Sorpresas te da la vida. Quién me iba a decir a mí que algún día coincidiría con la opinión de Soros



Financial Times. Europe • Finance

True Europeans now need a ‘plan B’


The European Union was brought into existence by what Karl Popper called “piecemeal social engineering”. A group of far-sighted statesmen, inspired by the vision of a United States of Europe, recognised that this ideal could be approached only gradually, by setting limited objectives, mobilising the political will needed to achieve them and concluding treaties that required states to surrender only as much sovereignty as they could bear politically. That is how the postwar Coal and Steel Community was transformed into the EU – one step at a time, understanding that each step was incomplete and would require further steps in due course.

The EU’s architects generated the necessary political will by drawing on the memory of the second world war, the threat posed by the Soviet Union and the economic benefits of greater integration. The process fed on its own success and, as the Soviet Union crumbled, it received a powerful boost from the prospect of German reunification.

Germany recognised that it could be reunified only in the context of greater European unification, and it was willing to pay the price. With the Germans helping to reconcile conflicting national interests by putting a little extra on the table, the process of European integration reached its apogee with the Maastricht treaty and the introduction of the euro.

But the euro was an incomplete currency: it had a central bank but no treasury. Its architects were fully aware of this deficiency, but believed that when the need arose, the political will could be summoned to take the next step forward.

That is not what happened, because the euro had other deficiencies of which its architects were unaware. They laboured under the misconception that financial markets can correct their own excesses, so the rules were designed to rein in only public-sector excesses. Even there, they relied too heavily on self-policing by sovereign states.

The excesses, however, were mainly in the private sector, as interest-rate convergence generated economic divergence. Lower interest rates in the weaker countries fuelled housing bubbles, while the strongest country, Germany, had to tighten its belt in order to cope with the burden of reunification. Meanwhile, the financial sector was thoroughly compromised by the spread of unsound financial instruments and poor lending practices.
With Germany reunified, the main impetus behind the integration process was removed. Then, the financial crisis unleashed a process of disintegration. The decisive moment came after Lehman Brothers collapsed, and authorities had to guarantee that no other systemically important financial institution would be allowed to fail. The German chancellor Angela Merkel insisted that there should be no joint EU guarantee; each country would have to take care of its own institutions. That was the root cause of today’s euro crisis.

The financial crisis forced sovereign states to substitute their own credit for the credit that had collapsed, and in Europe each state had to do so on its own, calling into question the creditworthiness of European government bonds. Risk premiums widened, and the eurozone was divided into creditor and debtor countries. Germany changed course 180 degrees from being the main driver of integration to the main opponent of a “transfer union”.

This created a two-speed Europe, with debtor countries sinking under the weight of their liabilities, and surplus countries forging ahead. As the largest creditor, Germany could dictate the terms of assistance, which were punitive and pushed debtor countries towards insolvency. Meanwhile, Germany benefited from the euro crisis, which depressed the exchange rate and boosted its competitiveness further.

As integration has turned into disintegration, the role of the European political establishment was also reversed, from spearheading further unification to defending the status quo. As a result, anyone who considers the status quo undesirable, unacceptable or unsustainable has had to take an anti-European stance. And, as heavily indebted countries are pushed towards insolvency, the number of the disaffected continues to grow, together with support for anti-European parties such as True Finns in Finland.

Yet Europe’s political establishment continues to argue that there is no alternative to the status quo. Financial authorities resort to increasingly desperate measures in order to buy time. But time is working against them: the two-speed Europe is driving member countries further apart. Greece is heading towards disorderly default and/or devaluation, with incalculable consequences.

If this seemingly inexorable process is to be arrested and reversed, both Greece and the eurozone must urgently adopt a plan B. A Greek default may be inevitable, but it need not be disorderly. And, while some contagion will be unavoidable – whatever happens to Greece is likely to spread to Portugal, and Ireland’s financial position, too, could become unsustainable – the rest of the eurozone needs to be ringfenced. That means strengthening the eurozone, which would probably require wider use of Eurobonds and a eurozone-wide deposit-insurance scheme of some kind.

Generating the political will would require a plan B for the EU itself. The European elite needs to revert to the principles that guided the union’s creation, recognising that our understanding of reality is inherently imperfect, and that perceptions are bound to be biased and institutions flawed. An open society does not treat prevailing arrangements as sacrosanct; it allows for alternatives when those arrangements fail.

