies replaced by the Euro will be legal tender anymore anywhere. That means that the 12 countries using Euro all will require payment of taxes in Euro, and practically all trading in those countries will occur in Euro.
This is not a toy currency - it is a currency that now has a market as large as the US market, and within a few years massively larger as new countries join the EU and accept the Euro.
Re:Nightmarish "Progress" by nagora · 2002-01-01 23:05 · Score: 1

it is a currency that now has a market as large as the US market
But that market is fragemented between economies as diverse as Germany and Portugal. The only way to make this work is to unite Germany and Portugal into one economy/country. Any other system will result in runaway infation in the weaker economies. The gamble the EU is taking is that a United States of Europe can be forged before this happens (perhaps 5 years?)
TWW

--
"Encyclopedia" is to "Wikipedia" what "Library" is to "Some people at a bus stop"
Re:Nightmarish "Progress" by iainl · 2002-01-03 03:21 · Score: 1

This argument fails the moment anyone realises that its not a one economy per country relation however. Much of Scandanavia, for instance, has a very similiar economy, and France and Germany are also very tied. Meanwhile the North of England has quite a different economy to that of the South-East, but that doesn't stop it having a common currency. Is the economy of Ohio tied that closely to that of California, for instance?

--
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"

The Euro by copteaser · 2002-01-01 20:29 · Score: 0, Flamebait

most of the people here think that the euro sucks big time. It is a huge spill of money . Also they gave the label to it that is was very hard to copy the eurobiljets-- yeah right it is already been done for several times. I hope this will be a flop and they go back to our normal kind of money "the Guilder" greetingzzzz

Not Swiss by innate · 2002-01-01 20:45 · Score: 1

The banknotes were designed by Austrian artist Robert Kalina.

Besides, Switzerland isn't even part of the EU.

--
No, I don't want to explore the Recycle Bin.

Haven�t had a bill in my hand by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 20:54 · Score: 0

Im on my way to the next money machine to get my first bill. But Ive had the coins for several weeks now (they were selling starter kits) and they are beautiful. Most of them have a golden shine (allergy alert) and the 1 and 2 Coins have two colors. Could become a collectors item over time, since each country has a different backsinde.

Re:hmmm what? Re:Picture of bills with US bill by PurpleBob · 2002-01-01 21:24 · Score: 2

Not really. The problem is you wanted 'cause' to replace 'symptom', but it could equally well replace 'serious problem'. No fallacies involved, just ordinary English ambiguity.

--
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota

weakest too.. by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 21:54 · Score: 0

I think that the German mark was also once the weakest currency in the world.... post World Wars?

Any online references for your numbers ? by ^BR · 2002-01-01 21:58 · Score: 1

Have you any references for your numbers not coming from a tory newspaper ?

From a look at this page the only thing better than France that you have is lower unemployement rate, but you are poorer, have more inflation and less growth...

Re:Any online references for your numbers ? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 07:26 · Score: 0

leave us alone. its not our fault. it was the Germans. they did it to us.

No coffee!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:11 · Score: 0

Dammit, the coffee machine at work has not been updated and only takes Schillings. And I don't have any left and no-one will give me any in change. How am I supposed to work without coffee?

Another thing... by da5idnetlimit.com · 2002-01-01 22:20 · Score: 1

"turns out to be a pretty second-division Europan power"

Well, this sumarize a point of view I've heard quite some time.

Also that possibly Britain will lose it's power as EU comes.

I mean Great Britain will explode into Etats Souverains with separate power (Ireland first ?)

It's money, if falling, will keep it out of EU, and GB will have lost both the remnants of it's empire and a good access to EU riches.

So GB is in for an All or Nothing bet that the pound will somehow rise and allow them better access to EU.

If everything else fails, they will become a US Free Trade Zone (=>> a Mall, Island sized) and Jersey will boom as a wonderful Fiscal Paradise.

I just hope they won't try a Secession anytime (Kernel Alert, GB forked it's own branch 8)

--
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker

Re:Another thing... by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:45 · Score: 1

Jesus man, Ireland left the UK in the early 1920s -- it's been a republic (or sovereign state) since then, albeit with close ties to the UK. Hence our joining the euro whilst the U.K. has not.

Try this, mate! by The_Messenger · 2002-01-01 22:29 · Score: 0, Funny

Dammit, the coffee machine at work has not been updated and only takes Schillings. And I don't have any left and no-one will give me any in change. How am I supposed to work without coffee?

If you're really desparate, I'll give you some advice. Make "Coffpee!" What's coffpee, you ask? Well, it's urine. And it's brown. See, go into the men's washroom, and get some urine. Anyone's urine, even your own. Now get some shit. Once again, the source can be anyone's ass. Now here's the complicated part: dunk the shit in the urine. The urine should shortly turn a brownish color. (Or rather, a brownish "colour," you being a Brit and all. Or should I have written "a brownish 'colour'," more closely conforming to your wacky ways? Oh, well.) Okay, so you have a mug of brown urine, right? Well, add cream and sugar to taste, and enjoy! It's brown, it's liquid, and it can't taste much worse than average office coffee. My office has an awful coffee machine, an automatic device which produces the caffeinated equivalent of unlubricated anal rape. Yep, it's really pretty fucking awful. (That's "bloody" awful, "mate.") It has four settings: weak, medium, strong, and espresso. They're all horrible, but the last is the worst, since the manufacturer's concept of "espresso" is simply "twice the grounds with half the water." I shudder thinking of it. Anyway, depending on what I've had for lunch, coffpee generally tastes the same (or slightly better) than my office coffee, so I'm almost completely converted. The only problem is the lack of caffeine, but next week I'm going to start smoking crack-cocaine, which should prove to be an acceptable substitute. I'm in DC (capital of the free world to you, "mate"), known as one of the nations foremost producers of crack, and so the stuff is cheaper than gourmet coffee anyway.

Have a happy New Year, good luck with the faggy new currency, and have a cup of coffpee today! Cheers, mate!

--

--
I like to watch.

Re:Try this, mate! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 00:36 · Score: 0

You pillock.

He isn't British - we haven't had shillings for years, and we spelt it differently.
We also aren't switching to th Euro.
Re:Try this, mate! by easter1916 · 2002-01-02 02:23 · Score: 1

He's most likely Austrian, they (used to) use schillings.

Re:NZ to English by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:31 · Score: 0

Some NZ coins can pass for british coins even over the counter as the both have the Queens head on the back
i.e
5 cents = 5p
10 cents = 10p

these are large values but still wiff 3.5 NZ$ if every pound it is a gain.

Re:Simple Answer by frost22 · 2002-01-01 22:36 · Score: 1

thirdly, commercial exchange rates are nowhere near 4% which is pretty high even for tourist rates

You forget the dreaded (and actually rather expensive) international transfer fees, which are going to get eliminated within the Euro zone.

f.

--
...and here I stand, with all my lore, poor fool, no wiser than before.

Convergence by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-01 22:37 · Score: 0

The EU spent the best part of the past decade convergeing the various ecconomies, with variations in ecconomic growth only tolerated at 10% of that allowed between US states.

So will more likely see ecconomic riots in wyoming than Paris

Re:Ah Punt was pegged to de pound tilll the Euro c by biglig2 · 2002-01-01 22:39 · Score: 2

Bollocks! The Punt was a completely independant currency. However. most Irish shops are quite happy to allow you to pay in sterling at parity exchange; due to the fact that fleecing idiot brit tourists is always pleasant ;-)

Real rate has varied over the years. The prevalance of gas smuggling (I speak here in American, mindful of our core audience; the rest f you know I mean petrol) would suggest a good understanding of the rates.

--
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?

Why bother with a Euro, convert to a Dollar! by applejacks · 2002-01-01 22:44 · Score: 0, Troll

Convert to the United States Dollar! You already speak our language, American English. So, Americanize your currency. It will be great. -One nation under God. So lets start acting like it.

