Not all 17 million Leave voters can possibly be racist northern pensioners without an O level to the
Comments
-
Surrey Commuter wrote:Moontrane wrote:Pls help me out: what does an "O level" mean? :?:
A much harder version of a GCSE
Thanks, I think I'm getting it.Infinite diversity, infinte variations0 -
-
Moontrane wrote:
In this case American education system. What country are you in and we will give you an equivalent0 -
NorvernRob wrote:verylonglegs wrote:NorvernRob wrote:And I thought that no way could 16.4 million people in this country be intolerant, ignorant, pompous, arrogant up-their-own arsehole dickheads. Then they lost the Brexit vote and have been proving me wrong ever since.
Happy to be intolerant of racists all day long. I woke up on the 24th to find I was on an island riddled with narrow-minded fuckwits. What do you reckon...coincidence or related to the referendum?
http://www.edp24.co.uk/news/shop_owner_ ... _1_4608759
What has that person got to do with me? Are all Muslims terrorists? You're suggesting the same thing with Leave voters.
I voted leave for several reasons. The EU is a shambles. The Euro isn't working for many countries. The Southern European countries are farked. Greece are going to need another massive bailout soon, Italy are on the verge of bankruptcy, Spain are skint with massive youth unemployment. France aren't much better off. The UK doesn't need to keep pouring money in.
There was always going to be some uncertainty in the economy after a Leave vote, but the government have f*cked that up too through sheer arrogance again because they never actually thought that Leave would win.
And yes, another reason is mass immigration. I see the effects of it every day - do you? House prices through the floor, all available housing bought cheaply by landlords who then rent them out to 3 or 4 families in a single house. Schools are full, people can't even get their third choice never mind their first. I know this because my wife is head of the foundation stage at the school in the area I work too. 40% of her school either don't speak English or are learning as a second language. There's nothing wrong with that if the infastructure is in place to deal with it, but it isn't. Families (from all backgrounds) are telling her they can't keep bringing the kids because they have to get 3 buses every morning, but there's nothing the school can do so some kids end up missing out because of poor attendance.
It's got nothing to do with cuts btw, another school was built in the area less than 5 years ago but it isn't enough.
She's a typical vegetarian, people loving, dedicated, highly educated teacher (degree + masters in child psychology), but under your assumption she's a narrow minded fuckwit too.
I refer back to my point about ignorant dickheads.
The EU is not in a shambles and we trickle money in.
The economy had a massive shock - the govt has kept the banks afloat and the economy functioning. What more would you want them to do?
Brexit will move us into recession end then permanently reduce our long term rate of economic growth. This will result in govt having less money. Sorry to say that public services are only going to get relatively worse.
No reason why you would believe what I have written but say you had a crystal ball and knew I was right - would you still have voted out?0 -
The government are making the current economic problems worse than they need to be because of a) turmoil and infighting which is probably unavoidable due to the circumstances but more importantly b) because neither side can admit that they exaggerated talk of the impending apocalypse and say the right things to give the markets some confidence or reassurance.
Although some measures have been taken with the banks, nothing has been done to give hope or confidence, which is what the markets really need. Whether they believe it or not, the politicians need to start talking up the outcome and telling is that , yes it will be a challenge to navigate the course chosen but there is every reason to believe that things will be OK. By continuing to talk doom and gloom, they are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.0 -
DeVlaeminck wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Those who campaigned for leave on the same topics as those on the far right would do better to explain the difference between their stance and those on the far right.
That's more the issue. If the far right have hijacked the immigration debate, and they have, it's up to those who campaigned on it to show that it doesn't need to be that way.
