Comments by enriquecost

I am from the E.U. secret service, hehe.

There are many indicators which lead us to believe the U.K. will join the Eurozone, and the European Federation, after the next Elections:

a) The national identification code of British Euro notes is J, checksum 7.

b) The printer identification code for British Euro notes is the Bank of England, code A.

c) In the capital subscription of the ECB, Britain has paid already 58,580,453 €. When the rest is paid, the U.K. will have 14.51% of the ECB´s capital subscription, second in the Eurozone after Germany´s 18.93%.

That is why the Government of Spain (8.30% of ECB´s capital), which now can boast a permanent seat in the Executive Board of the ECB, has accepted to lose its seat...with Britain taking it.

d) The European Banking Authority (EBA), a regulatory agency of the Europeana Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), which is a branch of the ECB, established its headquarters in London.

e) The U.K. is part of the E.U., and an In-Out Referendum will be the first step to guarantee Britain´s place in the Executive Board of the ECB, an institution which already cooperates at an impressive scale with the British financial system.

The United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.) offer an example to the E.U. about a federal structucture with their "Spain" (Dubai) and their "Germany" (Abu Dhabi) keeping enough autonomy and personality.
Malaysia also can offer an idea that could be applied, keeping different kingdoms inside the Federation. Both the King of Spain, and the President of France could be also the head of the Union. When the Chief of State is a Monarch (Netherlands, Spain, Luxemburg, Belgium...) it becomes "de facto" a 5-year term "Emperor" of Europe.

George Bush was also a CIA official, and was also part of the plutocracy. In fact, as Kim Sung, George W. Bush was the President of the U.S. too. A democracy of 313 million people, and for 16 years a father and his son became Presidents...

I would add that Spain´s exports to U.K. (non-Euro) increased from $133 million surplus in 2007 to $708 million surplus in 2010...So, Spain´s competitiveness has increased INSIDE the Eurozone, while Britain´s has decreased outside. In fact, there has been a clear substitution of imports in Spain and Portugal. Before the Euro, the U.K. was the 2nd and 3rd trade partner of Portugal and Spain....Now it is 4rd and 5th....

Japan, the U.S., S.Korea and the U.K. are member states of the OECD, so when teh OECD recommenda Germany and the Netherlands to "push-up costs" they just want to get rid of a competitor to their own companies. So, don´t listen to siren songs.

Several German Lander are still uncompetitive, and with a low R&D spending. R&D investment in the Eurozone is still half the Japanese or S.Korean average. Nokia is in a bad shape, even if still dominates several areas. There are few software companies in Western Europe even if the WWW was born at CERN, Skype (Sweden), Angry Birds (Finland), SAP (Germany)...Even Russia is being more active with Yandex (search engine), Kaspersky Lab., mail.ru, DST (Digital Sky Technologies), VK (Vkontakte)

Competitors will not hesitate to behead you at any given opportunity. Last year, it was forecasted that Germany´s GDP would grow just 0.5% in 2011 while Japan´s would grow 2%...It was before the earthquake and tsunami. After them, Germany´s GDP increased 3% while Japan´s fell -0.5%. The truth is that Germany supplied some of the markets which were left by the Japanese.

Suggesting that Germany should decide to become less competitive is ridiculous, above all after the hard times that German citizens had to live after Reunfication and as a consequence of Agenda 2010. I am from Spain, and in my opinion, Europe needs an even more competitive Germany. Germany still has to undertake several reforms to make its legislation more attractive to innovation and more produtive. So, they cannot fall to sleep.

The competitors of Germany are not withing the European Union but far away, in Asia (Japan, China, S.Korea) and America (U.S.) Any suggestion to make Germany less competitive is a European suicide. Meanwhile, a competitive Germany is an stimulous for change in the rest of Europe.

Yes, it is Brazil´s fault winning five World Cups.
Brazil has been very sucessful on historical grounds, and that is why it has attracted 6 million immigrants, and has expanded far beyond the Tordesillas Treaty limits at the expense of other territories, until the XX Century. Rio Grande do Sul, Acre, Roraima...
While the lands of the former Spanish Emire in the Americas are now divided in 18 different countries, and have lost 2 million sq. Kms. since Independence, Brazil has enlarged half a million sq. Kms. with an increasing population.
Of course, with a better management, Brazil would be now the 4th industrial power in the World, instead of the 6th. And income per head would be at least as high as in Portugal ($ 24,000) instead of $11,000....
But the result is not a failure but an incomplete success...

Most of those countries have a very small population. Brasilia (3 million people), for example, has an income per head which is higher than any of them.

Brazil has to continue leading the process of Latinamerican economic integration, which has been halted by Paraguay during the last years as it has avoided the integration of Venezuela (30 million people, $300 bn. economy) That has allowed the U.S. led Pacific project to go ahead with Mexico-Colombia-Peru-Chile.

Paraguay is working against South America in a very, very dangerous way. It is really sad what such an small economy has done against South America.

Acording to the "Latinobarometro" published by "The Economist" a majority of Venezuelans consider their country one of the most democratic in the Americas.

Meanwhile, the U.S. and the U.K. support many Dictatoships: Saudi Arabia, U.A.E., Singapore, Kuwait, Baharein, Jordan...

