Is the end nigh for the Euro? [vol. 2]
Discussion
Funkycoldribena said:
Any new vids of Nigel Farage laying into the EU mob? Really must be a case of "told you so" that cant be denied.Then again....
I was watching some the other day and in every one he hits the nail on the head and gets it spot on. I bet the likes of barruso and shcultz aren't smirking and sneering so much now.Mermaid said:
DJRC said:
.. You were told last year, repeatedly, that it was a race to the bottom and the Euro was most likely to form the bottom rung.
Agreed, but the Euro is seemingly stronger than anyone would expect with all the woes. Eurobonds soon? Regardless it will weaken a tad more, but I expect a "Northern Euro" will bounce back eventually.G8 announcements this weekend.
ks and just got weaker. It hasnt been strong for the last 12 months, its only "seemed" strong to those who wished/thought it should have been weaker according to their bias. All this was stated on here several times aswell.It will weaken more for the next 3 months at least.
Driller said:
DJRC said:
eh? You should have sold the fkers!! Wtf do you think you should have done with them??!! Its not frigging rocket science.
You know, you really come across as an arrogant tkers!! Wtf do you think you should have done with them??!! Its not frigging rocket science.t sometimes but then I guess you'd know that 
Explain this to me: I sell Euros and buy say Sterling. When I sell the Euros it is €1.15 to the £1.00.
I pay about 10% commission to change them into pounds. When the Euro rate had/has gone back up to say €1.25 to the £1.00 I change them back into Euros and pay another 10% commission.
In other words not a lot has changed and I've messed around a lot.
Now imagine that you guess the Euro is going to fall, you sell them, lose 10% commission and then nothing moves.
Now what the f
k would YOU do in that situation?This is why I hate all this playing with money bulls
t. There is no honour in this, no integrity.
And why buy or sell? You can just short them on the spreads.
What do honour and integrity have to do with making money? Ive warned you repeatedly, time and time again, over and over what would happen, how it would happen and why. It *would* be a race to the bottom. It "would* be the most vicious, unethical b
ds who benefitted and Britain *would* be in the one of the best positions to exploit the weakness of Europe if they took the option.DJRC said:
Mermaid said:
DJRC said:
.. You were told last year, repeatedly, that it was a race to the bottom and the Euro was most likely to form the bottom rung.
Agreed, but the Euro is seemingly stronger than anyone would expect with all the woes. Eurobonds soon? Regardless it will weaken a tad more, but I expect a "Northern Euro" will bounce back eventually.G8 announcements this weekend.
ks and just got weaker. It hasnt been strong for the last 12 months, its only "seemed" strong to those who wished/thought it should have been weaker according to their bias. All this was stated on here several times aswell.It will weaken more for the next 3 months at least.
I agree it has dropped from about 98p in late 2008 to 80p now, 19% down and in the 12 months by 9%.
Not about bias, about facts. The Euro is relatively well supported, whilst the cancer has been confirmed. Sterling weakness is something else.
How much more do you reckon it well weaken in the next 3 months?
Mermaid said:
DJRC said:
Mermaid said:
DJRC said:
.. You were told last year, repeatedly, that it was a race to the bottom and the Euro was most likely to form the bottom rung.
Agreed, but the Euro is seemingly stronger than anyone would expect with all the woes. Eurobonds soon? Regardless it will weaken a tad more, but I expect a "Northern Euro" will bounce back eventually.G8 announcements this weekend.
ks and just got weaker. It hasnt been strong for the last 12 months, its only "seemed" strong to those who wished/thought it should have been weaker according to their bias. All this was stated on here several times aswell.It will weaken more for the next 3 months at least.
I agree it has dropped from about 98p in late 2008 to 80p now, 19% down and in the 12 months by 9%.
Not about bias, about facts. The Euro is relatively well supported, whilst the cancer has been confirmed. Sterling weakness is something else.
How much more do you reckon it well weaken in the next 3 months?
DJRC is correct in his =predictions generally and has been suggesting the Euro collapse, and money men profits to be made, for some time. He is also correct that the least principled of the traders will generally make the most money. I would phrase the tone differently but he is substantially correct in the detail of what he says..
In the circumstances that, incompetent, greedy, self serving, EU politicians have reduced the EU to, with their mindless, stupidity and reckless wasting of investment, in defaulting countries, without addressing the massive insolvencies present within those economies, their madness will ensure misery, penury and wholesale tragedy for millions of individuals within the defaulting countries.
In such cases the weakest do suffer the most. The traders generally look after themselves. I do not like this but it us a fact.