It's true that the chattering classes can't separate a concern over sustained record levels of immigration with the kind of views espoused by the BNP but I would suggest that it is more up to them to address that shortcoming rather than it being the duty of the rest of us to go over the arguments again.
i think the people who want to leave and have led at the very least, to a perception that the UK isnt a welcoming place for migrants (fire bomb attack on a Polish family in Plymouth last week FFS) should explain where we are going to get skilled and unskilled workers from?
i had no idea how many EU and non EU Doctors, Nurses, Physio's HCA's Cooks etc work in our Hospitals and its scary to think that if they start to return to eurozone land and/or we stop being the place to go to, what are we going to do?0 -
It's more than that, the people who are in charge need to explain that we will absolutely not be closing our borders. That we will continue to accept immigration and that will mean both EU and non EU nationals. They need to be clear in that message. And if that is political suicide and/or has a real impact on bregret then so be it. Because, rhetoric aside, no promise was ever made to close our borders and those who believe that to be the case need to be told in no uncertain terms that it is not going to happen.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
apreading wrote:The government are making the current economic problems worse than they need to be because of a) turmoil and infighting which is probably unavoidable due to the circumstances but more importantly b) because neither side can admit that they exaggerated talk of the impending apocalypse and say the right things to give the markets some confidence or reassurance.
Although some measures have been taken with the banks, nothing has been done to give hope or confidence, which is what the markets really need. Whether they believe it or not, the politicians need to start talking up the outcome and telling is that , yes it will be a challenge to navigate the course chosen but there is every reason to believe that things will be OK. By continuing to talk doom and gloom, they are creating a self-fulfilling prophecy.
In cycling terms if a GC contender went mad and opted to leave the peloton and ride solo. Would you bet on him to win? If his DS went on TV and assured you that it was all would be fine would you rush down Ladbrokes?
In economic terms free trade is good and uncertainty is bad. There is nothing that anybody can say that will persuade investors (in markets and industries) that all is well.
You underestimate the utter stupidity of what we have done and overestimate the power of optimism.
The best we can do is accept where we are and make the most of a bad situation.0 -
Hi, well for what its worth, anybody who thinks the EU is not not a shambles is kidding themselves! they fiddled the books to get Greece in, which has put the poor Greeks in a terrible postion! Spain has cronic youth unemployment and the euro has been a unmitigated disaster across the board. To go with this we hear the aurgument from the remainers of changing the EU from the inside, well i dont believe they want to change. what we voted for in the 70`s was the single market, if it had stopped there it would of been fine, but it has not and was never going to. I have lived in both Germany and France and love Europe but the EU is a doomed project and we will in time be better off out of it in my view! but only time will tell.0
-
Is there anywhere I can look to determine how much worse/better off Greece or Spain would be without the EU?My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
spatt77 wrote:Hi, well for what its worth, anybody who thinks the EU is not not a shambles is kidding themselves! they fiddled the books to get Greece in, which has put the poor Greeks in a terrible postion! Spain has cronic youth unemployment and the euro has been a unmitigated disaster across the board. To go with this we hear the aurgument from the remainers of changing the EU from the inside, well i dont believe they want to change. what we voted for in the 70`s was the single market, if it had stopped there it would have been fine, but it has not and was never going to. I have lived in both Germany and France and love Europe but the EU is a doomed project and we will in time be better off out of it in my view! but only time will tell.
The books were not fiddled to get Greece into the EU.
Why is chronic youth unemployment in Spain due to EU membership.
The Euro has not been an unmitigated disaster across the board in any case has nothing to do with our membership of the EU.
Why do you think the EU is a doomed project?
Over what time frame do you think you will be proved right - ie years or decades?0 -
bendertherobot wrote:Is there anywhere I can look to determine how much worse/better off Greece or Spain would be without the EU?
I will have a look - not easy to isolate different factors but best bet probably to find out long term growth rates0 -
Well, there were a number of rules regarding GDP and other financial rules that were changed to accommodate Greece, regarding Spain, they never actually had chronic unemployment until recently and my Spanish friends tell me that this kinda came about after the euro came in. Time frame wise i think in 5 to 8 years we can look back at this and decide if this has been a good thing or not. it sounds like you`ve lost out personally on the U.K pulling out surrey commuter?0
-
spatt77 wrote:Well, there were a number of rules regarding GDP and other financial rules that were changed to accommodate Greece, regarding Spain, they never actually had chronic unemployment until recently and my Spanish friends tell me that this kinda came about after the euro came in. Time frame wise i think in 5 to 8 years we can look back at this and decide if this has been a good thing or not. it sounds like you`ve lost out personally on the U.K pulling out surrey commuter?