Re:More notes from Frankfurt by hughk · 2002-01-01 22:52 · Score: 2

Just went into Frankfurt today to pick a visa for a short break in Egypt. The Egyptian consulate was only accepting Euros. Two persons were sent back to get some Euros before they could submit their visa applications. The price increased!!!!!!

--
See my journal, I write things there

The rationale for a common currency by pkaral · 2002-01-01 23:38 · Score: 2, Interesting

There are two main reasons for implementing the common currency - political and economic. Although the economic might be important (think in hundred billion dollar terms of potential efficiencies), the political have been the most important motivation.

The political goals behind the Euro are, of course, the often-cited "ever closer union". Many people think that a "United States of Europe" model, much along the lines of the USA, would be a good thing. Such a development goes hand in hand with tearing down the barriers for commerce, travel, cultural exchange and relocation of people and businesses. The whole EU Common Market project has been doing this explicitly for the last 6 years, and implicitly since the eighties. There are many arguments for and against such a European Federations, the most vocal opponents cite nationalism or the loss of local governance/influence, whilst the advocates usually talk about economic benefits, European identity and the need for transnational coordination to tackle global environmental issues etc.

The economic goals are basically to remove wasteful practices and increase productivity through increased competition and specialization. To deal with those individually:

Wasteful practices: A lot of resources in Europe are used for tackling currency translations of different sorts, ranging from exchange bureaus to expensive accounting consultants and accounting software development. This might sound marginal, and it is indeed way beyond one percent of GDP, but when applied to economies of this size it still adds up to triple-digit billions (Euro or US, take your pick). There is also a lot of (costly) risk taking will be removed.

Increased competition: Especially in the smaller countries, local markets can be so small that they don't support enough suppliers (or buyers) to ensure good competition. This leads to monopolistic behavior, and hurts the economies in terms of lost production and mis-allocation of production resources. By removing barriers to cross-border tenders, competition (and thereby efficiency) is increased.

Specialization: Because the Germans are better at making cars than the Swiss, while the Swiss are better at making cheese, it makes sense if the Swiss make cheese for the Germans and the Germans make cars for the Swiss. This is called specialization, and occurs within economies as well as between them (in fact, specialization is the main reason why e.g. currency, the corporation and industrialization have been so important for the economic development in our history). Specialization between economies is realized through trade, which will be facilitated by the common currency.

The cons: The economic cons are well-known, but hard to quantify. Basically, the main problem is that with a common currency comes (by definition) a common monetary policy. Monetary policy needs to be adjusted to the business cycle. The cost of the common currency will be incurred when different policies are needed in different parts of the EU, e.g. if boom in Ireland requires a contractionary policy (high interest rates) while recession in Germany requires stimulation (low interest rates). This has been experienced by the US, when Chicago (car industry) was in recession while California (high-tech etc.) was booming, and the Fed had no way to respond to this situation.

The gravity of this problem is determined by how different the business cycle is within the common currency region, which again is determined by the mobility of resources (notably including labor resources). It is widely accepted that European workers are, at least at present, less likely to move to other countries than Americans are to move to other states. Therefore, this problem is likely to be bigger in Europe than in the US. Whether this will eat up all the economic benefits is not predictable with present analytic tools, and only time will show. Most economists seem to be in favor of the Euro, though.

pk

Re:Simple Answer by Zeinfeld · 2002-01-01 23:48 · Score: 2

You forget the dreaded (and actually rather expensive) international transfer fees, which are going to get eliminated within the Euro zone.

Actually the cost of inter bank settlement in the EU has nothing to do with currencies. It is the dependence on the very expensive SWIFT VAN that is the cause of high costs.

This will undoubtedly be dealt with, but the solution will be to replace SWIFT and any such network would as a matter of course go for the much more lucrative UK/US transfer market regardless of what currencies were in use.

--
Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/

We Brits aren't all like that. by garethwi · 2002-01-01 23:49 · Score: 1

Personally I like the Euro, and I like Europe.

I also think that when a British person starts rattling on about the World Wars, it's only because it was the last time that we were important as a major military power, and we need to remind everyone about it at every opportunity because then perhaps people will think that we are great once more. Of course it usually projects the image of the British as a bunch of xenophobic idiots whose feeble minds are controlled by jingoistic newspapers like The Sun.

What made (and still makes) Britain great is not it's rather dubious performance in two world wars, but rather it's countryside, it's culture, and it's continuity. Sadly, however, the sort of people who refer the the wars think that a country can only be great if it sends its sons in to battle to be slaughtered like animals.

--

Find funky gifts

Re:We Brits aren't all like that. by jeremyp · 2002-01-02 02:42 · Score: 1

The other thing of course is that it is inaccurate to say we saved the Europeans from Hitler or Kaiser Wilhelm. In neither case would we have won if the Americans hadn't joined in on our side.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:We Brits aren't all like that. by garethwi · 2002-01-02 07:55 · Score: 1

Well, I'm not entirely sure about that. I would say that the Russians did the most to ensure a speedy end to WWII, although the American contribution should not be underestimated, especially in the Pacific.

As for WWI, when you really look at the politics of that, it looks like a bit of a fight between distant family members blown out of all proportion.

--

Find funky gifts
Re:We Brits aren't all like that. by jeremyp · 2002-01-10 05:17 · Score: 1

In WW II if the Americans hadn't joined in in Europe, the whole of post war Germany would have been in the communist bloc.

It doesn't matter about the politics of WW1, withhout the US involvement the German 1918 spring offensive may have succeeded and eve if it hadn't, Britain and France would have had nothing left to counter attack with.

--
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Re:We Brits aren't all like that. by garethwi · 2002-01-11 01:57 · Score: 1

All that says is that American involvement stopped the Russians from grabbing too much of Europe. The Germans would have still lost the war, but with American help, more of it remained capitalist.

--

Find funky gifts

You Forgot the Netherlands!!! by sofar · 2002-01-02 00:36 · Score: 1

Well, seems like you guys are pretty bad in checking references, come on people!

Fact: The introduction of the euro was effectuated in 1991 in Maastricht, The Netherlands, by signing the treaty of Maastricht by all participating countries.

The Netherlands is also the one nation which has the largest support under it's citizens for the euro, and in which introduction has been the fastest and smoothest of all 12 participating countries so far.

Now please let the Europeans post the data before you guys blooper again!

My wallet contains 3.88 EUR currently :-P

Re:You Forgot the Netherlands!!! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:55 · Score: 0

the dutch have been always the best traders...

How to get used to the euro by sicko · 2002-01-02 00:48 · Score: 1

Without any doubt this is gonna be one the preferred methods:

http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Bistro/9891/actual .h tm

numbers versus names by oddityfds · 2002-01-02 00:57 · Score: 1

They really do mean the exact same thing, and if you use the number it works in more browsers.
Unicode char 8364 really mean "the euro sign".

Monopoly money by Pflipp · 2002-01-02 01:04 · Score: 1

Today I'm gonna pay with monopoly money in the stores to check out reactions.

Hell, if they imprison me for that, I've got enough of those purple 10.000 shines to bail me out :-)

--
"We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]

New World Order by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:04 · Score: 0

New world order of 2 superpower USA, Europe and 1 rising star China who just joined WTO.

Is India, Russia and Middle-east Islamic country going to catch up or will the world dominated by USA, Europe and China?

I was in Maastricht! Great party! by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:24 · Score: 0

I even made Dutch TV :-)
But these shops in London don't seem to like my shiny new coins :-(

Re:hmmm what? Re:Picture of bills with US bill by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:29 · Score: 0

What are you babling about? "Cause" isn't a synonym for "symptom".

When baby Brown is on solid food by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 01:30 · Score: 0

*Then* the date will be set :-)

Partisan screed by dunster · 2002-01-02 01:32 · Score: 1

I'm pretty surprised to see such a partisan version of history modded up so highly.

