Money

This book is an absolute must reading for those who are interested in gaining an indept understanding the Monetary Alliance between a broad spread of countries. The book is written in easy to understand terms where each country is discussed separately. I must say I was a little worried it would be over my head but was delightfully refreshed to find out it was an easy read. This is MUST read for anyone in the financial community.

Steven Schuker's work is considered by many in the academic field as perhaps the most well researched and scholarly work in diplomatic history in recent memory. This book is a must for anyone who really wants to understand why the Paris Peace Process failed after the First World War, and why France was so ill-prepared for World War II. The End of French Predominance in Europe also provides great insight into France's situation in European politics, both in the inter-war period and today. This is a must read for any serious scholar of modern diplomatic or military history.

This is the book to put into the hands of anybody who still thinks that Economic and Monetary Union would be good for Britain or for any other country. John Mills is a very rare person, an economist with business experience in trade and production. In this excellent book, he shows that Economic and Monetary Union would be bad for all our economies.

Experience shows that the more economically integrated the European Union has become, the worse it has performed. From its start in 1958, the original six members had no form of economic or monetary union, and they grew by 5.4% a year. Then in 1972 they created the currency snake; it lasted only until 1976. By 1974, economic growth had ceased. After the snake expired, growth resumed: 4.9% in 1976, 3% in 1977-80.

They created the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1979 and it lasted until 1993. The ERM slowed growth and raised unemployment across the EU: growth was only 1.7% a year; unemployment averaged 7% and inflation 7.8%. Even so, we joined, because the whole establishment wanted us to, not because the people wanted to. Polls in 1989 showed that 93% of the Chief Executives of large British companies and City institutions believed that we should join the ERM. We joined in October 1990: during our two-year membership unemployment rose by 1.4 million and national output fell; manufacturing output fell by 7% and manufacturing jobs by 14%. It was worse for us even than for the rest of the EU.

In the same period, the rest of the world grew by 3.2%, proving that the EU's slow growth was not due to world conditions. The ERM was the main cause of the EU-wide recession: from 1990 to 1993, growth ceased altogether. After ERM expired, growth resumed: 2.9% in 1994, 2.4% in 1995. But implementing the Maastricht criteria for EMU slowed growth again and raised unemployment. EU unemployment is now 12%, 30 million, according to ILO figures.

What would entering Economic and Monetary Union mean for us? It would mean deflation, higher unemployment, slump. It would also mean the end of Britain's independence. Politics and economics are indivisible. The arguments for constitutional, economic and political independence are one. The experiment of making the Bank of England independent has clearly failed: we should call on the Government to reassert control of interest rates. This is a political demand, a constitutional demand, and an economic demand.

Under EMU, eight unelected European Central Bankers would control our currency, and as Keynes said, "Whoever controls the currency, controls the Government." To make EMU credible to the markets, they would keep interest rates high, imposing deflation. This would mean higher unemployment and taxes, lower wages and lower public spending.

The Gold Standard was a way of trying to fix currency values together. It failed disastrously, ending in the Great Crash. Economic growth ceased. After the Gold Standard expired, growth resumed. In 1931, Britain left the Gold Standard, devaluing by 24%; money supply rose by 34%; interest rates were about zero, and there was some tariff protection. Labour's 'Iron Chancellor' Philip Snowden said leaving the Gold Standard "would reduce the standard of living of the workman by 50%." What actually happened? From 1932 to 1937, manufacturing output rose 58%; 2.7 million new jobs were created (1.3 million in manufacturing); growth averaged 3.8% a year, and living standards rose. Lower interest rates brought a boom in house-building.

By contrast, the French Government stayed in the Gold Standard and kept the franc overvalued: GDP fell by 17%, industrial production by a quarter, until the Popular Front Government devalued the franc.

This Government claims that the way to restore industry's competitiveness is to invest in skill. But this will not restore manufacturing while there is still not enough demand in the economy. The present regime of tight money and high interest rates, leading to a high exchange rate, doesn't work. It's like putting on the brakes when you're going up hill. An overpriced pound means dear exports and cheap imports: in the first quarter of 1998, our goods trade gap was £4.7 billion, the worst since 1990.

The remedy does not lie in reforming the labour market or the public sector. To stimulate output and employment, we need more demand, higher wages and more public spending. Supply-side reforms, better education, more information technology, may improve efficiency and productivity, but without an expansion of demand this can lead not to growth but to more unemployment and unused resources.

