The 1992 crisis proved that the existing system was unstable. Not moving forward to the euro would have set up Europe for even more disruptive crises.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Europe must dissipate any doubts over the euro, affirm that the euro is an irreversible project and act in consequence.
There was a real fear that a euro-zone bank might fail, that we'd have a sovereign debt problem in one of the larger European economies. That's dissipated, thanks largely to the action of the European Central Bank.
The Europeans governments have massively changed the landscape in Europe. There is no doubt about it. They have put together the European Financial Stability Fund. They have discussed and approved the European Stability Mechanism.
If the euro becomes a factor promoting Europe's drifting apart, then the foundation of the European project is destroyed.
I had the belief that many troubles you could observe on the European continent were due to politicians not understanding economic phenomena. Even if they had good intentions, they didn't have the skills to solve problems.
The experience of the '90s, whether it's the '94 peso crisis or the '97 crisis in Asia, the '98 crisis, even the 2001 crisis, is that we recovered pretty readily. There wasn't great consequence.
I think as a business it would be amazing if the euro was to collapse, but financially and economically I think that would be a bit of a tsunami for everybody to cope with.
Fundamental systemic crises are often associated with the decline of the dominant imperial power and its increasing inability to sustain the system over which it had previously presided. The profound instability of the interwar period owed much to Britain's inability to maintain its role.
There is no better protection against the euro crisis than successful structural reforms in southern Europe.
Austerity need not be Europe's fate.
No opposing quotes found.