"The main similarity between 1992 and 2000 is the extent to which a viciously partisan press tipped the balance in favour of the right. Bush was consistently praised despite his obvious deficiencies while every opportunity was taken to attack Gore. So Bush got a bye for lying about driving while drunk while Gore was called a liar for mistakenly saying he visited Texas with the head of FEMA when it was the deputy head, he having visited 19 other states with the head one might think it an innocent mistake."

This isn't an accurate picture of what went on. Both candidates were bashed relentlessly by the press in the US's classic politics-of-destruction manner. If you try to detect right/left tilt in the media you find that 3 out of 4 networks are slightly left, and the 4th, Murdoch's Fox, is slightly right. I'm sure one could trot out a list of perceived media slights, but so can both sides. The media pleases no one.

For instance: If the press is as right-wing as you describe, why did it declare Gore the winner in Florida at 8PM EST? Polls were open in the Florida Panhandle for another hour; such an announcement could only lower turnout in the Florida Panhandle, the most right-wing portion of the state.

He also goes on to say "The ecconomy was in recession, the administration had lost control of the Senate due to crass political judgement, the California energy crisis caused by blatant market manipulation by Bush's texas cronies at Enron." A more rational person would point out that California's crisis was caused by horribly written market regulations. But, the author would rather tie the crisis to a bankrupt company and tie that company to Bush, all without logical support. It's just convenient for him to tie all of his pinatas into one and take a big whack. If Enron was the rapacious profiteer of the last year, why did it go bankrupt?

I would encourage moderators to highlight more even-handed versions of events. Extreme versions are welcome if they are so labelled. But partisan tripe masquerading as the truth is just awful.

Dunster

PS. I'm neither a Republican nor a Democrat - I'm one of those rare people registered with a third party.

hard money by ChristTrekker · 2002-01-02 01:37 · Score: 1

Too bad nobody's using real "specie" money anymore. It gives governments too much latitude to tinker with the economy. They withdraw the real value out of the system, while giving us worthless paper that's only valuable as long as we continue to have faith in the system. History bears out that any economy based on a fiat currency eventually dies in hyperinflation.

The banks are a joke, too. If they go bankrupt and you lose you're money, you're FDIC insured, right? Well who pays the gov't to bail out the banks? You do. You're the taxpayer. Your money isn't safe, because you still lost. But the banker's butt is covered, and he gets rich at taxpayer expense. We're headed for a cliff.

Down with the Federal Reserve. Down with the 16th "Amendment".

Want to make a difference?

--

Constitutionally Correct

One single currency??? by hateddamntruth · 2002-01-02 01:46 · Score: 0, Flamebait

"Today sees the historic introduction of the new European Currency (Euro) into European hands. The Eurozone market, with a population of 300 million people, will be cashing in their Punts, Francs and Deutschmarks in favour of the new common Euro currency. This is the biggest currency transition in history, vive l'Europe!"

You may think that with this move, you gain some kind of unitive power, but in actuality, you lose all individuality and a great deal of control over your own economy.

You guys are doomed.

The Pound the most stable currency by cinekid · 2002-01-02 02:11 · Score: 1

The Pound Sterling the most stable currency? Remember 1992.

Re:Simple Maths by DrSpin · 2002-01-02 03:10 · Score: 1

75% of our food is imported. The figures for everyting else are probably meaningless, due to the difficulty in defining terms and values (Ford imports/exports engines, etc at values set to determine where it is most tax effective to make the profit, not representing the value of the engine, and most other businesses do the same, I'd guess)

Ok the banks probably do not charge a commission of 4% for changing money, the COMMISSION is probably below 2%, but look at the spread we buy at 112 thingies to the pound, we sell at 92 thingies to the pound. Go on, take a look in the FT, or anywhere else. You won't see a spread under 4%.

The spread on tourist rates in the average Bureau de Change is over 10%.

And wait till you have to get a quote on 6 months ahead to handle ordering now for delivery in 90 days, and then 90 days to pay, which are normal export/import terms.

This is a scam of galactic proportions, and make no mistake. Second only to It takes 3 days to clear a cheque which is embezzlement, fraud and deception. Any slashdot reader could fix it so cheques clear in 3mS, including full bankers' algorithm (deduct from payer before crediting payee). Come on - these people really do have broadband.

America and Russia have the mafia, the British have banks.

The German banks were taken to court, and now cheques clear overnight.

I am Dr Spin - well, what would you do in my grave? :-)

Thaler = Czech Tolar by xr6791 · 2002-01-02 03:24 · Score: 0

True, it's not from "Daalder" but from medieval Czech currency "Tolar" (Germans named it "Thaler").

DING FLOP BIPS by leuk_he · 2002-01-02 03:32 · Score: 2

He tried and failed.

N is for Netherlands. But of course he is from there so it does not have to be named.

BEEEEP... by gpinzone · 2002-01-02 03:54 · Score: 1

The point is tolerance. Anything that increases tolerance in the society is OK, anything that restricts the freedom is bad. I let these freaks publish their own religious crap even though I hate all forms of religion because I believe in the complete freedom of speech. Burning books is 100% against the freedom of the speech and should therefore be a serious crime.

I hate intolerance! How dare they?! If there is one thing I won't tolerate, it's intolerance!

This was a test of the Emergency Sarcasm Network... If this were a real point of view, it would be considered idiotic. Remember, this is only a test...

Re:Are we becoming like star trek? I hope not! by Picass0 · 2002-01-02 04:23 · Score: 2

A One World Government is a bad idea. There are many people in the world who don't like America (in case you haven't been paying attention) and I would prefer they not have a voice in ruling my life.

I don't care what your stripes are, liberal or conservative. If you feel like Florida was a bad way to run an election, wait until you try to have your vote in a world election (if the World decides YOU get a vote). You will have fraud on a scale never before seen. Take everything that's screewed up in the UN an magnify it by a 6 billion.

No thanks. I like the United States of America. It's not perfect, but it's better than most people give credit.

Star Trek shaceships are cool. But it's UFP is oversimplified to the point of being trite.

Doesn't have to be extra-terrestrial by Cato · 2002-01-02 04:34 · Score: 2

You are ignoring the threat of non-state actors such as al Qa'ida, who are enough of a threat to governments all round the world that they are one driver for global cooperation and (perhaps) ultimately world governance - see http://www.nonzero.org/terror.htm for more discussion of this. As technology makes it easier and cheaper for almost anybody to kill large numbers of people, global cooperation will become essential to counteract this.

thanks for the correction by da5idnetlimit.com · 2002-01-02 04:34 · Score: 1

Sorry, my school history course are not @ 1920 yet 8)

More seriously, close ties ? with a standing army on your ground ? closely tied is more to the point...

Thanks for the point anyhow. Maybe that could be a nice revenge, Irish people segregating on GB people (You are out of Euro zone. May I see you Passport ? 8)

--
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker

Anyone has a good printer? by Kresh · 2002-01-02 04:36 · Score: 0

Many people don't know how the euro bills actually look like!

AltGr is the right Alt key on AT keyboards by yerricde · 2002-01-02 04:52 · Score: 1

Furthermore, what is an AltGr key?

Short answer: right Alt key.

AltGr (possibly for Alternate Graphic) has existed on nearly all PC keyboards since the first 100+-key AT keyboard. The bottom row of the keyboard runs Ctrl, Alt, Space, AltGr, RCtrl. On newer keyboards: Ctrl, Meta, Alt, Space, AltGr, RMeta, Menu, RCtrl. On some US keyboards, AltGr may be marked the same as Alt, or with different text coloring.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Vending machines by yerricde · 2002-01-02 05:22 · Score: 1

According to Israeli law, a merchant may not refuse to accept valid currency.