Not lost out at all. Short term I am fine as UK Co I work for the profits go up 1.5% for every 1% the £ drops against the $. My team budget is 30% in $ so is getting easier and another 40% is in £ but selling to people outside the UK. Also planning some building work and architect tells me that more builders are available so will get cheaper. Thanks for asking though.
Regarding Greece you are confusing Euro eith EU. Somebody needs to check long term Spanish unemployment rather than relying on what your friends kinda think.
After the last recession it took us 5-6 years to get back to where we were before. So let's assume the same again then our economy has to achieve growth above our long-term growth rate to get to where would have been without inflicting a recession on ourselves. I think you are looking at nearer 20 years. And that is assuming you turbo charge our economy by leaving the world's largest free trade area.0 -
Spanish economic history lesson
Franco died 1975
joined EU in 1986
Joined Euro in 2002
Seemed to have done well in economic growth terms. Unemployment, particularly amongst the young seems to be influenced by restrictive labour laws. This is shown by the fact that it is currently booming but unemployment not going down.0 -
Greek history. Run as military dictatorship until 1975. Joined EU in 1981 from when it had a great economic run until the financial crisis in 2008.
So interestingly both Spain and Greece became prosperous stable democracies. How much of that was due to EU membership giving investors confidence?0 -
There's a lot of correlation means causation going on here. South Korea had some history, then a dictatorship until 79/87 (depending on definition), then had lots of growth. China still has a dicctatorshiop, but also had some history, then some economic reforms in 78 and then lots of growth. Etc. All done outside the EU.
Also, simply because the UK GDP is greater than it was in 2008 doesn't imply that the UK has recovered. See massive deficit, record low interest rates, QE etc.
The Euro is basically a vanity project which should only have been started after much greater integration / federalisation. Whilst Goldman Sachs/ Greece are rightly abused, Germany should face its critics too. It is obliged to reduce its budget surplus, but doesn't. It should be fined, but isn't.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:There's a lot of correlation means causation going on here. South Korea had some history, then a dictatorship until 79/87 (depending on definition), then had lots of growth. China still has a dicctatorshiop, but also had some history, then some economic reforms in 78 and then lots of growth. Etc. All done outside the EU.
Also, simply because the UK GDP is greater than it was in 2008 doesn't imply that the UK has recovered. See massive deficit, record low interest rates, QE etc.
The Euro is basically a vanity project which should only have been started after much greater integration / federalisation. Whilst Goldman Sachs/ Greece are rightly abused, Germany should face its critics too. It is obliged to reduce its budget surplus, but doesn't. It should be fined, but isn't.
Finding comparative stats going back 40 years is hard enough without attempting to strip out extraneous factors. My point is more that most commentators agree that the EU has been a good thing for members both economically and politically.
I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.
I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
Surely a reasonable comparison could be drawn between the ERM crisis we faced in the 90's and the Greek debt crisis. we had a mechanism to withdraw from the ERM and use our central bank to make changes that helped mange our debt. Similar to when the IMF bailed us out in the 70's, having our our bank and currency helped us rebalance our economy (one factor among many admittedly).
Because the Greeks had no exit mechanism from the Euro, they were less able to manage their own economy and others had to bail theme out, thus increasing their debts, in order to prevent contagion to other Euro nations. It's not about the morality of repaying their debt, but how they got into so much debt in the first place. Out of the Euro they would likely be much better of economically.0 -
mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
Surely a reasonable comparison could be drawn between the ERM crisis we faced in the 90's and the Greek debt crisis. we had a mechanism to withdraw from the ERM and use our central bank to make changes that helped mange our debt. Similar to when the IMF bailed us out in the 70's, having our our bank and currency helped us rebalance our economy (one factor among many admittedly).