With regard to the value of the Euro, once again I agree with DJRC, Despite all the waffle and cant that the EU leaders are propounded, daily, the Euro must be weakened by all these structural deficiencies steadily and inexorably. I would expect steady falls and renewed further falls as the reality of the Spanish, Portuguese and Italian positions come to light.
My real concern is when does the Euro become really unmanageable as a currency? With all these defaults coming and becoming more and more apparent daily. That is the real question.
Mermaid said:
Euro at 80p to the £, with all its woes, is relatively strong compared to sub 60p to the £ not that long ago (33% up) in the scheme of things.
I agree it has dropped from about 98p in late 2008 to 80p now, 19% down and in the 12 months by 9%.
Not about bias, about facts. The Euro is relatively well supported, whilst the cancer has been confirmed. Sterling weakness is something else.
How much more do you reckon it well weaken in the next 3 months?
To the pound, perhaps, but then the pound isn't exactly all that good at the moment either....I agree it has dropped from about 98p in late 2008 to 80p now, 19% down and in the 12 months by 9%.
Not about bias, about facts. The Euro is relatively well supported, whilst the cancer has been confirmed. Sterling weakness is something else.
How much more do you reckon it well weaken in the next 3 months?
Gary11 said:
wanna friend....buy a dog, the harsh world of buisness we live in.
I think the business world is farcical not harsh, everyone trying to be Top Monkey with the biggest, reddest arse. Don't need a friend, have a conscience is all and the principle that to earn money one should provide a useful service to society otherwise we are no better than the benefit scroungers.
I wholeheartedly resent being put in this situation because of the stupid, selfish actions of a few of said monkeys.
Driller said:
Gary11 said:
wanna friend....buy a dog, the harsh world of buisness we live in.
I think the business world is farcical not harsh, everyone trying to be Top Monkey with the biggest, reddest arse. Don't need a friend, have a conscience is all and the principle that to earn money one should provide a useful service to society otherwise we are no better than the benefit scroungers.
I wholeheartedly resent being put in this situation because of the stupid, selfish actions of a few of said monkeys.
Driller said:
Gary11 said:
wanna friend....buy a dog, the harsh world of buisness we live in.
I think the business world is farcical not harsh, everyone trying to be Top Monkey with the biggest, reddest arse. Don't need a friend, have a conscience is all and the principle that to earn money one should provide a useful service to society otherwise we are no better than the benefit scroungers.
I wholeheartedly resent being put in this situation because of the stupid, selfish actions of a few of said monkeys.
k about you 2000 yrs ago, 1900, 1800, 1700, 1600, 1500....300,200,100, 50, 10 yrs ago, etc, etc.Nothing has changed. NOTHING.
Humanity has no emotion when it comes to either making money or gaining power. It never has had in any society at any point in human history. Ever.
"The strong do as they can and the weak suffer what they must." Thucydides. He was Greek by the way.
DJRC said:
Driller said:
Gary11 said:
wanna friend....buy a dog, the harsh world of buisness we live in.
I think the business world is farcical not harsh, everyone trying to be Top Monkey with the biggest, reddest arse. Don't need a friend, have a conscience is all and the principle that to earn money one should provide a useful service to society otherwise we are no better than the benefit scroungers.
I wholeheartedly resent being put in this situation because of the stupid, selfish actions of a few of said monkeys.
k about you 2000 yrs ago, 1900, 1800, 1700, 1600, 1500....300,200,100, 50, 10 yrs ago, etc, etc.Nothing has changed. NOTHING.
Humanity has no emotion when it comes to either making money or gaining power. It never has had in any society at any point in human history. Ever.
"The strong do as they can and the weak suffer what they must." Thucydides. He was Greek by the way.
I agree in business focus is critical and benevolence can be seen as weakness. But I do think you are presenting a pretty ruthless edge.
Survival of the fittest is a self correcting system, if you're too soft then the strong will trample you, if you're too hard then you become a parasitic burden on humanity.
The banking crisis is a perfect example of people being too hard and thus becoming parasitic to the point where they have killed the host.
This is why we need a strong FSA to support those bankers who are helping society and ruthlessly crush those who seek to harm us through their selfish actions.
The banking crisis is a perfect example of people being too hard and thus becoming parasitic to the point where they have killed the host.
This is why we need a strong FSA to support those bankers who are helping society and ruthlessly crush those who seek to harm us through their selfish actions.
Tartan Pixie said:
Survival of the fittest is a self correcting system, if you're too soft then the strong will trample you, if you're too hard then you become a parasitic burden on humanity.
The banking crisis is a perfect example of people being too hard and thus becoming parasitic to the point where they have killed the host.
This is why we need a strong FSA to support those bankers who are helping society and ruthlessly crush those who seek to harm us through their selfish actions.