So how are Israeli vending machines programmed? In the USA, vending machines are clearly marked: "Takes 5c, 10c, 25c, and $1 coins and $1 bills." Unless the law grants an exception to operators of vending machines, I bet they have to put a metric ____load of change in the machines every night.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Re:oh yay by ChristTrekker · 2002-01-02 05:26 · Score: 1

I don't know if global gov't can be done right. I've read most of the Federalist Papers, and one of them states that the idea that a U.S. federal (as opposed to remaining individual and independent) gov't was feasible was based on the idea that the culture was pretty homogeneous. It works for a "melting pot" society to have one gov't. Without it, there are bound to be problems. See the breakup of Yugoslavia and USSR into their original ethnic divisions for proof. I see the increased turbulence in urban America as partly due to "hyphenated" Americanism and the replacement of the "melting pot" with the "tossed salad." It's one thing to be proud of your cultural heritage, it's another when it becomes divisive and a roadblock to working together with others as a single society.

--

Constitutionally Correct

Why? by PHAEDRU5 · 2002-01-02 06:03 · Score: 1

I watched the celebrations on TV and was struck by the almost religious fervour surrounding the conversion to the Euro.

Among other things, I noticed all the slagging of the U.K,, Denmark, and Sweden, complete with comments about the inevitability of conversion to the Euro. Failure to accept the Euro came across as a sort of heretical position. Reasons for accepting the Euro came across to me as a combination of hand-waving and proof-by-intimidation.

So, I started asking myself why. Why the Euro? I think it's all for historical reasons, but not the ones normally given.

Take the Irish, for example. They really want to be out of the U.K.'s economic orbit. They never will, for reasons of geography, but God, do they want to be. So, for them, conversion to the Euro is seen as a way to become closer to Berlin and Paris than to London. Mind you, they also went along with the Euro because they've received, and continue to receive, massive support from the EU.

The French want to bring Europe back to the time of Louis XIV. A common currency, open to meddling by the Enarcs is just the thing for them.

The Germans? Well, the whole "European Union" idea dates back to studies by Nazi economists during WWII. More recently, we've had one German Chancellor indicate that the EU had to succeed or the Germans would just go rampaging all over the continent once again.

As for the rest, well, the Greeks, the Spaniards, the Portugese are all in it for things like the Common Agricultural Policy (you know, taxing Germans to pay Greeks), and don't really have an option but to go along.

So, really, the impetus behind the Euro is all the historical animus, greed, and ambition that have characterized Europe for the last 400 years.

Personally, I give it 50 years before the whole thing falls to pieces. Rewind European history to about 1670 and hit "play" and you'll have a good predictor for the next 400 years.

--
668: Neighbour of the Beast

E$ is a string by yerricde · 2002-01-02 06:24 · Score: 1

Everbody seems to know what E$ means...

E$ is the name of a string variable in the Basic programming language.

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

Re:oh yay by iphayd · 2002-01-02 06:24 · Score: 1

I see that Federal governments break down when they try to do _local_ things. If the scope of a global government were to remain global, the government could work. Global trading, human rights, pollution, and nuclear arms reduction are all global issues. These issues should be determined on a global scale, rather than local, where they are ineffective. These issues (except human rights) effect _every_ human on the planet, no matter what country you live in.

If a global government were to _only_ deal with global needs, and not local needs, then it would work, despite cultural differences.

Re:New World Order [nWo] by yerricde · 2002-01-02 06:36 · Score: 1

Why would a defunct wrestling conference (once part of the defunct WCW (now part of the WWF)) be a world superpower?

--
Will I retire or break 10K?

free market by hokanomono · 2002-01-02 06:48 · Score: 1

Yes in a free market, the government cannot control prices. Where is your argument that we NEED a completely free market?

There are some things that are more important than a free market. A free market does not nescessarily lead to a better economy and even if it did, there are things that are more important than economic prosperty. The EU was not founded with the intent of a stronger economy, it is a more general vision.

--
This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.

Re:free market by tdye · 2002-01-03 02:12 · Score: 2

A free market is the best path to a good economy... history consistantly shows that free trade and markets free from govt. intervention produce the best results for the most people.

Certainly, there are a host of things that are more important than a free market. My point here, and one that I think we keep missing, is that there's a deeper concept which Europeans very often miss completely (man, it's really hard to articulate this... I'm trying my best here): the govt. has no place meddling in the private transactions of a retailer, regardless of whether or not the beurocrats believe the people must be protected from them. It's not the job of the govt. to shield one segment of the populace from another, equally law-abiding part... especially when the only real reason must be their own political arses. Who would the people blame if they get screwed on the price of a roast? The govt! Therein lies the entire problem, and that's why it's practically impossible to break the cycle... and why so many people in the USA fight against the beginnings of it.

If I get overcharged for a steak because of the Euro changeover, it is, IMHO, my own damned fault, not the fault of the Irish parliament for switching to the Euro. But to your average Irishman, it's the govermnemt's fault! They will go right on and curse the Euro, and the shopkeeper will join in even while he's screwing his customer. And this is why European govts act to protect the people, and interfere in markets. You'll never hear the local TD tell a voter that it's their own damned fault for paying too much, and maybe he ought to take his business elsewhere... he'll go on a tirade about the evils of price gouging and how something must be done about it.

IMHO, things like freedom from unwanted intervention by my govt. are more important that prosperity. I think it's the job of govt to create conditions in which I have a reasonable chance of success in whatever I might try, provided I have the skills and put in the effort. It is NOT the job of the govt. to support me indefinitely me if I give up, nor is it the job of govt. to force other, successful people to support me in my decision to just be a long-term failure.

Lastly, and slightly off-topic; if the EU was founded by any other means than a consensus of citizens (NOT officials several steps removed from direct, regular accountability from the populace) who decided to join together to make the continent better, than it's dangerously close to an illegitimate governing body.

Is it really better to create a governing body with no popular accountability which has the power to severely restrict basic freedoms and commerce (like, I think this steak costs £5 today, not £4.50) because it's members decide they know best for the populace? What do you do when you don't like what the EU does? Tell your local official, who tells the minister, who tells the EU rep, who tells the other EU reps, who tell him to piss off. Then he tells the minister "no dice", who tells the local official "Sorry, not this time", who tells the people "What can I do, I'm just the local official!". (of course, if this isn't how it works, I'd love to be corrected.)

As always, I welcome responses... perhaps this wil help get to the meat of the issue here.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:free market by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-03 13:39 · Score: 0

