May 21, 2005
IF ONLY THEIR PUBLICS MATTERED:
Dutch No camp takes strong lead (BBC, 5/20/05)
The Dutch public appears on course to firmly reject the European constitution in a referendum on 1 June, according to latest opinion polls.A poll for RTL television indicated 54% would vote No, with 27% voting Yes.
The Dutch vote is purely consultative, but politicians have said they will take the result into consideration when it comes to a parliamentary vote.
Anybody think the EU project will stop just because the people of Europe oppose it?
MORE:
Surprise for EU chiefs: voters' urge to say no (Richard Bernstein, MAY 21, 2005, The New York Times)
For a quarter of a century, it has been pretty much axiomatic that in the core half-dozen founding countries of the now 25-member European Union, popular support for ever-higher levels of unity and integration could be almost taken for granted.
Not any more.
The strength and amplitude of the opposition to the constitution in France and the Netherlands - both of which will soon hold referendums to accept or reject the charter - amount to an unprecedented revolt among sizable numbers of Europe's supposed core constituency against the idea that has governed the European project until now: that the bigger it got and the more closely knit it grew, the better.
"It surprised me," Bernard Bot, the Dutch foreign minister, said of the surge in opposition to the constitution, which he helped negotiate. "I was out canvassing the other day and I met a woman who said there was no point in trying to convince her, she was going to vote no.
"I asked her 'Why?' and she said, 'I just feel good saying no for once."'
Bot, interviewed in his office in The Hague, added, "There's a lot of irrational reaction that has to do with the general economic situation in the country, European enlargement and immigration.
"You can take any issue that has come up in the last few years, and it's a reason to vote no."
One size doesn't fit all for rates in euro zone (Mark Landler, MAY 21, 2005, The New York Times)
Spain is in the seventh year of a housing boom that, with interest rates at historically low levels, shows no sign of cresting.Posted by Orrin Judd at May 21, 2005 7:57 AM
Nearly two decades after joining the European Union, Spain is on the leading edge of an emerging, and troubling, dichotomy between dynamic European countries with fast-rising asset prices, and lumbering countries with moribund markets, most notably Germany. Far from converging into a more homogeneous bloc, the 12 countries that use the euro are dispersing into sprinters and laggards, with different levels of consumer confidence, industrial activity, and economic vigor. Bustling Ireland, with a growth rate of 5 percent, has little in common with becalmed Italy, where output may shrink this year.
This has created a conundrum for the European Central Bank in Frankfurt, which sets interest rates for much of the Continent. For months, the bank has signaled it wants to lift rates. But it is afraid of hobbling weak countries like Germany and the Netherlands.
While the Germans linger on the edge of a recession, Spaniards are taking out cut-rate mortgages to buy and build houses at a furious pace.
"For the Spanish economy, the advantages of being in a monetary union clearly outweigh the disadvantages," said José Luis Malo de Molina, the director of research at Banco de España, the
How can you argue with someone who says: "I just feel good saying no for once."
"For the Spanish economy, the advantages of being in a monetary union clearly outweigh the disadvantages."
For the moment.
Posted by: Tom at May 21, 2005 8:43 AMIt's never made sense to me that the EU went for monetary union ahead of most open market reforms and political union. Monetary union is, in lots of way, part of the cost of economic integration rather than one of the benefits. On the other hand, exchange rates just aren't that hard to deal with. I'm sure that the benefits to which S. Malo de Molina refers are either political (and thus not really part of monetary union) or are part of the boom caused by having low rates as the European central bank tries to shock Germany back into some semblance of life.
Posted by: David Cohen at May 21, 2005 9:04 AM-- Bustling Ireland, with a growth rate of 5 percent, has little in common with becalmed Italy, where output may shrink this year.--
It's the tax laws, stupid.
Sandy;
Tax law and rates are a big part of it, but I lean more toward the De Soto school which is that the amount and structure of overall regulation matters even more. I'll bet it takes a lot less time, money and energy to start a company in Ireland than in Italy.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at May 21, 2005 12:30 PMRe voting no because I can, that's what happens when we allow the rabble to vote.
Posted by: Sandy P. at May 21, 2005 12:30 PMDavid: a political union for the EU makes no sense, as people do not see themselves as being European.
One of the fears of local politicians is pensioners taking their pensions and health care rights south towards Spain, while leaving the bill in the Netherlands.
oj: exactly.
Posted by: Daran at May 21, 2005 4:18 PMWhy doesn't that make sense?
Posted by: oj at May 21, 2005 4:22 PMPoliticians like to keep the money local. And if people can get health care in Spain, evil market forces may intrude on our system of health care.
Posted by: Daran at May 21, 2005 5:51 PMThat can only help.
Posted by: oj at May 21, 2005 6:15 PMDaran: That may well be. The revolution always has to come before the politics. But that makes a monetary union even more baffling.
Posted by: David Cohen at May 21, 2005 7:12 PMoj:
The U.S. have a national pension plan, so it's no big deal if seniors move, as long as they stay in the U.S.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at May 22, 2005 3:38 AMSo will a United Europe.
Posted by: oj at May 22, 2005 9:10 AMMichael: The fact that it is a national plan only makes us feel better because we think of ourselves as a nation. Americans paying for Americans is acceptable to us. As it happens, because seniors move south when they retire, there is a net export of social security money from the northern states to the southern states.
Posted by: David Cohen at May 22, 2005 3:07 PMDavid Cohen:
Or, the Northern states benefit from workers' productivity before the workers head South.
Everyone likes having a population of people who bring in outside money, but Northern states aren't "losing" anything, because they never paid for nor held SS retirement pension funds.
All they're losing is an opportunity.
Michael: Social Security will pay your benefits even if you move out of the country. A fair number of oldsters move to Central America.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at May 22, 2005 9:21 PM