France seeks €300bn rescue fund for Europe

[Jesus Jones]

France heaped pressure on Gordon Brown last night by floating an ambitious plan for a €300 billion (£237 billion) bailout fund to rescue crippled banks across Europe.
As the world held its breath on the fate of America’s $700 billion bank bailout plan, President Sarkozy was seeking the backing of European leaders for his own lifeboat.

France seeks €300bn rescue fund for Europe - Times Online

[Norton]

President Sarkozy was seeking the backing of European leaders for his own lifeboat.

Think he's going to have a tough time making this happen. It is not the United States of Europe and unlike the US, each country has an independent bank. Getting all to cooperate on a unified "rescue fund" program will be next to impossible.

[lom]

It is not the United States of Europe and unlike the US, each country has an independent bank. Getting all to cooperate on a unified "rescue fund" program will be next to impossible.

There is the European Central Bank even though each county has it's own
central bank and I don't think it will be that hard for ECB to coordinate an action between it's member states.

Gordon Brown may be upset but England has no say since they are not in the Eurozone. Can't see why France is seeking Englands support for the rescue plan.

[bkkandrew]

As I stated on the other thread, UBS' losses alone would swallow most of that, so its a pointless plan that will not work.

[astasinim]

Can't see why France is seeking Englands support for the rescue plan.

England is still part of Europe, and its currency exchange rate governed by the ERM agreement. So we have just as bigger voice in Europe as anyone else.

[lom]

England is still part of Europe, and its currency exchange rate governed by the ERM agreement.

I thought England left the ERM long time ago ?

[astasinim]

I thought England left the ERM long time ago ?

Apologies. Just looked and your right, England left in 92. The only other reason I can think of, is the that England is still a player in Europe. If the Eurozone is bailed out, it will have a severe impact on other member states who arent in the zone. Then trade barriers would go up, further impacting on the problem, we would then end up in a situation like the great depression.

[bkkandrew]

^UK agreement required if EU funds are to be used in bailout.

[thehighlander959]

I notice its UK not England (UK = Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland) so whatever England says doesn,t really matter, its all four countries in the union who will decide.
I am sure there are a lot of people who don,t understand the geography and the make up of Great Britain and the United Kingdom.
England does nor decide on its own!!

[Butterfly]

For those in the EURO currency, there is only one central bank, the ECB, the former country central banks are just the "branch" of the ECB,

England is already doing its own bailout by punishing financial institutions and nationalizing them, a very good and healthy move. Those banks would have recovered eventually when the pricing of their assets had resumed, but a strong political message has to be sent to the industry and to the public so this kind of shit doesn't happen again.

[lom]

UK agreement required if EU funds are to be used in bailout.

Unlikely that EU funds will be used.
The ECB has it's own assets, coming from the national central banks, totally separated from the EU budget.

So a bailout by the ECB should only cover those countries who are Eurozone members.
They are the ones who funded the ECB so don't expect ECB to help
Britain, Sweden, Denmark or any of the new EU countries who currently are in
ERM waiting for Eurozone membership.

[mellow]

I thought this was all an American problem, and that we are now getting what is due to us. I guess you don't all have your shit together, as you all claim you do.

[astasinim]

^
Who`s all?

[bkkandrew]

UK agreement required if EU funds are to be used in bailout.

Unlikely that EU funds will be used.
The ECB has it's own assets, coming from the national central banks, totally separated from the EU budget.

So a bailout by the ECB should only cover those countries who are Eurozone members.
They are the ones who funded the ECB so don't expect ECB to help
Britain, Sweden, Denmark or any of the new EU countries who currently are in
ERM waiting for Eurozone membership.

There is no ERM. It disappeared at the launch of the single currency. As previously stated on this thread, the UK was ejected from the ERM in 1992. Try and catch up.

[bkkandrew]

UK agreement required if EU funds are to be used in bailout.

Unlikely that EU funds will be used.
The ECB has it's own assets, coming from the national central banks, totally separated from the EU budget.

So a bailout by the ECB should only cover those countries who are Eurozone members.

Incorrect, you are confusing ECB injections of liquidity (that have happened numerous times thus far in the crunch) and the current French proposal for EU bailout, which would involve purchase of bad assets.

[sabang]

Individual countries can organise their own bailouts if they wish, but I don't see why this should involve EU funds.

Anyway Germany is opposed to it, the UK sceptical. I doubt it will get off the ground.

[lom]

There is no ERM. It disappeared at the launch of the single currency. As previously stated on this thread, the UK was ejected from the ERM in 1992. Try and catch up.

Of course there is.
Surprising that an economic expert like you don't know that..
European Exchange Rate Mechanism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[bkkandrew]

^And if you had bothered reading the link you posted, you would have seen this in the first paragraph:

Subsequent exchange rate agreements made with countries wishing to join the Eurozone are known as ERM II.

ERM II is entirely different from the ERM, which ceased in 1999.

[lom]

^ Of course I know that the current ERM is version 2.

or any of the new EU countries who currently are in ERM waiting for Eurozone membership.

They can't possibly be in ERM I , since that is discontinued.
What is it you don't understand , twat ?

[bkkandrew]

^

Here:

https://teakdoor.com/issues/36539-fra...tml#post786000

You claimed that Britain was Britain was in the ERM waiting for Eurozone membership. That's what I don't understand. Perhaps you would explain.

[lom]

Yes, I listed 3 old EU members who are not in the Eurozone.
None of them are in the ERM yet.
(Sweden and Denmark must eventually join the Eurozone via ERM.
Britain is exempted from it.)

I also mentioned new EU members who are in the ERM waiting to become Eurozone members.

None of these 2 groups are entitled to get help from the ECB since they have not contributed to the ECB.

[bkkandrew]

^So, in summary, you were incorrect about which countries were in the ERM II and wrong about whether the ERM still existed.

With that in mind, could you confirm why Sweden and Denmark must eventually join the Eurozone via ERM? Who is compelling them? What is the compulsary join date?

[bkkandrew]

None of these 2 groups are entitled to get help from the ECB since they have not contributed to the ECB.

I think that you are confused, once again.

The Paris summit today is to discuss the current troubles. The French proposal (attacked already by UK and Germany) is for a bailout by EU taxpayers - i.e. from the EU budget. This is completely different from liquidity injections (that have happened on numerous occasions thus far) into the European banking system (including UK banks) from the ECB.

[lom]

^So, in summary, you were incorrect about which countries were in the ERM II and wrong about whether the ERM still existed.

No I wasn't.
Not being a native English speaker but I don't believe that the "who currently are in
ERM" can point behind the preceding "or".

With that in mind, could you confirm why Sweden and Denmark must eventually join the Eurozone via ERM? Who is compelling them? What is the compulsary join date?

Sweden and Denmark must join the Eurozone / convert their currency to Euro because it was prerequisite for their EU membership, part of the contract.

Sweden was allowed to postpone joining ERM basically because it was known that they wouldn't pass the economical requirements at that time.

Denmark, when becoming a EU member, was allowed to wait for a peoples referendum to decide the time for the conversion.
They have had 2 of them if I remember correct and both times the nay-sayers won with just a few percent.

I don't know when the time is running out for these 2 and if there is any strong
pressure on them to do it "real soon now".
But I know that they can't get away with it forever since it is part of the EU membership requirement.

[DrAndy]

oh dear, another argument by our financial "expert"

boring and tedious, splitting hairs and knowing everything, and then being patronising to boot!

He may be right, but at what cost?

this proves him right, as predicted in february

Study traces origins of syphilis in Europe to New World