Politics is a trade, at which only the most despicable scoundrels, and swindlers can hope to succeed.
Euro: We should tell 'em where to stick it, Nick
Nick Clegg has a piece in the Independent this morning repeating his suggestion of last week that we should consider joining the Euro. Not, it has to be said, now and in a hurry - he does not see it as a way out of the mess the financial markets are in - but in recognition that the world after this crisis will be a different economic landscape in which ganging up together with Europe may outweigh the loss of credibility the City of London will have wrought on itself. He concludes:
But given the gravity of the economic crisis in Britain, and our unique exposure to international financial markets, silence about the euro must end. The future has never been more uncertain. People are increasingly desperate for stability in our economic affairs. We must be ready to think anew. [From Nick Clegg: We should consider joining the euro - Commentators, Opinion - The Independent]
Indeed, we must think anew, but alas the Euro is still part of the old world not the new. It is the system itself that is broken. It is true that one could argue that the Euro is slightly different from the rest of the system in that its central bank is not controlled by a single government with spending plans it would like to get that central bank to finance. At the moment that is; and God forbid that it ever should - we don't want these people to have any control over our lives, as liberals, do we?
If the Euro is able to survive the current crisis, with the pressures of Greece, Spain, Portugal and Ireland at least threatening to break all the rules, it will be a stronger currency I am sure if it emerges out the other side, but how long would it take for it to be ready to absorb an economy the size of the UK's?
Then also I notice talk that the BRIC countries, and at least China and India, as global creditor nations, will hold a lot of sway when the G20 meets in a few weeks time, are resurrecting something similar to Keynes' idea of the Bancor as a sort of a supra-national reserve currency. I doubt that they will readily accept a switch from one "national" reserve currency to another. The very notion of a reserve currency linked to one particular geopolitical grouping skews the system against all the other nations by effectively ensuring they have to buy that reserve currency in order to trade. In the new world where these economies are nipping at our heels it is economic imperialism, and protectionist, to believe we have a right to be some global super-currency.
I really think we have to begin to look beyond the era of "central banking" - it's not like it's been around that long - less than a century in reality. It has proven time and again to be a hostage of markets owing to the moral hazard inherent in the private banking system knowing they will be baled out in a crisis and has been a constant source of inflation. Not even our most monetarist governments have been able to control the money supply. It is one of the great monopolies that our liberal predecessors knew were a great cause of inequity.
As well as establishing this group to look at the electoral use of technology, the party needs to establish a group of, if you like, futurologists, to look at how the technological advances, especially in communications, over the past couple of decades can facilitate even more wide ranging changes right down to the institutions we have accepted till now as the very life-blood of the economy. The genie is out of the bottle, we are in a new epoch, and it seems to me that the opportunity this financial crisis affords us to do away with some of the old and facilitate the new is unmissable.
Related reading
Here are some stories that may be on related subjects, based on the tags used in this post:
- Vince and George: both singing from the statist hymn-book
- Freedom is fair
- A new Financial Operating System - an Open Source alternative.
- Useit, or usury? How much debt are you paying off?
- Land Tax and Citizens Income - further discussion...
- Response to some comments on "Unconditional Benefits"
- Fannie and Freddie expose fragile financial fabric
- The squeaky wheeled "trolleygarchy"
- From here to Liberty
- Tax havens are such old hat...

Main articles or...
All comments 
via Feedburner
Random Blogroll Links
About Jock

Name: Jock Coats
Age: 40s
Lives: Oxford, UK
Works: IT Support, Oxford Brookes University, where I am also a Governor of the University and a Warden in a hall of residence.
I am a card carrying Lib Dem, but am a confirmed market-anarchist, of the US Individualist Anarchists or Mutualist tradition. Other passions are social enterprise, monetary reform and housing. See full profile and contact form and at the following web-haunts:
Others' Magnificent Mutterings



















