4 ms·
<< Its my beliefe that if debt should be assumed commonly, it will break up the EU because no voters in any country would agree to this. >> But that's exactly
by kanamekun 11y ago
<< Its my beliefe that if debt should be assumed commonly, it will break up the EU because no voters in any country would agree to this. >>
But that's exactly what happened in the early days of the founding of the US, when Alexander Hamilton negotiated the Funding Act of 1790: "The Funding Act authorized the federal government to receive certificates of state war-incurred debts and to issue federal securities in exchange."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_Act_of_1790 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_Act_of_1790
Without the Funding Act, the state governments would've defaulted on their Revolutionary War debt. By assuming the debt of the states, the US greatly strengthened their collective borrowing ability and also brought the states closer together into the union.
- nickik 11y agoIf you WANT a "United State of Europe" then yes, common debt makes sence. But in that case all nations lose their sovereignty and absolutly no nation in the EU has voted on this, and not a single one would agree to this. I, for one, am against a United States of Europe and theirfore Im against common debt. If we want to attempted such a project we should start by democratically asking people if they want it, not just imposing it. That EU doing this now would essentially be taking away sovereignty in a undemocratic way, and theirfore it would be tyranny.