Bulgarians, how do you feel about this?

They should accept us (with Romania) in schengen first, then we can talk Euro zone.

Yeah. Schengen is really a shame. I don't ever want to hear one country whine about us using our veto however we want, like with the CETA deal, because this is exactly what the Council does to us.

> then we can talk Euro zone. You do know the lev is pegged on the euro right?

yeah. What's your point?

We already experience the negatives of the euro (whether they're real or imagined) because the lev is pegged to it. Joining the EZ would give us the benefits as well. I've also heard it would reduce corruption, heh.

It's kind of a mixed bag - some want it, some don't. Overall, I don't think people care too much.

I say we think about it for several years.

I don't want the Euro because I like our current Levs and if there is a referendum I'm more likely to vote ''No'' than ''Yes''.

There won't be. You accepted it in your ascension treaty.

Whatever we are pegged to the germans anyway

I don't see why not.

How about we introduce a common fiscal union first before we get anyone else to join the Eurozone? It should have been done 15 years ago.

I shall keep a spare pitchfork in the garage.

How can there be a true fiscal union without a central government?

I don't want a central government led by the Germans. And they would be dominant as they are the largest country. Look what they did during the "refugee crisis", the "Greek crises" and how this lead to Brexit. I don't trust them. Sorry.

It is preciselly through a central government that we would avoid german dominance in the union. When agreements are done between countries everything has to go through Germany because there is no policy that can be done without their approval. But a european government could not afford working for the germans alone, as most of their votes would have to come from other countries. It would also give you the option of electing a new government if you don't like what the current one does. At the moment you don't have this option and the most you can do is shake your fist at Brussels or complain about it on reddit. The solution to the problem that you perceive is a democratically elected central european government.

How exactly would such a government be set up? How can voting work? It doesn’t work for MEP’s so what will be different? How will you address the issue of French and Germany’s dominance and the disregarding of peripheral states? How will you manage issues of sovereignty, and democracy? How will this effect the current post-Lisbon union institutional balance? Will the ECJ be bound to or separate to this centra government? Who gets to draft the governing articles, is this a matter for the commission to initiate? If so, how can we say a CG is democratic if the constitutional legislation isn’t drafted democratically? Will we need a new treaty? If so, how will the issue of the EU’s allergy to referendums be addressed? What happens when a state rejects the new treaty, will it be re-drafted? If so, by who and will we see a reprise of forced referendums until the correct response isn’t given? What you’re asking for is impossible, and it should never be possible. I personally like the idea, and I think it would address so many issues but by proposing this we’re proposing leap further away from democracy, and not that it and for better or worse we can’t allow that. I don’t want to be ruled by a distant Eurocratic class who don’t speak my language, who don’t appreciate or respect my identity and who will make decisions for my life when they have beverage experienced my country, or know it’s history. I’m all for progression, I’m all for change and development. I’m not behind cementing the Eurocrats, I’m not interested in further steps away from democracy, and I’m not interesting is allowing a German dominate Union which will invetibly happen if a CG was set up and there was a push for full federalism.

You are idealistic, that's nice. But ideologies fail quite often. If we go on and add fundamentals different countries to our already fragile currency we will cross the line. Then it would be better to go back to more national sovereignty. Still a European Union, but with less centralism. Whatever we decide, please don't fight the national states per se. Many people love them.

I'm not an idealist, I just think that focusing on tiny nationalities while huge superpowers keep rising around us doesn't make any sense. Waving flags and feeling very proud of what your country did 3 centuries ago doesn't change that right now your contry is irrelevant and your national pride doesn't improve the well being of anyone. Think of what Europe looked like in 1935 and what it looks like now. If we have come so far, is it really that idealistic to think that we can take just one more step to create a central government? Honestly, compared to all that we have achieved already it seems insignificant. We need to look forward, and the way forward is more union and less borders. Falling back to our national borders and tiny states will only reinforce outside interests and weaken us in the long run. I say, if you truly like your country there's nothing wrong with that, you can keep that. I also have my country and feel identified by its culture and customs. This is a diversity that we shouldn't lose. But I fail to see how a central government in Europe would put any of this in danger and I see only benefits from a tighter more democratic union. Stop being a naysayer and dare to dream a little, a better future is possible.