The Maastricht Treaty which set up EMU has only money and budget targets, there are no real world targets, for full employment or higher growth. It is innately deflationary: those not meeting the targets must deflate, yet those meeting them do not have to reflate. A Treaty cannot be reformed; it can only be accepted or rejected. Sir Nigel Wicks, Chair of the EU Monetary Committee says, "I would not regard monetary policy as an instrument for solving unemployment." We who have experienced decades of monetarism in action regard that as an understatement. EMU is monetarism on a European scale; it is Thatcherism on a European scale.

We need lower interest rates to fund projects fitting in to our plans for rebuilding Britain. We need lower taxes on jobs. We need taxes on capital: tax Murdoch, not toady to him. We need to legislate so that pension funds, which are heavily subsidised by taxpayers, are required to invest in British industry and services. The Government could promote investments with a high social rate of return. We need to reimpose controls on speculators. But we can't do these jobs when in EMU: EMU forbids them all.

We need to keep out of EMU. Joining would clearly be bad for our health. Then we will rebuild Britain as a self-reliant, industrial and sovereign nation.

I WISH THEY TOLD ME ABOUT THIS GREAT BOOK LONG TIME AGO WE WOULD OF SAVED ALOTS OF TIME AND TRIALS AND BAD MISTAKES I SHALL KEEP AND USE THE HELL OUT OF THIS BOOK WE LOVE IT.

This book is very important for my research project, it's a key book, nice book, smart book ... ah ... delicious book! When you read it your body is electrisizing, you almost feel orgasm.
Read this book everybody!!!

Collaboratively written by author/editor Cheryl Kimball and certified financial planner Faye Kathryn Doria, The Everything Get Out Of Debt Book is a straightforward, eminently practical, do-it-yourself, "user friendly" guide to dealing with debt and specifically designed for readers of all skill and experience levels when dealing with money matters. From how to obtain and read one's credit report, to assessing one's earning power, to determining when credit counseling services are needed (and how to spot the crooked ones), coping with joint debt, filing for bankruptcy, home equity, the advantages and drawbacks to credit cards, insurance, taxes, and so much more, The Everything Get Out Of Debt Book is a first-rate and highly recommended resource -- especially for the non-specialist general reader unfamiliar with the complexities of America's financial system.

After reading Larry Burkett's fantasies ("Coming Economic Earthquake", "Illuminati", and "Thor Conspiracy" to name a few), it was a real joy to read a book written by an individual with knowledge of macroeconomics and not merely a personal financial advisor. Burkett's books are thinly veiled conspiracy tripe and Sherman Smith's book is a well-written and thoroughly informed antedote to Burkett's far right wing conspiracy nonsense. Burkett's predictions have already been proven false, so that is all the more reason to look to a sane approach such as Smith takes. Highly recommended!

This book is about women in England who have faced enormous amounts of debt due to various circumstances. Some were addicted to shopping, while others found themselves in horrible financial situations due to divorce. For anyone who is facing debt themselves, this book will help them realize that they are not alone.

Faith, Morals, and Money is a book for our time and is the book FOR THIS MOMENT. As we as individuals and a nation anguishes over another corporation's ethical failures, a new book offers important guidance. For centuries economists have ignored the rich resource of religious wisdom about money and its uses. Business schools have paid only the slightest attention to the ethical dimensions of trade and business practices. On the other hand, we live in a marketplace and what could be more saturated with issues of right and wrong than the manner with which we acquire and use money.

This book brings to the surface the long tradition of ethical thinking and religious laws on money matters. Written clearly and with copious examples from current business practice, the author, Edward D. Zinbarg, explicates the economic thinking of the great religions of the West and the East. Zinbarg's well-documented argument is that, while our major religions have somewhat differing rules and imperatives, there is also great overlapping and complementarity. The message is particularly important at this time of intense globalization. A fascinating and timely read.

Family Money is an excellent and "user friendly" introduction for the non-specialist general reader into the intricacies of preparing and utilizing wills, trusts, life insurance, and other financial instruments for the purpose of endowing the people you love with the funds, properties, and possessions you wish to leave them as your legacy. Family Money covers the building and keeping of family money as a deliberate act while avoiding the hazards and uncertainties of contestable bequests. The reader will learn how to keep a will simple enough to do what is wanted, but detailed enough to satisfy a probate court; why probate is inimical to family wealth and how to avoid it; how to use living trusts to move as much as you can to family members; and when charitable trusts, special needs trusts, and other trusts can work in favor of your family. Of special value is the information on what to do if you find yourself named executor or trustee and how to instill notions of duty and humility in your heirs. If you want to pass on your wealth and possessions to those of your own choosing, then begin the process by carefully reading Family Money!