3 ms·
Not the OP, but I think the printing money in response to slow economy is what they are referring to. The U.S. Federal Reserve certainly did so as well, but th
by rossdavidh 6y ago
Not the OP, but I think the printing money in response to slow economy is what they are referring to. The U.S. Federal Reserve certainly did so as well, but the point is if the Euro is willing to tolerate (or even encourage) extremely low or even negative interest rates in response to a slowdown (unlike, say, gold, which has no central bank), then it is not much different than the dollar in that respect. Perhaps no worse, but also not really better, and so not much reason to switch from the status quo.
- nolok 6y agoI am not saying it is a reason to switch, I don't think it is, I'm just answering thos specific points. "Stability, predictable" is the euro's mantra, literally the only thing they follow is do whatever is needed to keep inflation at 2%, period. And then the specific line from parent I answered to > "The yuan, euro and pound all have a history of fiddling whenever it suits the government of the day" This is absolutely not true for the euro. I wish it was a bit more.
- woodpanel 6y agoThis is absolutely not true for the euro It is indeed true. The ECU was a basket of the currencies of the European Community member states, which in it were tied at a fixed rate (The ECU later on was converted 1:1 into euros as were the nations currencies exchange rates). That fixture already was enough 'fiddling' to enable speculators to "break The Bank Of England".
- oblio 6y ago? What does the mechanism used to create an entirely new currency by converting old currencies to it have to do with the day to day operation of the Euro after its creation? The € has about as much government intervention as the $ has. I'd be glad if someone could prove me wrong.