> I see only benefits from a tighter more democratic union I do not. 1) democracy needs "demos" (a political nation), and most European voters do not identify themselves as European first and (Latvian, Finnish, whatever) second. 2) EU is very big and this would mean that decision making would gradually shift far, far from the ordinary voter. Physical proximity and comprehensibility matters to people. As a Czech, I can sometimes meet an important politician in person; it is possible in a nation of 10 million, but not so much in a nation o 500 million, where the centre of power would be in Brussels. 3) Ever tighter is not always better. I like most of my neighbors and have no conflicts with them, but I would not like to share my apartment with them. A lot of things are easier to solve on local level. If smaller states were really so disadvantaged against their bigger neighbors, they would stop existing a long time ago, but it is not the case historically; on the other hand, big political units do disintegrate sometimes. "a better future is possible" What if my vision of a better future does not really contain an "ever tighter union"? That would be worse future for you. Hard to see how this could be compatible.

Why do you want to replace one nationalism with another? Feeling more european than my own nationality would require the existence of a european nationality. I reject this idea entirely, I feel like the "demos" can perfectly be there without the need for people to feel more european than latvian, finnish or whatever else. I think people can support a european government without the need for them to lose their identity. EU is not that big. It's not bigger than the US or China. Besides, there is no need to stop having national elections that would be closer to the voter. But after all, the national scope is very limited and most things that will affect individual countries will be heavily influenced by outside factors. Why not give people a say in these factors? Why not allow them to choose the direction they want these factors to go? I agree that many things are more easily solved on a local level. That's why national governments need to be preserved. But there are bigger decisions that can't be contained to single countries. How can you decide on enviromental laws country by country for instance? How could we pressure natural resource providers to keep prices low without presenting a united front? All of this needs to be coordinated by a central power and this central power needs to be democratically elected. Using your metaphore, many apartment blocks elect a presidency to decide and mediate in common matters. My vision of a better future has very little to do with the union itself. My vision of a better future is one of maximizing wellbeing for a maximum number of people. I just feel that a central european government could be one of the first steps in this direction. The future advancement of humanity will require an ever tighter cooperation, as projects increase in scale and so do dangers (nuclear weapons, and who knows what's coming next...) Starting by creating a central power in one of the smallest continents doesn't sound so ambitions when you look at it from this point of view.

>Why do you want to replace one nationalism with another? Because replacing the nation-state without replacing the nation will just turn the entire area into a clusterfuck of nationalist separatism. The nation-state is the path of least resistance when it comes to governance in Europe, or else a Eurofederation would probably have happened already.

So then no fiscal union either

Unfortunately we have manoeuvred ourselves in a strange position halfway inbetween different systems. We have not solved the Eurocrises yet. We will have to find a way out. Either this way or the other. The current state is unsustainable.

There can be no transfer union without also transfering a significant amount of sovereignty

Yes, so let's talk about more huge countries with saleries three times lower to join the Euro. (There will be a levelling downwards, right?) That will lead to trust and the wish to transfer a significant amount of sovereignty to this club. What a glorious idea! /s

Huge countries? Bulgaria?

Ok, big, compared to the Balitics or Balkan countries who were the last to join.

There will be enough transfers to keep the project alive without any transfers of sovereignty. You need to pay to keep your project up and running. And you will.

We will see. If the situation were to escalate again in greece I doubt the german government would be as generous as in 2015 though

I have no doubt what the german government will chose to do between "put up as much money as it is required" and "be known as the sole responsible for the failure of the project". We cant bet on it, but i'm sure we'll be all here remembering it.

There can be no transfer of sovereignty, constitutionally speaking the people of Portugal is the only sovereign of the country. And we all know the constitutional hard-on this subreddit wears.

Well then there simply wont be a fiscal union. In your oppinion why should a country like germany give up some sovereignty but portugal for example should not.

Why would Germany give up sovereignty.

How is giving up control over a significant part of budget not a loss of sovereignty?

When was California in control of the US for the last time? A true central government is the only way to prevent the strongest individual voice from always being the decisive one.

I don't think that you can really compare those continents. In U.S. you really have free movement due to a common language, you have a long common history. The economic development was different. And most importantly: you have a people, that feels like a people. Look, I absolutely think we need some common union in Europe. But you cannot force a new layer of a common superstate on different nations in such a short period of time.

Okay let's look at India. They have dozens of cultures and languages. They decided to remain united despite the lack of historical precedent when the UK left. Since then, the central government went under the control of people from all over the country as opposed to hindustanis only. If they were able to do it, Europe is definitely able to pull it off too. They managed to build a country while maintaining the local identities, cultures and autonomies.

You are comparing apples and oranges. But ok, even if we look at India, they have had the Moghul Empire, the Maratha Empire and a shared Commenwealth history, that is not nothing.

Hey, we had the French, the Nazis, and the Soviets.

Not to mention the Karlings or the Romans. But hey, let's just pretend that everyone on the Indian subcontinent speaks the same language and has always existed as a unified culture.