A free market is the best path to a good economy... history consistantly shows that free trade and markets free from govt. intervention produce the best results for the most people.
No. Free market is good, but not unconditionnally good. It is not the goal at least in Europe, only a means. The goal is to live a better life. If free market gets in the way, well we might as well just regulate it.
My point here, and one that I think we keep missing, is that there's a deeper concept which Europeans very often miss completely (man, it's really hard to articulate this... I'm trying my best here): the govt. has no place meddling in the private transactions of a retailer, regardless of whether or not the beurocrats believe the people must be protected from them.
Yes it has. We voted so. And we think so.
Who would the people blame if they get screwed on the price of a roast? The govt!
No, the retailer, for having lured them. Governement action is just a bonus.
Therein lies the entire problem, and that's why it's practically impossible to break the cycle... and why so many people in the USA fight against the beginnings of it.
But we like this cycle. It's just like saying, once you're married, is difficult to divorce, so you should stay single. Are we more miserable ? No.
If I get overcharged for a steak because of the Euro changeover, it is, IMHO, my own damned fault, not the fault of the Irish parliament for switching to the Euro. But to your average Irishman, it's the govermnemt's fault!
No, it's only a slight abuse of the retailer.
IMHO, things like freedom from unwanted intervention by my govt. are more important that prosperity
No. I can tell you exactly why: I trust my government more than corporations. That's because I vote for it of course. Ask yourself: how is it possible that you hate so much your governement, although you vote for it. What are the real reasons ?. Here people are decently "satisfied" of both President and Prime Minister (58% and 48%).
It is NOT the job of the govt. to support me indefinitely me if I give up, nor is it the job of govt. to force other, successful people to support me in my decision to just be a long-term failure.
Wrong. It's the job of the governement, if people vote so. It's not if people vote against. The only question, is potential dictatorship of the majority, which is a form of cartel, to which free market theorists/game theorits have no solution.
Lastly, and slightly off-topic; if the EU was founded by any other means than a consensus of citizens who decided to join together to make the continent better, than it's dangerously close to an illegitimate governing body.
Again you are transposing your hate of your own governement to people who don't hate theirs. EU wasn't created for fun and profit, by a set of governements, nor are there dictators at the head of the EU. You want to know the truth ? The truth is that governements of each country did the best to make a democratic Union of States, this union evolved, and on average, people were ok with this. The greatest Europe proponent, here, Jacques Delors, was very popular (to the point that at some presidential election he would probably have won, but he choose not to present himself). I don't hate my governement, on the contrary. I don't hate EU, on the contrary. Both are far from perfect, but I don't blame some people are for trying hard. I prefer to be ruled by Spain, German, Danish type of laws, than American ones because I don't believe in "Free Market Only All The Way", and my neighbors don't either.
What do you do when you don't like what the EU does? Tell your local official, who tells the minister, who tells the EU rep, who tells the other EU reps, who tell him to piss off. Then he tells the minister "no dice", who tells the local official "Sorry, not this time", who tells the people "What can I do, I'm just the local official!". (of course, if this isn't how it works, I'd love to be corrected.)
If it's a relatively unimportant matter that might happen. But then it might be handled locally, or by an unimportant part of the administration. If it is an important matter, then it might well that the governement experts had seen the problem in advance, or even had seen a problem affecting me that I didn't see ; and least they are likely to listen me.
But for instance "anti-globalization" concerns are starting to get studied by current party ; Jacques Chirac, said even at Genoa "there is here a impressive amount of protesters, and noticeably mostly European citizen, which are expressing their concerns or fears about globalization, and as such, they must be listened", while Bush (and Berlusconi), said something which really meant "those protesters are idiots who don't understand economy".
Re:free market by tdye · 2002-01-04 01:57 · Score: 2

No. I can tell you exactly why: I trust my government more than corporations. That's because I vote for it of course. Ask yourself: how is it possible that you hate so much your governement, although you vote for it. What are the real reasons?
Americans generally don't hate government, but they have a deep-seated systemic distrust of it. This comes from the fact that we had to throw off a government system and construct a new one. Americans want their government to act in the spirit of that revolution, and we've designed a system that prevents the government from being able to interfere in the affairs of the people any more than is absolutely necessary to maintain order.
Now, that goal is of course a constant struggle and a constantly shifting balance.

In my view, Europeans tend to see their government as an engine for social reformatting, with a series of disasterous consequences as a result.
And we're not talking about corporations here... nobody trusts a corporation to be an engine for social change... they're supposed to be engines for making a profit. Nobody in the US expects a corp to better society (although it's nice when they do, which is pretty often). People in the US expect the people to better society.
Maybe it's a matter of size. It's almost better to talk about US State govt. when comparing to European national government. The US Federal government is different in structure and in philosophy from any European national system, in large part because it's designed to be a strong structural framework by which the "several States" can act in concert, a body which can resolve State disputes, and a system by which the people have protection from the potential for governmental abuse.
The idea of abuse of power seems not to enter the European mind... which is one reason, I suppose, why we differ in governmental systems so strongly.

Also, some regulation of industry is often necessary, but enforcing price controls on the entire retail market is IMHO WAAAAY over the top.

I prefer to be ruled by Spain, German, Danish type of laws, than American ones...
Perhaps this is a language issue, but I find your use of the word 'rule' very interesting. Americans prefer not to be ruled at all, whenever they can avoid it. The American system is designed such that the people rule themselves, and the system is designed to prevent tyranny by the govt. or the majority. Most European democracies are shaped such that the people pick which group they want to be ruled by, and surrender many protections and personal freedoms under the assumption that the ruling party's people know best. Talk about tyranny of the majority! Why in the world must I submit to being constantly filmed as a walk down a street, because you believe I might commit a crime!

The US system isn't "Free Markets and the consequences be damned!". But it does have, at it's core, a reverence for the rights of the individual. It is from this idea, described in the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence but not deriving from those documents, that the US system flows. The US system IS the solution to the tyranny (dictatorship was your word... I think tyranny fits better) of the majority. The free market economic system exists not as a solution to political problems, but as a seperate thing that the political system tries to avoid mucking around in as much as possible. It is, at it's root, the reverence for individual freedom that prevents the government from enacting price controls on local shopkeepers because the majority of people want things kept simple. Europe (and France in particular) does not share this bias toward the individual.
From where I stand, this is more than a little scary.

...nor are there dictators at the head of the EU.
Fair enough, but neither are there accountable representatives of the people at the head of the EU. Only a group which you hope will deal with you fairly, but against whom you have little defense should they do otherwise, especially if the national government and the ruling party remain uninterested in protecting your personal freedom.

It is NOT the job of the govt. to support me indefinitely me if I give up, nor is it the job of govt. to force other, successful people to support me in my decision to just be a long-term failure.

Wrong. It's the job of the governement, if people vote so.

No!
No, No, NO! It is WRONG to allow a greedy and lazy majority to deal out economic torture to a productive and successful minority. It is wrong to force a member of your society to offer up the fruits of his labor to support those who refuse to contribute to that society if he does not wish it.

You have to let people succeed or fail as they will, without enforcing 'medium-ness' on everyone, even if most everyone is happy with being medium. The only way to truly be fair is to not get involved. Any other path pits the society against itself and is necessarily unfair to someone. You end up making value judgements about who is hurt less by unfairness... but by extension, you're really deciding who's rights are more important. Everyone's rights should be equally important, and that means you have to protect the individual regardless of whether it sucks for everyone else in the country.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?
Re:free market by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-04 13:10 · Score: 0

