• subOrange@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    As other might have said the same here and some other places: if they are serious about an unified economy they shouldn’t need their own currency that only benefit themselves directly if it goes stronger.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      It also only hurts them directly if it goes weaker though right? From an outside perspective I would understand them moving to the Euro just to simplify things, but I also think being a part of the EU has more effects than being a unified economy. It helps with travel, that’s good. But it also makes a country dependent and can void the entire principle of laws fairly easily.

      Hypothetical, let’s say a country like Hungary isn’t following the civil rights laws required to be part of the European Union. Does the EU try to squeeze them economically to make them act in a manner the rest of the Union demands, or do they settle and say, well they are their own country and we have no say there, so our rules aren’t really laws, but mere suggestions. Where do these suggestions draw hard lines, and if you hit a hard line what stops the country from printing their own currency back out and just telling the EU to fuck off. Does the EU not allow them to do so because their currency would thereby be unbalanced? Or do they allow them to under the condition they trade all their currency out somehow?

      Some things could get dicey I imagine.