Euro has many cons

All EU's fundamentals are fundamentally wrong. EU's fundamentals are free movement and common currency. There is little benefit and a lot more cost. EU is based on propaganda. They deceive people, hide the real truth and instead make their own "truth" which of course is big lies. NWO's propaganda presents EU and Eurozone as wonderful, while in reality they are horrible for most countries.

In most things, there are advantages and disadvantages, benefits and costs. People should weigh very carefully the pros and cons of doing something. For most countries, participation in EU has a lot more disadvantages than advantages. Participation in Eurozone, generally adds more harm. So most countries get harmed if they participate in EU and get harmed even more if they participate in Eurozone.

There are mainly two benefits from common currency; a) simpler currency exchange system and easier transactions b) no risks from exchange rate fluctuations. The benefits are only for the countries that have common currency. In Eurozone, there are twenty countries while in the world there are approximately two hundred countries. The benefits are only for transactions among the twenty countries.

With euro, there are no benefits in the transactions of the Eurozone countries with the rest of EU and the rest of the world. Obviously there are no benefits for the countries that are not in the monetary union. Regarding exchange rate risk, there are financial instruments, forward contracts, swaps, futures, options. So the benefits are very limited and small, only the transactions among the twenty countries become simpler.

There are many disadvantages though, as it will be explained that far outweigh the advantages. On the other hand, national common currency has no disadvantages and it is much much easier to establish. Countries do not have to be in any Union. All countries in the world could have national common currency quite easily. The currency exchange system will become simpler and transactions easier among all countries, not just among a few.

There are three alternatives; a) national currency b) national common currency c) common currency. When we weigh pros and cons, advantages and disadvantages, the best alternative is national common currency. It does make the currency exchange system much simpler and transactions easier. But countries can have their own monetary policy, print their own money and affect the exchange rate of their currency.

With national common currency, we get the best from both worlds. Also it is something that all countries in the world can establish relatively easily, without having to be part of a Union. Actually, in a few months there could be national common currencies all over the world. All is needed is decision to do so. The rest of the process is quite easy. AntiNWO can assist any country regarding that.

Common currency has many disadvantages. Countries that make the huge mistake to join Eurozone, abolish their right to have monetary policy and print their own currency. Monetary policy is a very useful tool. Countries that have national currency can set interest rates, determine money supply and either stimulate or dampen the economy, according to the circumstances.

Monetary policy is related to affecting currency exchange rate. Technically, a country that prints its own currency, can never go bankrupt. It just prints money. This has negative effects but still, a country can make payments and will not go bankrupt. There will be another article on monetary policy and how the exchange rate is set. This might be too technical but nevertheless some readers may be interested.

Eurozone has monetary policy but it is unsuitable for most countries because there are different conditions in every country. Some countries may need increase in interest rates while others may need decrease. Some may require more money supply while others may require less. Some countries may need lowering of exchange rate while others may need the opposite.

Participation in EU is something horrible for countries with lower competitiveness because it is very harmful. If a country makes a second big mistake to join Eurozone, harm will get bigger because euro will make price level higher. So Eurozone is more harm, added to the harm already caused by participating in EU. Exchange rate is one important factor affecting price level but it is not the only one.

In Eurozone, countries have the same currency but different price levels. Even in the same country, different areas can have difference in prices. These are caused often by the differences in real estate prices. Rent and sale prices are determined by demand and supply. If for whatever reasons the demand is high and the supply not high enough, rent and real estate prices go up.

This will bring up all other prices. Rents and sale prices of stores, offices, warehouses will bring up the costs of products and services and this will increase prices. Workers will require higher salaries, if they will have to pay higher rents or higher prices for homes and generally higher prices for products and services. Although exchange rate in not the only factor affecting price level, it is probably the main one.

Euro can be viewed as the weighted average of the national currencies it replaced. It is certain that countries with weaker currencies have a price level increase when they enter Eurozone. Price level increase will lower their competitiveness and cause additional harm to that from EU participation. Generally, less economically advanced countries that have lower per capita income have weaker currencies.

Countries with lower competitiveness are harmed a lot by participating in damned EU. Free movement of products and services is fundamentally wrong because it requires participating countries to have roughly equal competitiveness. Free movement of people is fundamentally wrong because it requires roughly the same per capita income. Obviously non of these exist in the colossal disaster called EU.

Generally, countries with lower productivity have lower competitiveness. Countries that are less advanced and have lower per capita income, have lower productivity. It is possible, some countries to have high per capita income, even if they are not economically advanced, if they have abundance of natural resources, like oil for instance.

There are two factors that mainly affect competitiveness, productivity and price level. High productivity and low price level have a positive effect on competitiveness. Low productivity and high price level have a negative effect on competitiveness. It is possible one country to be less productive and more competitive than another. This can only happen, if the price level difference is big enough.

Generally, in Europe, this does not happen. There are not so big price level differences to outweigh the productivity differences. But lower price levels can make smaller the competitiveness gap caused by productivity differences. Suppose a country with low productivity and low price level makes the huge mistake to join damned EU.

Because it has low price level, the harm by joining EU is smaller. If it adopts euro, the harm becomes much bigger. We need to clarify harm. It could be decrease in per capita income or smaller increase than the one it would be otherwise. So a country may still have a positive growth rate but much lower than otherwise. NWO's charlatans deceive people and present participation in EU as positive because people do not know what the acceptable growth rate for their country is.

Price level deception   Purchasing power parity   Price level consequences   EU-euro are disastrous   Convergence deception   Productivity deception   Two convergences   Real convergence   Growth rates deception   More deception   Advantage deception   EU is a multi-deception   Free movement deception   Unnecessary packaging 1   Unnecessary packaging 2