Americans generally don't hate government, but they have a deep-seated systemic distrust of it. This comes from the fact that we had to throw off a government system and construct a new one. Americans want their government to act in the spirit of that revolution, and we've designed a system that prevents the government from being able to interfere in the affairs of the people any more than is absolutely necessary to maintain order.
Which is a choice and not a natural law. Your statement is also technically incorrect, because it is skipping one interesting part of policy in the US, I urge you to consider Welfare policies and Keynesianism in 1960s.
Most European democracies are shaped such that the people pick which group they want to be ruled by, and surrender many protections and personal freedoms under the assumption that the ruling party's people know best. Talk about tyranny of the majority!
Actually it is often true, that some governement agent knows more than me on any matter. For instance, what are the consequences of EU laws on agricultures. In most EU countries (except Italy now maybe), the governement isn't heavily funded by corporations ; so yes I can choose to trust it.
But it does have, at it's core, a reverence for the rights of the individual.
Yes, but you should consider we don't emphazize freedom as much as you. If equality is as important as freedom, the choices are different.
. The US system IS the solution to the tyranny (dictatorship was your word... I think tyranny fits better) of the majority.
"solution to tyranny", in a sense "maximizing freedom". Not in the sense "maximizing equality", and a combinaison of those. Reminds of the joke about the man seeking his keys in the night under some spotlight, not because he is likely to have lost them there, but because it's the only place, he would be able.
But This is by far your most valid point: i.e. tyranny of the majority (and I'll attempt to answer in a reply to another of your post). But on the other hand, note that France has never been strongly libertarian (we had about 5 revolutions in a century, with various kind of monarchies, democracies, popular dictatorships) : so enforcing "libertarian ideas", would be the dictatorship of the minority.
The free market economic system exists not as a solution to political problems, but as a seperate thing that the political system tries to avoid mucking around in as much as possible.
That would fit the sentence "Free Markets and the most of the consequences be damned!".
Europe (and France in particular) does not share this bias toward the individual.
No we don't. That's exactly why we call this "religion". For instance, public nazi worshipping is illegal in France and possibly in some other EU countries: in practice I don't care, but you American are rabid against that on the principle, not considering why this perticular law, never intended to be transposed to something else, can make sense, in light of France, Austria, Germany, and Russia history.
Rejecting things on principle rather than on genuine and actual consequences, is precisely what make this kind of view "religion" to me. Just like "You CANNOT eat cows because they are sacred!!!".
Yeah, the governement CAN go wrong. But for now, I think it is doing a good job keeping the boat afloat, so the theoritical horrors that didn't happen yet are secondary to me.
No!
No, No, NO! It is WRONG to allow a greedy and lazy majority to deal out economic torture to a productive and successful minority. It is wrong to force a member of your society to offer up the fruits of his labor to support those who refuse to contribute to that society if he does not wish it.
Wrong. Nowhere in our constitution it is written a citizen can pocket the benefits of free education for himself and his children, health-care, inter-generation retirement payment, roads and generally good transport infrastructure, electricity networks, economic help when in sector needing it, and also of having educated employed with good healthcare, ..., and then be able to unilateraly change the principle of the society, by deciding "well it's not normal I give a cent to the State". This citizen WAS WELL AWARE of what the general principles and law are (since redistribution rate is nearly constant now), well before getting rich (or poor). That's the very basis of the "social contract".
You have to let people succeed or fail as they will, without enforcing 'medium-ness' on everyone, even if most everyone is happy with being medium. The only way to truly be fair is to not get involved.
There is no absolute fairness, only differing incompatibles views of fairnesses.
Any other path pits the society against itself and is necessarily unfair to someone.
Any path pits the society against itself. In any society there are some conflicts of interests. The way you "solve" them, is to say "THIS IS THE WAY IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE", which is essentially religion, if you don't realize it's not an absolute truth.
Re:free market by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-11 13:52 · Score: 0

>Wrong. Nowhere in our constitution it is written a citizen can pocket the benefits of free education for himself and his children, health-care, inter-generation retirement payment, roads and generally good transport infrastructure, electricity networks, economic help when in sector needing it, and also of having educated employed with good healthcare, ..., and then be able to unilateraly change the principle of the society, by deciding "well it's not normal I give a cent to the State".

And nowhere is it written that you can't.

At least, thank god, there is NO LAW that requires a person to have a SSN. Whoops, I don't owe a dime to the government :)

> This citizen WAS WELL AWARE of what the general principles and law are (since redistribution rate is nearly constant now), well before getting rich (or poor). That's the very basis of the "social contract".

If it's a contract, then *SHOW* me where I signed? I didn't, so it's NOT a valid contract. Case closed.

Simple answer by overunderunderdone · 2002-01-02 07:00 · Score: 2

Read you question again slowly and you will see that you have already answered it.

Coins are individual per country by k2r · 2002-01-02 07:04 · Score: 1

You missed on of my favorite details on the euro-coins:

Although the front is the same in every country, the back is designed individually.
That means that coins with different backsides from different countrys will start mixing over the years.
As the countrys and citizens already started to do.
Both will keep their nationality (backside) and be part of the European Community (frontside) at the same time.

This seems way more romantic to me than I ever expected the European politicians to be.

k2r

P.S. Some bank-person just called the people in Germany "europhorical". And the Euro just passed the 1:0.9 exchange-rate compared to the dollar. Upwards.

Re:Coins are individual per country by k2r · 2002-01-02 07:21 · Score: 1

> and the other with a common european one.

D-oh.
You didn't miss anything and I missed the
point where I should have read your posting again.

Sorry.

k2r

Re:oh yay by ChristTrekker · 2002-01-02 07:12 · Score: 1

I agree that the problem with any government is that it tries to assume too much power, moving it away from the people it governs. The best government is the one that remains under the control of the people. Why would anyone want to cede away control of their own life to someone who is not held properly accountable?

However, the problem is that "human rights" is a nebulous term. Who decides what they are? Who enforces these laws, and how? Basic human rights, as described in the Declaration and Constitution, are God-given and inalienable. Some call these basic rights the first law of nature. Some think that abortion is or should be a basic human right, while others deny it is a right at all. Who's right and who's wrong? Some say that guns are dangerous and a threat to society, while others say gun ownership is the only way to provide adequate defense. Who's right and who's wrong? If we try to err on the side of caution...which side is that? I know I have my own ideas...but what if someone else who disagrees with me wins and tries to impose their ideas on me?

These are intensely private and personal things. Can we justify forcing values on others just because some global council says it's the law? Where does national sovereignty kick in? In many countries life is cheap, and genocide is common. They won't respect a "right to life" unless the culture has a moral basis for it. In many places, liberty is unknown, and women and children are treated like slaves. They won't respect a "right to liberty" until the culture has a moral basis for it. Property is confiscated by many governments, and you are not allowed to keep the fruit of your labors. These countries won't resepct a "right to pursue happiness" unless the culture has a moral basis for it.

I think that the reason the West, particularly the U.S., has experienced the prosperity it has in recent centuries is because of the influence of Christianity. Jesus was the greatest civil libertarian the world has known. He knew a government wasn't the answer. He wanted to change the heart at the individual level. Respect for human life (all life: women, children, elderly, sick) all grew when the Good News was preached. Freedom replaced tyranny as the model of Christian love dictated that everyone be treated justly. With that freedom came the possibility to pursue individual dreams and better oneself.

Remember what I said earlier about the U.S. being a homogeneous society. John Adams said, "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Early America was quite definitely Christian. Unless the heart is right, any government will become corrupt, and a corrupt gov't with any sort of power is dangerous. As a check against that, it is wise not to create any large gov't, and keep most of the power deemed necessary for gov't as local to the people as possible.

--

Constitutionally Correct

currency boards by hawk · 2002-01-02 08:29 · Score: 2

also, please note that currency boards are used when the government has already abused the currency, typically after long hyperinflations. Dollarization would generally better meet the intended objectives, though without assistance from the U.S. (accepting the old currency as whatever fraction of a dollar, and trading) it may be impractical to obtain enough dollars.

hawk, economist

Where the Hell did this come from? by Galvatron · 2002-01-02 09:37 · Score: 2

Powerful economies help everyone. I am American, and would be thrilled to have the EU really come together and kick economic ass. I don't think it's likely to happen, the EU is too restrictive for nations that have been independent for hundreds of years. The language barriers will be painful. The only thing that binds the EU together seems to be this desire to "beat" the US, as though we were trying to keep them down.

I believe that the EU will come apart within the next 10 years, and when it does, it will be messy.

--
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD

Re:Where the Hell did this come from? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:38 · Score: 0

I don't think it's likely to happen, the EU is too restrictive for nations that have been independent for hundreds of years.
There have been some form of economic union gradually increasing since about 50 years: April 1951, The Six (Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands) sign the Treaty of Paris establishing the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC).
The only thing that binds the EU together seems to be this desire to "beat" the US, as though we were trying to keep them down.
No, the desire of EU is to keep its strong social systems, with the US, do constantly claim it's bad, evil, inefficient, dirigist, etc..., and try as hard as possible to enforce THEIR ideology to the whole planet.

Shopping malls in London accepting � by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 10:49 · Score: 0

Today, if've heard that the big shopping malls in London are accepting the Euro. If this is not a rumor, there seems to be a pressure. The seems to be the same thing for GB what the Deutschmark has been in Ex-Yugoslawia... ;-)

"deustcheland uber alles". by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-02 12:13 · Score: 0

I dislike those folks with no hair, which are singing the (kind of illegal) 3rd part of our national anthem.