Because the Greeks had no exit mechanism from the Euro, they were less able to manage their own economy and others had to bail theme out, thus increasing their debts, in order to prevent contagion to other Euro nations. It's not about the morality of repaying their debt, but how they got into so much debt in the first place. Out of the Euro they would likely be much better of economically.
You have joined together two sentences from different paragraphs so changing the meaning of what I wrote.
I specifically said that I am not defending the Euro. I also said that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members. It is also wrong to confuse the Euro With EU membership as they are not synonymous.
Note the new paragraph. We were talking about Uk debt which I believe to be a problem as it currently costs us £46bn a year in interest. I also acknowledge that few other people see this as a problem.0 -
mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
Surely a reasonable comparison could be drawn between the ERM crisis we faced in the 90's and the Greek debt crisis. we had a mechanism to withdraw from the ERM and use our central bank to make changes that helped mange our debt. Similar to when the IMF bailed us out in the 70's, having our our bank and currency helped us rebalance our economy (one factor among many admittedly).
Because the Greeks had no exit mechanism from the Euro, they were less able to manage their own economy and others had to bail theme out, thus increasing their debts, in order to prevent contagion to other Euro nations. It's not about the morality of repaying their debt, but how they got into so much debt in the first place. Out of the Euro they would likely be much better of economically.
i was reading a piece the other day where the view is that hosting the Olympics was the folly that destroyed the Greek economy, made far worse by the wealthy and tax evasion.
anyone see the program on TV where wealthy Greeks were camouflaging their swimming pools to avoid the tax on these?
UK youth unemployment figures are heavily reworked, add in those on pointless training schemes/forced to stay in education and ours is much nearer the EU average.0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
Well put.DeVlaeminck wrote:Rick Chasey wrote:Those who campaigned for leave on the same topics as those on the far right would do better to explain the difference between their stance and those on the far right.
That's more the issue. If the far right have hijacked the immigration debate, and they have, it's up to those who campaigned on it to show that it doesn't need to be that way.
It's true that the chattering classes can't separate a concern over sustained record levels of immigration with the kind of views espoused by the BNP but I would suggest that it is more up to them to address that shortcoming rather than it being the duty of the rest of us to go over the arguments again.
Unfortunately, I think there is some truth in this. I guess that makes me sound snobby, up my own arse etc... I suppose now I need to be anti-intellectual to fit-in in the UK.0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
Surely a reasonable comparison could be drawn between the ERM crisis we faced in the 90's and the Greek debt crisis. we had a mechanism to withdraw from the ERM and use our central bank to make changes that helped mange our debt. Similar to when the IMF bailed us out in the 70's, having our our bank and currency helped us rebalance our economy (one factor among many admittedly).
Because the Greeks had no exit mechanism from the Euro, they were less able to manage their own economy and others had to bail theme out, thus increasing their debts, in order to prevent contagion to other Euro nations. It's not about the morality of repaying their debt, but how they got into so much debt in the first place. Out of the Euro they would likely be much better of economically.
You have joined together two sentences from different paragraphs so changing the meaning of what I wrote.
I specifically said that I am not defending the Euro. I also said that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members. It is also wrong to confuse the Euro With EU membership as they are not synonymous.
Note the new paragraph. We were talking about Uk debt which I believe to be a problem as it currently costs us £46bn a year in interest. I also acknowledge that few other people see this as a problem.
It wasn't my intention to misquote you, but to show that the Euro was disastrous for the Greeks and would have been disastrous for us in 93 and 76 if we had been in it when our economy was in crisis - and there is no reason why it wouldn't be disastrous for us our other EU states in the future. It doesn't have to be disastrous for everybody all the time in order for it to be considered a bad thing.0 -
mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
Surely a reasonable comparison could be drawn between the ERM crisis we faced in the 90's and the Greek debt crisis. we had a mechanism to withdraw from the ERM and use our central bank to make changes that helped mange our debt. Similar to when the IMF bailed us out in the 70's, having our our bank and currency helped us rebalance our economy (one factor among many admittedly).