Comments
[...] Euro: We should tell 'em where to stick it, Nick | Jock's Place [...]
Unsurprisingly I agree.
The love of central banking mystifies me, although listening to Rothbard's 'For A New Liberty' I can see how its been promulgated by the conservatives which dominate all politics today to maintain their power...
Note that your "these people" link is gibbering nonsense.
And inflation is a cause of *equity*, not *inequity* - debtors, who are poor, benefit at the expense of savers, who are wealthy.
john b's last blog post... Those who will not see
[...] Jock Coats isn’t so sure we should join the Euro in our time of need. [...]
John, I disagree with your analysis on the criminal record sharing protocols (though I am not going to go so far as to call it "gibbering nonsense"). A distributed database is, er, still a database, and a set of sharing protocols is to make individual databases, er, talk to each other. Thus creating a distributed database. And those protocols seem to reveal that they are cataloguing some very minor things which should not be following you around in such a way.
On your other point, it is indeed a commonplace to say that "inflation helps the poor". The biggest debtors are usually very wealthy, including the government, after a fashion (though I will admit that devaluing government debt is at least a saving to the tax payer).
Labour, at the bottom of the heap, is often behind when it comes to keeping up with inflation, in debt or otherwise. The inflation of the past decade, which has mostly gone into that convenient of commodities that does not figure in official inflation rates, housing, has greatly impoverished those who have not been able to get on the ladder (such that if this correction is not fifty per cent or so they may still never get on the housing ladder by the time prices pick up and run away from them again).
By contrast, those who are truly wealthy and who are therefore much more able to salt away that wealth in non-money goods are less prone to the effects of inflation. In any case, the idea that we should save in cash (excepting relatively small amounts to see you through a few months' crisis) is one of the reasons why the money system is so broken - that instead of treating money purely as an instrument of exchenge, it has become custom to see it also as a store of value, which is contradictory.
In the thirties some of the complementary currency systems even suggested demurrage fees and negative interest rates so that people were encouraged to keep their cash in circulation which is the only place it really does anyone any good - when being used in trade.
"those protocols seem to reveal that they are cataloguing some very minor things which should not be following you around in such a way."
They're categorising whatever is recorded on the criminal records system of the relevant country. That seems saner than trying to come up with a triviality threshold and ignoring all responses that are 'too minor'.
"The inflation of the past decade, which has mostly gone into that convenient of commodities that does not figure in official inflation rates, housing"
OK, perhaps we're approaching this from different angles. Price inflation is generally good for labour because outside of major downturns, wage settlements more than exceed price inflation. Asset inflation isn't good for labour, I agree.
Besides, I think you're reading my piece wrongly - it is not the inflation that is the great source of inequity but the monopoly of credit creation. Nonetheless I stand by what I said in the previous comment - I think you'll find the supposed "benefits" of inflation are less clear cut than you make out with your sweeping statement.
They're categorising whatever is recorded on the criminal records system of the relevant country. That seems saner than trying to come up with a triviality threshold and ignoring all responses that are 'too minor'.
I would agree it would be saner, if we wanted anyone else to know our business in the first place. I don't. The whole idea of sharing police databases that contain everything is repugnant to me.
Our comments on inflation crossed in the post - or at least I didn't see your later one before I posted mine. Though I'm not sure workers in the seventies necessarily thought they were ahead of inflation, or indeed earlier last year when it looked like everyone was going to be asked to settle for nominal 2% pay rises with inflation running at 5% and likely to go (much) higher when the sterling devaluation really hits new imported stock.
On those records - as I've said elsewhere - any group which thinks its okay to punish people for insult to the state, the nation or state symbols is a group we should shun.
There is also far too much complacency on letting governments share information about us.
Indeed - I am surprised at some of the people who have jumped on what they described as "libertarians going bonkers" who would, I think, normally be quite suspicious of such sharing.
I'm under no illusions I don't think - the only purpose of a data sharing protocol remains to share data. Like ContactPoint, this is part of the mission creep.