But this part was misinterpreted (in a evil way) by the nazis, the original meaning was not 'germany over other nations', it was just meant to build a german nation out of prussia, bavaria and x*10^y other small countries.

1-2-5-10-20-50-100-200-500 etc.. by mAsterdam · 2002-01-02 13:13 · Score: 1

There's no 25 cents coin. Someone tell me why, because I don't understand it. Specially since a coffe here is about 125 pesetas, which is roughly 0.75 euro. We've got 2 and 20 cents coins, but anyway, I don't know why there're no 25 cents coins.

I cannot really answer your question, but I can shed some light. In order to minimize

the number of coins to carry and
the number of coins involved in transactions

the ratios 1-2-5-etc... in denominations have been implemented in several different countries in just two different schemes:

A. 1 - 2.5 - 5 - 10 - 25 - 50 - 100 etc...

B. 1 - 2 - 5 - 10 - 20 - 50 etc ...

If you take a close look at it, you'll see that both schemes are allmost completely equivalent in the minimum number of coins to use for transactions. Scheme A was in use in the Netherlands, and - appearantly in Spain. B in France and in Germany. I don't remember about the other EMU-countries (I should, I visited most of them). I do not know what the reason was, but the monetary authorities chose for B.

Re:1-2-5-10-20-50-100-200-500 etc.. by mAsterdam · 2002-01-02 13:26 · Score: 1

I guess really minimizing the number of coins involved in random amount transactions would be 1 - 2 - 4 - 8 - 16 - 32 - 64 ...etc,
maybe some math-knowledgable /.-er could calculate this. Now I'm positive I've seen this scheme before, though not in currencies.

euro by timecop · 2002-01-02 22:15 · Score: 0, Funny

I converted all my bank accounts to euro because its the best thing since sliced bread!

prices ARE free in EU by clarkie.mg · 2002-01-03 00:36 · Score: 2

The prices are as free in EU than in US. What is not allowed is to fool customers by setting different prices in and in local currency. This was enforced in some places by freezing the prices for a limited time. You must see it as a very exceptional practice. In other places, the retailers themselves chose to freeze prices to keep the trust of their customers.

Don't forget that in a free market, there are rules anyway so that the freedom of everyone (not only the merchants but also the customers) is real. That is why there are anti-trust laws for example. And in that case, it seems that the US are not very good at keeping their market free (from microsoft monopoly, I mean).

To be more precise, I would say that the US are very good at enduring the freedom of those who have the most money or weapons but not for the poors or the weaks.

--
Men are born ignorant, not stupid; they are made stupid by education. Bertrand Russel

homeless by clarkie.mg · 2002-01-03 00:51 · Score: 2

I agree with you that one must work to earn living but when you are homeless, very poor or ill, it is very hard or impossible to get a job so that even the most decided person would fail.

I saw the other day someone in Paris who was too cold to even walk. What are you supposed to tell him ? Hey get a job ? Silly. Fortunately, an ambulance came and took charge of him regardless he had no credit card.

My point is that some people fail in our societies (their fault or not) and it is a duty of those societies to help them overcome their failures, espescially when the society is rich enough to do it.

Giving money away to the lazy is not the solution, of course but do not let the opportunists hide the benefits of a system.

--
Men are born ignorant, not stupid; they are made stupid by education. Bertrand Russel

Re:homeless by tdye · 2002-01-03 04:56 · Score: 2

On this, I'll agree with you completely. It's a good function for government to rescue those who have failed utterly, or who are unable to sustain themselves... but it's dishonest and (IMHO) even cruel to continue handing out assistance to those same people instead of teaching them, training them, and getting them off welfare whenever and however possible.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?

who manipulates the market ? by clarkie.mg · 2002-01-03 01:21 · Score: 2

You can't retain the ability to arbitrarily manipulate commerce like that and expect a powerful united economy to rival the USA.

Excuse me but if the US are so strong and so keen to enforce free commerce, why do they tax 20% steel imports ?

http://www.uksteel.org.uk/nw73.htm
http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/speeches/ct-dg022599 .html

--
Men are born ignorant, not stupid; they are made stupid by education. Bertrand Russel

Re:who manipulates the market ? by tdye · 2002-01-03 05:06 · Score: 2

Because the Japanese steel industry was dumping steel into the USA at obscenely low prices, and losing millions of dollars on the deals, in order to impact the US market and run US steelmakers out of business. In this effort, they were subsidized by the Japanese government, who was providing financial assistance so they wouldn't go bankrupt. In the US, we can't enact an import tax on goods from only one country unless they have certain other political restrictions already placed on them (Cuba for example), so we have to tax it all.

It was a punishment against Japan for trying to destroy the US steel market to their advantage. There's a big difference between regulating a free market system and combating a government-subsidized cartel acting in concert to demolish the industry of another country.

Besides all that, I never said the USA is perfect... but they're Constitutionally prohibited from the kind of manipulation that Europeans seem to favor and European markets seem not to survive without. I think that's a Good Thing.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?

European economy by Per+Abrahamsen · 2002-01-03 02:16 · Score: 2

Actually, European economy grow stronger (and larger) than the US economy during the Reagan/Bush area. During the Clinton administration, US economy grow strong again, and actually surpassed Europe in the late 90'ties.

So "never" is inaccurate. The relative strength is approximately the same, seen over the last 30 years. Which indicates that idelogical dogmas has less effect than many people think, and the effect is probably negative most of the time, compared to a more pragmatic approach.

Re:European economy by tdye · 2002-01-03 05:09 · Score: 2

That's a completely inaccurate statement, and I'd love to see the link that supports it. I can't wait to see which countries constitute 'Europe' for the purpose of getting those numbers, and how many EU countries aren't included in the counting.

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?

Thats a serious level of counterfeiting! by iainl · 2002-01-03 02:21 · Score: 2

I'm not going to bother arguing about the relative strength of the US Dollar and Sterling; after all your currency is already considered an international one for many business transactions. I _will_ be mildly alarmed that you appear to plan counterfeiting enough of them that you have to consider how much your fake Sterling would cause the currency to devalue!

--
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"

objection against the mod by hokanomono · 2002-01-03 02:56 · Score: 1

Who the FUCK is the moderator here? Bill Gates?

It is obvious that the moderations in this thread are strongly biased.

(This is not inteded as an offense against tdye, except she/he/you is/are the moderator.)

--
This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.

Re:objection against the mod by tdye · 2002-01-03 05:13 · Score: 2

I didn't get moderated... I'm just cool enough to post at +2

--
Whatever happened to JonKatz?

Euro and intra-european wars : wishful thinking ? by franois-do · 2002-01-03 03:44 · Score: 1

By the way, there is a strange wishful thinking here in Europe : many people insist on saying (and perhaps even believing) that countries having the same currency cannot have a war between them.

History does not say so, as for instance the Secession war suggests. Territories in war cannot go on sharing the same currency, but we see from this exemple that the inverse is not true.

Of course, many people say that "there cannot be war between democracies", but this only true as long as the winner of a war can decide what will be written in history books, in other words who was democratic and who wa not; an excellent privilege, indeed.

That being said, the Republic of Venice was terminated by a young general of the young French Republic - incidentally called Napoleon Bonaparte. This was, to be exact, not a "real" war, just an accepted ultimatum; besides, the two sides of this example are probably very atypical.

--
Signature omitted in order to save space. Thanks for your understanding.

I say: by riotrick · 2002-01-03 03:57 · Score: 1

DING FLOF BIPS!

--
Insert nifty comment here

Chosing pictures for the Euro bills by franois-do · 2002-01-03 04:50 · Score: 1

That is the problem : because there are (still) many chauvinists everywhere, nobody dared to suggest to put, for instance, Beethoven's face on a 500 euros bill (what is the need of a 500 euros bill, by the way, besides escaping the taxman?) and Leonardo da Vinci on "simply" a 100 euros bill.