Because the Greeks had no exit mechanism from the Euro, they were less able to manage their own economy and others had to bail theme out, thus increasing their debts, in order to prevent contagion to other Euro nations. It's not about the morality of repaying their debt, but how they got into so much debt in the first place. Out of the Euro they would likely be much better of economically.
You have joined together two sentences from different paragraphs so changing the meaning of what I wrote.
I specifically said that I am not defending the Euro. I also said that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members. It is also wrong to confuse the Euro With EU membership as they are not synonymous.
Note the new paragraph. We were talking about Uk debt which I believe to be a problem as it currently costs us £46bn a year in interest. I also acknowledge that few other people see this as a problem.
It wasn't my intention to misquote you, but to show that the Euro was disastrous for the Greeks and would have been disastrous for us in 93 and 76 if we had been in it when our economy was in crisis - and there is no reason why it wouldn't be disastrous for us our other EU states in the future. It doesn't have to be disastrous for everybody all the time in order for it to be considered a bad thing.
You are talking to somebody who thinks that one monetary policy is not enough for the UK. Show me one place where I have argued in favour of the Euro.
Why do people keep banging on about the Euro? Do they think that we are in it?0 -
mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:mrfpb wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
Surely a reasonable comparison could be drawn between the ERM crisis we faced in the 90's and the Greek debt crisis. we had a mechanism to withdraw from the ERM and use our central bank to make changes that helped mange our debt. Similar to when the IMF bailed us out in the 70's, having our our bank and currency helped us rebalance our economy (one factor among many admittedly).
Because the Greeks had no exit mechanism from the Euro, they were less able to manage their own economy and others had to bail theme out, thus increasing their debts, in order to prevent contagion to other Euro nations. It's not about the morality of repaying their debt, but how they got into so much debt in the first place. Out of the Euro they would likely be much better of economically.
You have joined together two sentences from different paragraphs so changing the meaning of what I wrote.
I specifically said that I am not defending the Euro. I also said that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members. It is also wrong to confuse the Euro With EU membership as they are not synonymous.
Note the new paragraph. We were talking about Uk debt which I believe to be a problem as it currently costs us £46bn a year in interest. I also acknowledge that few other people see this as a problem.
It wasn't my intention to misquote you, but to show that the Euro was disastrous for the Greeks and would have been disastrous for us in 93 and 76 if we had been in it when our economy was in crisis - and there is no reason why it wouldn't be disastrous for us our other EU states in the future. It doesn't have to be disastrous for everybody all the time in order for it to be considered a bad thing.
You are talking to somebody who thinks that one monetary policy is not enough for the UK. Show me one place where I have argued in favour of the Euro.
Why do people keep banging on about the Euro? Do they think that we are in it?0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:TheBigBean wrote:There's a lot of correlation means causation going on here. South Korea had some history, then a dictatorship until 79/87 (depending on definition), then had lots of growth. China still has a dicctatorshiop, but also had some history, then some economic reforms in 78 and then lots of growth. Etc. All done outside the EU.
Also, simply because the UK GDP is greater than it was in 2008 doesn't imply that the UK has recovered. See massive deficit, record low interest rates, QE etc.
The Euro is basically a vanity project which should only have been started after much greater integration / federalisation. Whilst Goldman Sachs/ Greece are rightly abused, Germany should face its critics too. It is obliged to reduce its budget surplus, but doesn't. It should be fined, but isn't.
Finding comparative stats going back 40 years is hard enough without attempting to strip out extraneous factors. My point is more that most commentators agree that the EU has been a good thing for members both economically and politically.
I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.
I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
I think the Euro has been an unmitigated disaster for all its members, but time will tell whether I'm right. The UK may be outside the Euro and may have an opt-out, but all new members of the EU are still required to join it at some point. My problem with this is that there is no humility, no admission of mistakes, just a head in the sands plough ahead policy. That's not aspirational governance in my opinion, and is a reason that people link the EU and the Euro in a negative manner.