Cardozo and Lula improved the base for Brazilian growth, and at a time when there was capital available looking for new places to invest. A great part of that capital arrived from Europe. In fact, Europe has invested in Brazil three times more than the U.S. and Japan combined according to FT....Now, Europeans need to repatriate that money back to the European Continent. So, the Brazilian Government needs to establish the base for the next step of development. Much was done during the last decade:
1. Brazil enjoys $350 bn. in foreign currency reserves.
2. Inflation is low.
3. Interest rates are low.
4. R&D is increasing.
Brazil, a nation of 200 million people, 5th by population in the World, 5th by territory, and 6th by GDP, is an increasingly large market which already has surpassed the U.K. So, the Brazilian Government has to undertake new reforms to guarantee that native Brazilian capital is used to internal development instead of going out to the North.

The integration of Western Europe with Russia will increase during the next decade.

Nord Stream is already working. South Stream´s gas pipeline is viable while Nabucco doesn´t have any future without Iran as there is no gas to fill it. Nabucco is a very expensive idea on the European economy right now, as it is not based on economics but on U.S. politics.

Renault is buying the main Russian automaker, Autovaz.

So, we are heading to a European Gas and Steel Community (EGSC) between Russia and the European Union (E.U.), especially with Germany.

The E.U. and Russia are complementary, and our exchange is increasing at a high speed (in fact the Sapsan speed trains are built by Siemens) In three years, Russia will be the main car market of Europe. The E.G.S.C. will be a reality in five years.

At the same time, the Eurasian Union guarantees Europe and China an stable Eurasian link, so our Trade will increase. Certainly, that is the main reason why the U.S. (and the U.K.) are against the E.G.S.C. between the E.U. and Russia, as the "Continental" concept leaves them away as an island apart from the Eurasian landmass. America uses NATO for its own, private, geopolitical idea, which is "Maritime" and contradictory to Eurasian Trade and economic integration. America feels they can be left out of the Eurasian landmass. That is why they promote APEC as an alternative (which leaves the European Union apart)

It is essential for Europe to continue building our Common Market (E.G.S.C.) with the Russian Federation, which apart from a large market (6th in the World already) is our link to China. Merkel knows it. Hollande Knows it. Monti knows it. There is not alternative if we want Europe to play its role in the World stage. The Eurasian (Continental) concept keep Europe in the game. The Pacific (Maritime) concept leaves Europe apart. So the highway is clear for Europeans: deeper integration, including Russia (which is the largest and most poplated European country)

Before many were in other social networks like "Myspace"...but switched to "Facebook". Any day, consumers will be bored of facebook and will look for another new social network fad.

Facebook is a "pyramidal scheme", a Ponzi scheme.

The value of every new consumer is lower, but once its number stop increasing, the result will be a loss.

Facebook is a fad. Its technology is so innovative that cannot be matched? Has it enough patents to protect it. If not, in a decade there will be a dozen "facebooks" more.

In Western Europe, expectations for global business conditions to improve have had the best evolution from Oct. 2011 to Apr. 2012...and in spite of the current recession, 11% of Western European companies are thinking about hiring new employees.

Slavery was a very important part of trade, but also Africans took as slaves hundreds of thousands of Europeans for centuries. For centuries slavery was something usual.

And about the Inca (or the Aztec), the Spanish conquistadors won because they liberated the People from Tyranny. That is why millions of Natives supported the Spanish rule. Even if, it is true, Spanish conquistadors also married to the daughters of the Aztec and Inca rulers....So, now the descendants of Moctezuma and the Inca rulers are the same as the descendants of Cortes and Pizarro. That is the melting pot.

That was why so many millions of Germans emigrated during the last centuries, not just to the U.S., Russia and Brazil, but also to Argentina, Canada, Chile, Venezuela etc.

1. Industrial sector. It depends about what region of Southern Europe and what region of Northern Europe we are talking about. Northern Italy (Milan, Turin) for example is more industrialized than most of Northern Europe, and that is the reason why its income per head is among the highest in Europe. In Spain too there are highly industrialized regions.

At the same time, also some regions in "Northern Europe" are based on Agricultural development. So, it is not accurate talking just about "Northern industrial" and "Southern tourism".

2. Colonial expansion could take place thanks to abundant capital resources during the XIV Century in Spain and Portugal. Portugal in fact had developed trade routes from Europe to China (Macau, Goa, Cape Verde, Madeira...) In Spain, the Kingdom of Castile had ended the "Reconquest" of the Peninsula so it was plenty of resources to undertake the invasion of the Americas and Philipines. Without capital resources it wouldn´t have been possible. In fact, Spanish territorial expansion continued until the end of the XVIII Century (California, Texas, Equatorial Guinea, Western Sahara...)

Spain was wealthier than most of Northern Europe until the Spanish Cvil War (1936-39) and the post-War World embargo (1945-56)

According to Lester Thurow in his book "Head to head", Spain was among the top wealthiest nations in 1870, above Norway and Sweden, and at a similar level as Germany (by then Argentina was wealthier than Germany too)

Portugal also was for centuries wealthier than most of Northern Europe. That is why they could colonize and keep the military defense of Brazil (among other colonies)