An obvious solution would have been to represent only great people from outside the European Union (a very nice symbol of openness too). Seems that nobody was ready for that either. As (in France at least, I cannot say for the rest of Europe) best and brightest people just study math and physics, and politics seem to be left, at the other end of the rainbow, to people lacking both logical abilities and creativity, we can hardly be much surprised here.

Anyway, the Euro Notes will probably be redesigned, like most other bills, every 10 years or so, We could have something acceptable around 2080 if we do not revert to something harder to counterfeit (a given standard mix of expensive metals?) by that time. However, electronic money or even something more subtle could have taken over, and perhaps on the whole planet.

--
Signature omitted in order to save space. Thanks for your understanding.

democracy by hokanomono · 2002-01-03 05:10 · Score: 1

We already know one of the fundamental antinomies (the meat of the issue): the first sentence of your comment. Contra negantem principias non est disputandem. (You don't need to argue against those who deny the principles.)

I agree with you that people are not enough aware of their own responsibility, be it with their consumer decisions or with their voting. The EU will need better democratic institutions, but the bigger problem is, that people should start to care for EU issues and should take their national governments into responsibility for EU issues. Most EU decisions need an unanimity of all the national governments. There is no such thing as an "EU rep". Anyway it does not work too well; the reason is that people don't care what THEIR national governments decide for the EU.

The EU was not founded by a consensus of the citizens. Almost all other countries in the world -- if not all of them -- were not founded by consensus of the citicens either. However the EU was founded with a majority in each of the member countries and unanimity of their national governments. Some countries had a direct poll to join the EU, some countries left the decision to their elected representatives, but all was done by democratic means in compliance with the national constitutions.

--
This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.

Nonsense? Name-calling? by Anonymous Coward · 2002-01-03 10:36 · Score: 0

First of all, I'm growing tired with these pseudo-arguments like using "...nazi regime entered the democratic system via democratic ways". Yes, and what's the point you're trying to make? That democracy is flawed? That we need your expert opinion to determine who qualifies as democratic and who doesn't? Your sentence implies that I sympathize with naziism. After all you state: "I can only guess why you sympathize with Haider" followed by the link of to nazi-Germany. Thanks for the insult.
I live in Belgium. The fate of the Austrian people is theirs (AND ONLY THEIRS) to decide, that's precisely the point I was trying to push across.
My sympathy with Haider is the sympathy for an underdog getting crushed by the established media and powers-that-be using the same kind of insulting and undeserved smears as you've just used. That is precisely the Europe we're heading for. Anything not to the liking of the social-democratic elite (and the wolves crying along with them) is stigmatized using the convenient holy dogma of a war long past and events that occurred 30 years before I was even born!
As for the EVP: there is a vast chasm between being a large merged fraction in the Europarliament, and being in power. There are such things as coalitions, you know. One large fraction can easily be outnumbered by the conglomerate of socialist parties. Look at the majorities in the Euro-countries. The 3 major countries (France, Germany, UK) have socialists at their helm. In my country, Belgium, and neighbouring Netherlands it's a liberal-socialist mixture. Are you starting to see the common denominator in all these? Denmark: social-democrats. Austria: oops, their brothers missed the boat with the OVP because they were too greedy and the OVP walked away. Then all hell broke loose.
Europe is slowly turning into a bureaucratic state where dissent is squashed using pseudo-moralism. The Eastern bloc may have been destroyed, but their fellow-travelers are still alive and kicking, slowly imposing their ideological tyranny upon all of us.

A great comment by hokanomono · 2002-01-04 01:12 · Score: 1

Thank you for that comment.

Our motto is freedom, equality, fraternity (French Republic). You want to argue the motto should be freedom alone.

We really need all of the three. It is a great motto. I wish the EU would officially adopt the motto. (I guess the monarchies will not like it.) Thanks to France that they put it on the Euro coins. I am looking forward that some french coins find their way to me here in Austria.

a mere Mercedes versus a Ferrari
I always put it this way: I don't mind that there are rich people, but I do mind that there are poor people.

Liberté, Egalité, Fraternité

--
This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.

Re:hmmm what? Re:Picture of bills with US bill by PurpleBob · 2002-01-04 19:58 · Score: 2

That's nice. Maybe when you learn to read, you can get an account and contribute something useful.

--
Win dain a lotica, en vai tu ri silota

Euro minds are not dollar minds by franois-do · 2002-01-06 02:25 · Score: 1

>> One nation under God. So lets start acting like it. We saw with the Taliban what "one nation under God" could mean, so I would say NO, THANKS ! :o( In most countries of Europe, believing or not in an hypothetical God (whether an individual, a kind of extratemporal being or force, or a pure language metaphor) is an individual choice, note a state-relevant one. So do not expect to ever see "In God WE trust" on an euro coin. In God SOME OF US trust. Some do not. Obviously some have to be wrong but we shall not pretend any of them know best. That being said, if there is no God to take care of people when they are down and out, a strong social security system has to, and this is why it was started as early as the end of XIXth century by Bismarck and others. The system has got slightly better ever since. Leveling the social security levels on te world seems up to now more important that just matching the currencies, though both of them should occur within this century unless surprising new conditions rise in the meantime.

--
Signature omitted in order to save space. Thanks for your understanding.

Re:Euro minds are not dollar minds by applejacks · 2002-01-08 03:34 · Score: 1

funny thing is most of our government don't seem to trust in God. Reminds me of the time the spanish sailed over here sporting God to the Indians. Then they took their gold, I suppose for God and the King. wonderful.
Sometimes I wish the new world had never been found. Christobol's ship just sank.

No fallacies please. Thanks. by franois-do · 2002-01-06 02:52 · Score: 1

Thats not true. I'm 29, and against the euro. So much for your theory.

As far as 50% of people + 1 agree with using the euro, the proposal of your interlocutor still holds. We see no sign of the contrary up to know, otherwise so-called "sovereignists" would be in power everywhere in Europe and the Maastricht vote would have been rejected by every country.

every conflict in europe for the last 1000 years have been about nationalism

Can you name just three of them ? I can hardly see any that did not have its origin in ECONOMIC reasons, including the two last world wars (so could be the case for the Secession war, incidentally : it was probably easier for the North to sell its machines to replace people in the South if there was no unpaid human workpower power to compete with them)

In such a case, the wars were the wrong answer to real problems. A central bank might be the right answer to the same real problems. Back to 1895, the Economist Charles Gide, looking at the regression line of interest rates thoughout the XIXth century, came to the conclusion : "If interest rates still go down like this, they will be zero by 1915, which is impossible. Therefore something has to happen in the meantime and we do not know what it will be.". We know by now.

(The "1000 years" are just stuff for kids. None of us is ever concerned with what occured more than 4 generations ago. I shall believe otherwise when I see somebody able to name me the list of all his/her great-grandparents. I still have to meet one (except those interested in genalogy, a quite different matter because you often find one or more migrants in one"s family in that case).).

--
Signature omitted in order to save space. Thanks for your understanding.

Banknotes earlier than 19th or 17th century by jasonzzz · 2002-01-09 21:18 · Score: 1

Banknotes, paper currency, or other ideas
of notes of deposit were invented around the 7th century.

http://www.fnmt.es/esp/museo/ebilletes.htm
http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/html_En/03/hm3_7_ 1_ 2.html

Unfortunately, the Chinese stopped using papermoney in 1455. Meanwhile the first "western"/European papernotes were only printed in Sweden in 1661.

An example of a chinese banknote from the 13th century:
http://www.samfogg.demon.co.uk/23/2334.html

http://www.banknotes.com/intro.htm#history

Note also that Chinese invented what we know today as paper in 100AD - this is real paper using mixes of fibers and pulp to form sheets. Papyrus was a beaten bark that you can scratch crudely and make notes on; entirely different animal.

1,162 comments