I'm not sure I would go as far to say the national debt needs to be repaid, but the current level of deficit certainly implies that the UK still has lots of problems.
For many of the new countries joining the EU it is seen as a way to reduce corruption of their own governments, receive EU funding for various projects and have access to labour markets for its citizens who can then repatriate wealth. Whilst clearly quite appealing and relatively easy, it is not obvious whether a better outcome might be found by holding the governments to account and developing its own industries.0 -
TheBigBean wrote:Surrey Commuter wrote:TheBigBean wrote:There's a lot of correlation means causation going on here. South Korea had some history, then a dictatorship until 79/87 (depending on definition), then had lots of growth. China still has a dicctatorshiop, but also had some history, then some economic reforms in 78 and then lots of growth. Etc. All done outside the EU.
Also, simply because the UK GDP is greater than it was in 2008 doesn't imply that the UK has recovered. See massive deficit, record low interest rates, QE etc.
The Euro is basically a vanity project which should only have been started after much greater integration / federalisation. Whilst Goldman Sachs/ Greece are rightly abused, Germany should face its critics too. It is obliged to reduce its budget surplus, but doesn't. It should be fined, but isn't.
Finding comparative stats going back 40 years is hard enough without attempting to strip out extraneous factors. My point is more that most commentators agree that the EU has been a good thing for members both economically and politically.
I am not defending the Euro, more pointing out that it has not been an unmitigated disaster for all members.
I feel you and I may be the only two people in the world who feel that a deficit is a bad thing that needs to be solved and debt repaid.
I think the Euro has been an unmitigated disaster for all its members, but time will tell whether I'm right. The UK may be outside the Euro and may have an opt-out, but all new members of the EU are still required to join it at some point. My problem with this is that there is no humility, no admission of mistakes, just a head in the sands plough ahead policy. That's not aspirational governance in my opinion, and is a reason that people link the EU and the Euro in a negative manner.
I'm not sure I would go as far to say the national debt needs to be repaid, but the current level of deficit certainly implies that the UK still has lots of problems.
For many of the new countries joining the EU it is seen as a way to reduce corruption of their own governments, receive EU funding for various projects and have access to labour markets for its citizens who can then repatriate wealth. Whilst clearly quite appealing and relatively easy, it is not obvious whether a better outcome might be found by holding the governments to account and developing its own industries.
What about Germany benefiting from a an artificially low exchange rate and new entrants getting to slash their base rates.
I still do not see what relevance the Euro has to our EU membership
People are queuing up to join EU - can they all be misguided?0 -
Surrey Commuter wrote:TheBigBean wrote:I think the Euro has been an unmitigated disaster for all its members, but time will tell whether I'm right. The UK may be outside the Euro and may have an opt-out, but all new members of the EU are still required to join it at some point. My problem with this is that there is no humility, no admission of mistakes, just a head in the sands plough ahead policy. That's not aspirational governance in my opinion, and is a reason that people link the EU and the Euro in a negative manner.
I'm not sure I would go as far to say the national debt needs to be repaid, but the current level of deficit certainly implies that the UK still has lots of problems.
What about Germany benefiting from a an artificially low exchange rate and new entrants getting to slash their base rates.
I still do not see what relevance the Euro has to our EU membership
People are queuing up to join EU - can they all be misguided?
I agree - currently Germany is hoovering up all the capital in the rest of the Eurozone.
https://next.ft.com/content/5f7542a3-8d ... 79d69b71ad
IMF thinks Germany's "real" exchange rate is 15-20% undervalued. If Germany had its own currency then it would have appreciated vs the rest of Europe and it would not be quite as competitive.
Also while some countries (Spain and Italy) have reduced their trade deficit this is more because they don't have the demand to keep buying from Germany and not because they have managed to make massive improvements themselves.0