But surely by saying that survival of the fittest is self correcting and the financial system is a survival of the fittest situation, you then contradict yourself by saying it needs a strong FSA? I'd argue that the regulatory regime probably made the crisis worse, not better.The banking crisis is a perfect example of people being too hard and thus becoming parasitic to the point where they have killed the host.
This is why we need a strong FSA to support those bankers who are helping society and ruthlessly crush those who seek to harm us through their selfish actions.
It is worth noting hat we have and shall continue to print money to ensure our currency does not become too strong.
The consequence of this shall be that we end up owning a majority of our own sovereign debt, which will help to solve the problem and reset the economic situation.
Chin up.
The consequence of this shall be that we end up owning a majority of our own sovereign debt, which will help to solve the problem and reset the economic situation.
Chin up.
davepoth said:
But surely by saying that survival of the fittest is self correcting and the financial system is a survival of the fittest situation, you then contradict yourself by saying it needs a strong FSA? I'd argue that the regulatory regime probably made the crisis worse, not better.
So you're arguing that it's ok to let the predators run riot until the system crashes? Well if you thought 2008 was a good thing for finance then you're entitled to that opinion but I suspect a few people may disagree.I prefer to think of it like the predator prey curve. If you want to avoid boom and sudden horrible bust then sometimes you have to cull the predators. It's ruthless but better to kill off a few folk in the speculative/predatory part of banking than let them kill off large parts of our economy.
This ruthlessness has largely been missing from the FSA but, as anyone involved in countryside management will tell you, sometimes you need to cull to be kind and keep it all balanced.
Don't worry about those clunk ker-click noises in the background, it's just the noise of me loading the shotgun.
Edited by Tartan Pixie on Saturday 19th May 21:42
davepoth said:
Tartan Pixie said:
Survival of the fittest is a self correcting system, if you're too soft then the strong will trample you, if you're too hard then you become a parasitic burden on humanity.
The banking crisis is a perfect example of people being too hard and thus becoming parasitic to the point where they have killed the host.
This is why we need a strong FSA to support those bankers who are helping society and ruthlessly crush those who seek to harm us through their selfish actions.
But surely by saying that survival of the fittest is self correcting and the financial system is a survival of the fittest situation, you then contradict yourself by saying it needs a strong FSA? I'd argue that the regulatory regime probably made the crisis worse, not better.The banking crisis is a perfect example of people being too hard and thus becoming parasitic to the point where they have killed the host.
This is why we need a strong FSA to support those bankers who are helping society and ruthlessly crush those who seek to harm us through their selfish actions.
The regulators are absolutely useless. Stood idly by whilst the entire banking system imploded. We need self regulation and an end to the UK taxpayer and Government being unwilling patsies.
The Banks have to be responsible for each other with a central fund to prevent collapse. The current system is no better than the last regime. Self regulation and responsible lending with all the Banks sharing the risk has to be the way forward.
Tartan Pixie said:
So you're arguing that it's ok to let the predators run riot until the system crashes? Well if you thought 2008 was a good thing for finance then you're entitled to that opinion but I suspect a few people may disagree.
I prefer to think of it like the predator prey curve. If you want to avoid boom and sudden horrible bust then sometimes you have to cull the predators. It's ruthless but better to kill off a few folk in the speculative/predatory part of banking than let them kill off large parts of our economy.
This ruthlessness has largely been missing from the FSA but, as anyone involved in countryside management will tell you, sometimes you need to cull to be kind and keep it all balanced.
Don't worry about those clunk ker-click noises in the background, it's just the noise of me loading the shotgun.
What I'm thinking is that if there wasn't regulation and governments were strictly "hands off" the financial system, we'd see more banks failing. The poor banks, the ones that make bad decisions, would ignore things like debt/equity ratio and properly assessing risk, and fail quite quickly. The ones that realised that it was a good idea to do that stuff themselves would thrive but stay smaller.I prefer to think of it like the predator prey curve. If you want to avoid boom and sudden horrible bust then sometimes you have to cull the predators. It's ruthless but better to kill off a few folk in the speculative/predatory part of banking than let them kill off large parts of our economy.
This ruthlessness has largely been missing from the FSA but, as anyone involved in countryside management will tell you, sometimes you need to cull to be kind and keep it all balanced.
Don't worry about those clunk ker-click noises in the background, it's just the noise of me loading the shotgun.
In the current situation, the FSA and the other regulators tell the banks that "a debt/equity ratio of x is fine" and "We'll cover pretty much all of your depositors' losses if you cock everything up"; so the banks don't have to worry about that stuff themselves.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff