[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: EURO patch

On Wed, Dec 02, 1998 at 05:39:13PM -0500, Avery Pennarun wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 11:08:21PM +0000, Tom Lees wrote:
> > Not to get too political or anything, but that is the kind of argument
> > which really annoys me: "Why should we have the Euro?" "Because it's
> > inevitable...". (Yes, that DOES seem to be the main argument all its
> > proponents seem to be putting forward (to the General Public)).
> So is there a reason to switch to the Euro?  I haven't heard the story.

This is the right question. I was essentially complaining about the
government asking people "is there any reason not to". But anyway, here

Big Multi-Nationals would like it, because it means they can cut overheads.
City people like it because it will increase the stakes in the currency
market. Organised crime will like it because it will provide more difficult
to trace notes, in MUCH higher denominations (500 EURO note =~ 350 pounds,
or 220 US dollars), in smaller packages (you can get 2 million+ dollars into
a medium suitcase in Euro notes!) [apparently 70% of US 50 dollar bills are in
the posession of organised crime!].

Tony Blair + New Labour will like it because it will give them a more
powerful, less democratically accountable position, as will reform of the
Lords [IMHO!].

Small businesses will hate it, because of the implications for taxes (we
have far less taxes on business here than continental Europe). The
individual democrat (not the American party) probably wouldn't like it
because the next logical step is to put sole control of the economy, then
the country into an institution in a country in which they don't even speak
the same language, and even worse, where most of the officials with this
power are unelected.

Having said that, it might cause an increase in jobs available from the
multinationals. But, I (for one) don't place too much trust in them (cases in
point being Microsoft and Intel and supermarkets and ...).

The other big problem with it is that the British (English) and continental
economies are fundamentally different. In Britain we have hardly any small
agriculture (although lots of corporate agriculture), hardly any mining,
and lots and lots of tertiary sector industry. In most of the Euro countries,
the situation is almost the reverse, eg Italy, France. Germany is (IIRC) mostly
manufacturing, lots of low-level jobs, particularly in East Germany.

And, judging by the comments of Oscar La Fontain (sp?), it seems that they
really badly want to control our taxes so we don't pose so much of a threat
to them.

On the whole, the answer at the moment is an overwhelming "Maybe". It really
does depend on (a) who you trust, (b) what kind of job you have, and (c) if
you like the idea of England being a separate nation.

> > How do I get joe (and less) to deal with the pound symbol properly but
> > still escape the nasty low chars (0-31) (escape codes can be pretty
> > dangerous under an xterm)?
> At least joe does exactly that with its "-asis" option -- it doesn't quote
> high ascii, but protects you from control characters.  That was the whole
> reason I wanted joe to _default_ to -asis mode.
> With less, I'm not sure.  Something about locale settings, I think.

But I shouldn't need them. A pound is a pound is a pound. It doesn't differ
whether I'm french, american, or if I come from indonesia. If someone
wants to use a pound symbol, they should be able to, even if my locale
"doesn't need it".

Tom Lees <tom@lpsg.demon.co.uk> <tom@debian.org>  http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/
PGP Key: finger tom@master.debian.org, http://www.lpsg.demon.co.uk/pgpkeys.asc.

Attachment: pgpjmIBzjuQSA.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: