Welcome to the new version of European Tribune. It's just a new layout, so everything should work as before - please report bugs here.
Display:
Barry Eichengreen: Europe's Divided Visionaries (Project syndicate)
This tension between Europeans' goals and their ability to achieve them is playing out again in the wake of the recent EU summit. Europe's leaders now agree on a vision of what the EU should become: an economic and monetary union complemented by a banking union, a fiscal union, and a political union. The trouble starts as soon as the discussion moves on to how - and especially when - the last three should be established.

...

Europe has been here before - in the 1990's, when the decision was taken to establish the euro. At that time, there were two schools of thought. One camp argued that it would be reckless to create a monetary union before economic policies had converged and institutional reforms were complete.

...

The consequences have not been happy. Monetary union without banking, fiscal, and political union has been a disaster.

But not proceeding would also have been a disaster. The 1992 crisis proved that the existing system was unstable. Not moving forward to the euro would have set up Europe for even more disruptive crises. That is why European leaders took the ambitious steps that they did.

They could also have abandoned stable exchange rates altogether...
Not proceeding now with bank recapitalization and government bond purchases would similarly lead to disaster. Europe thus finds itself in a familiar bind. The only way out is to accelerate the institution-building process significantly. Doing so will not be easy. But disaster does not wait.


If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jul 17th, 2012 at 06:43:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think there was a lot of support from the business community (who have quite a bit of influence) for stable exchange rates.

I know in our business we're definitely vulnerable on our exporting to exchange rates - and hedging/insurance on that kind of risk only works if you're in a high profit industry. Otherwise by the time you're finished insuring against currency risk, you're already in the red.

by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Tue Jul 17th, 2012 at 07:52:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I'm sure there are ways in which sovereign central banks could use foreign currency reserve management to stabilize exchange rates, each country allowing its own exchange rate to depreciate gradually over the long term if the fundamentals exert pressure in that direction, but limiting volatility.

If you are not convinced, try it on someone who has not been entirely debauched by economics. — Piero Sraffa
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Tue Jul 17th, 2012 at 08:38:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Oh it's definitely possible, but in the UK at least, we tend to be in the grip of Hayekian theorists who disdain that kind of intervention...
by Metatone (metatone [a|t] gmail (dot) com) on Tue Jul 17th, 2012 at 10:43:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Would that work similar to a currency band?

A vote for PES is a vote for EPP! A vote for EPP is a vote for PES! Support the coalition, vote EPP-PES in 2009!
by A swedish kind of death on Tue Jul 17th, 2012 at 02:43:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series