I am no economist nor a financial professional in any
stretch of the word, but I believe that the euro experiment was never a
comfortable marriage for the following reasons:
1.
The economies that bonded to form the euro were never in the same level
of economic development, and because they were never on equal footing
economically, other countries became more competitive than they
otherwise would have without the euro and others became even less
competitive although they maintained a lifestyle of artificial success.
Such scenario will eventually break over time and would drag the entire
union into the gutters.
2. The eurozone countries did not make a common
financial pact regulated and binding in all countries that would
designate one body to regulate the financial activities of each country
within the union. Such uber-body would control spending and budgetary
initiatives of each member country. The absence of such arrangement
created a free-for-all attitude of reckless borrowing and unsustainable
financial policies.
3. The eurozone countries did not really commit
fully to the union as evidenced by the populace in each countries
reluctance to give up certain rights to make the union more financially
stronger, such initiative would mean giving up monetary sovereignty to
the ECB. It seems that the less developed economies did not make painful
financial policy changes to catch-up with the more developed economies
and more developed economies flooded liquidity to the less developed
ones which only incentivized their reluctance to delay necessary
changes. The euro countries therefore wanted to have their cake and eat
it too.
With such structural defects, the eurozone would
eventually face an up-hill battle to keep it together - the hen has come
to roost.
For all of the inherent problems facing the eurozone and the Greek economy in particlar, there is an increasing possibility that Greece could possibly move out of the union by the end of 2012, possibly by October, then again, that is just me.