Why Germany Cannot [No, Will Not] Save the Euro

As Charles Wyplosz has recently written, the euro zone's rescue strategy adopted in May 2010 has failed. Like his column, this column argues that it was folly for the euro zone to believe the bailout approach would succeed because the problems in the euro zone run much deeper than just Greece. Further, this column argues that if this approach continues for any longer, the entire euro zone will break apart.

Yesterday, we re-published an excellent piece by Charles Wyplosz that originally appeared at VoxEU. After we published it, I also tweeted an excerpt which I felt representative of the tone of the piece:

"Chancellor Angela Merkel has sent word that Germany cannot save the euro. She is right." bit.ly/Mzew7v".

EconoMonitor » Why Germany Cannot Save the Euro.

Here's my comment over there:

The European equivalent of United States Notes would solve nearly every economic problem they're facing. They could wipe away all of the debt at once and without causing hyper anything. The problem with their economy is usury and the minds behind it. It's an obstacle. Bottom-up democracy could take it's place completely.

Let me add that I know Edward Harrison wrote his piece within the context of what the bankers world is willing to even hear. Within that context, he's on the right track; however, it's the context that's IS the wrong track.

Here's how he ended his article:

Germany cannot save the euro. It does not have the financial resources to do so, even with the ESM and IMF in tow. Many of us have been warning for some time that the strategic approach of bailouts and austerity is all wrong. If German politicians want the euro to survive, they must recognise that defaults, credit writedowns and bank recapitalisations will be inevitable. The sooner this occurs, the better. But, if Europe is to survive, we will also need to change the European institutional architecture to integrate Europe in a way that smoothes business cycles with supranational automatic stabilizers instead of exacerbating them with procyclical austerity. The ECB will be a big part of the transition to this approach. And so the ECB will be the subject of the second part of my weekly column.

Now, that's better than what they've been doing and appear to be planning. It isn't, however, as good as what I've proposed via my comment above. Austerity is asinine, but we don't need "business cycles" at all.

It's sad and comical at the same time that this isn't allowed to be spoken of in the circles where decisions are being made not on behalf of the whole people but of the bankers keeping the rest of the people duped and dizzy -- under some evil hypnotic spell.

"You will not talk about United States Notes. You will not talk about United States Notes. You will not talk about United States Notes. Your eyes are heavy. You are in my complete control. You will remember nothing," blah, blah, blah. Yet, it works on billions of people. Help!

  • Subscribe
  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Libertarian Capitalism, Monetary Reform, United States Notes. Bookmark the permalink.