It should be possible to mobilise a pro-European silent majority behind the idea that when the status quo becomes untenable, we should look for a European solution rather than national ones. “True Europeans” ought to outnumber true Finns and other anti-Europeans in Germany and elsewhere.

The writer is chairman of Soros Fund Management and founder of the Open Society Foundations.


True Europeans now need a ‘plan B’ | The A-List | Must-read views on today

A los que aún no entiendan de qué habla Soros y cuál es la "alternativa nacionalista" que se ofrece a la Unión Europea, les recomiendo estas lecturas:

Por mi se pueden meter Europa por donde les quepa.

Estoy harto de que se tomen decisiones que afectan a mi vida diaria, por unos tios q ni conozco, trabajan 3 dias a la semana, se enfadan si no viajan en primera y compadrean casi cada dia con directivos de bancos y del FMI

Ahora un piso cuesta 30 veces más que antes, la jubilacion es a los 67 años, pago un IVA del 18%, incluso se comienza a hablar de "copago sanitario" y otras lindezas antes inimaginables, y encima tengo que oir que "Desde que estamos en Europa vivimos mejor"

Adios Europa, adios....

__________________

Eso no se llama Europa, hamijo. Se llama ausencia de democracia.

Y contra eso hay que luchar, no contra "Europa".

La prolongación de la españa castellana es américa y no europa. Por culpa de europa y nuestras regiones fronterizas hemos abandonado totalmente nuestros intereses más allá del atlántico y ahora por poner todos los huevos en la misma cesta estamos jodidos.

__________________

Esto es un clásico “GRAN MENTIRA” tan grande que la gente lo crean. No ha sido el EU quien ha salvado a Europa de un conflicto, era el estacionamiento en suelo Europea de soldados USA armados hasta los dientes mirando el USSR derecho a los ojos.
Por si a alguien se lo ha olvidado Hungría era invadido por el USSR y Checoslovaca también, así “Paz en Europa “ no ha habido, y el poco paz que había no era gracias al EU

__________________

Discrepo. Ya no estamos en 1582 (cénit del imperio), ni siquiera en 1824 (Ayacucho). Mantener una integración económica suficiente con los países Latinoamericanos demanda algo que ya no tenemos. O, dicho en términos más crudos: quien quiera un imperio ultramarino necesita la mejor marina del mundo. Le cuesta a los USA, como para pensar nosotros en tamaño anacronismo.

Y, sin embargo, fíjese dónde invierten nuestra grandes empresas: Repsol, BBVA, Santander, Telefónica. Exactamente: ahí mismo, en Latinoamérica. Pues ahora, cierre el círculo: esa expansión no habría tenido lugar si España no fuera miembro de la zona €. De hecho, en esta zona € España es el puente entre Europa y América. No lo vea como dos direcciones contrapuestas: Europa y América son las dos caras de la misma moneda para nuestro país. Como ya lo era en el siglo XVI, pero con armas distintas. Ya no nos sirven ni la Armada, ni arcabuces o culebrinas. Sólo nos sirve permanecer en un zona económicamente fuerte.

Como el invento este de la UEM vuele por los aires (y tiene toda la traza de hacerlo) ya verá cuánto tiempo duran nuestras empresas en Latinoamérica...

Bueno, las tesis de Mazower y Judt van en el sentido de que la Segunda Guerra Mundial no acaba en 1945, sino en 1989. La cuestión para los europeos es qué van a hacer ahora: ¿vamos a volver a las andadas?

Y, ojo, porque aquí se piensan muchos que eso es imposible y que una situación en la que Europa estalle étnicamente por los aires está fuera de la realidad. A esos les digo que el mismo año en que la URSS se disolvió estalló la matanza étnica de Yugoslavia.

Me da igual si fueron los USA quienes patrocinaron el invento unioneuropeo. Pero nos ha traído más paz en 60 años de la que hemos vivido en toda la Historia.

¿Queremos volver a matarnos como perros? ¿Eso queremos? Porque eso sucederá si la Europa política se desintegra.

Union Europea = Ausencia de democracia

- Do you want the rainforest to die?
- No, I don't really want the rainforest to die.
- That's what will happen if you open the red door

YouTube - ‪the red door 3‬‏