I received a very thoughtful response from Rodney Willett of Team UK which I am re-blogging below:
My first thought is that you are right in saying that to be effective the ECB should, in partnership with the national central banks, have their powers extended BUT that is tantamount to creating a unified nation without having a plebiscite. That, in my opinion, could easily lead to violence as passions flare on both sides of the north/south divide. I really do feel that there has to be a period of retrenchment and time to allow the people of Europe to determine their own future rather than having matter stuffed down their throats by (frankly) dishonest politicians. Get the politics right and a united currency follows – as in the US.
There is a clear need for living within one’s means. In many ways that is best achieved by lowering taxes but that can be done only if people can be weaned off the nanny state which has taught them that they have a right to everything they need (not want, a very different thing) with no effort on their part.
For any nation to live within its means it must export goods and services valued at no less than the goods and services it imports. That may mean that here, in the UK, we will have to look towards providing more for ourselves including power and food. Too big a subject for here.
Within the nation people have to learn to live within their means – a concept that surely requires no elaboration.
Still within the nation we need to see more people actively employed in doing those things that need to be done here rather than imported, in looking after our infrastructure (horrid word but you know what I mean) and caring for those of our population unable to care for themselves. This is an area where the UK government could be acting with a positive result. If all the money poured into QE had, instead, been used to ensure that everything used by any state owned or controlled business was home produced wherever possible and that there were a multitude of small (and therefore quickly planned and started) initiatives to make the place better and cleaner plus a change in the way we care for people much could have been done by now.
Here I know we do not agree. My problem with the centralist view is that macro initiatives carry a huge amount of inertia that has to be overcome before any action occurs whereas micro initiatives can be fleet of foot and in there doing before there is time for circumstances to change and invalidate any proposal (either in part or in whole).
Why don’t you share your views, as well?