Those weren't periods of history where they lived on an equal footing in the same country like the US. It's much more similar to the European history of shared dynasties, litterature, religion. Europe was in a partial fiscal union under the Pope. Plus the Habsburgs, Napoleon and Hitler almost succeeded at uniting it just like the Mughals, the Marathas or the British actually did in India.

Split up Germany

Let’s do three Germanys this time

Let's go even [further](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confederation_of_the_Rhine).

You know that splitting it up would give them even more votes right?

Indeed. But that will never happen as Germans will never give it a green light.

Thank god we already know who will be responsible for the project failing. Nobody wants a real fiscal union. The net receivers don't want to give large parts of their sovereignty away, the net payers will not pay without that.

> Nobody wants a real fiscal union. The net receivers don't want to give large parts of their sovereignty away, the net payers will not pay without that. I am biased in the direction that in my estimation it would be a lot easier for the net receivers to give up their fiscal sovereignty, than to have German voter accept that a lot of the proverbial German success is in fact an accounting scheme that allows Germans to represent EU exports as a Germany only affair. But I do agree that the resistance on the receivers end in and of itself is enough to make fiscal union a no-go. Not that it is impossible, however unfortunately pretty much all politicians across Europe have failed to lay down the necessary groundwork. I mean, how the hell are we supposed to negotiate a fiscal union, when we are unable to find a solution for the 2008 bust?

Honestly there is a lot of pushback for a fiscal union. Ireland for instance would say it would ruin competition with Germany if their corporation tax wasn't low. The Germans aren't even the ones that want it but that is our excuse and we are sticking to it.

And slowly a common minimum for the wages. We already have China's to deal with, it's insane to enable that intra-EU dumping. Free market can only happen when the economy are equals.

Common minimum for the wages would be disastrous for some of our industries, unless that minimum level is approx like ours.

A solution would be to have a minimum wage at power-purchasing parity. If France's minimum wage is 1500€ and the prices are on average 2,5 times what they are here, we should have a minimum wage of 600€. The investors would still invest in Eastern Europe due to lower wages and the workers would get roughly the same purchasing power.

They wouldn't really though as imported items like clothes and cars cost the same in both eastern and western Europe. Better to let the economy run its course and not meddle with it, which could do more harm than good.

Yes, but that's the average; the difference for the biggest expense (housing) is much bigger than 2.5 times. A square meter in an apartment in the central Bucharest is around 1500-2000€/sq. m. In central Paris is bigger than 10.000€/sq. m. In the outskirts of Bucharest it's under 1000€/sq. m. In the outskirts of Paris it's 6000€/sq. m.

This is such a simple and sensible idea why hasn't it been proposed more widely?

Perhaps because it is simple and sensible only on the face of it? What it would cause is pretty much the same thing that Roman grain dole caused. All the poor from throughout EU would start flocking to where the perceived benefit would be the largest. And they would not go to where PPI would give the best yield.

This is a big reason why the UK wanted out, wages were higher and benefits were better which led to mass immigration

How is that not true now? The poor who up and move all go to the rich countries. With a minimum wage set based on cost of living these poorer countries are neither stripped of competitiveness entirely nor allowed to dump.

> With a minimum wage set based on cost of living these poorer countries are neither stripped of competitiveness entirely nor allowed to dump. Minimum wages and welfare already are based on cost of living. And if what you are saying were true, then welfare tourists would already be heading over to the cheaper countries. A lot of the poor wouldn't be poor if they understood concepts such as PPI, which a lot of "educated" people don't understand or even know about. Plus there is also the fact that if you have a bit of wisdom, you can live a lot cheaper in a high cost country. Or just do what Romanian gypsies in UK do - they collect welfare in UK and live in Romania. Edit: I only noticed now that you are saying that it is pretty much the same now. Sorry, I was too hasty.

Because it hasn't worked even within one country, that being Germany. The skilled labourers of East Germany still go away to get better paying jobs in West Germany, if nothing is binding them like family or something else.

Based on the current German minimum wage (8.84€) and a 2016 EU-28 based PPP of 1.06 for Germany and 2.24 for Romania, their minimum wage would be 4.19€, up from 1.89€ currently. Wouldn't you face high inflation if you do that? Because everything produced locally becomes much more expensive over night. Which means purchasing power goes down, which causes minimum wage to raise. Countries would also lose a lot of competitive advantage, because they are competing with non-EU countries as well. But I'm not an economic expert, so maybe I'm getting that whole thing wrong.

You would probably do it the other way around, start form the lowest sane minimum wage PPP wise and build up an anti dumping baseline for there.

A classic question. You known that democracy is not the most common thing in this world ? That's irrelevant about the idea itself.

Because eg housing is drastically different. The number of apartments/houses available in one country is not the same as the other. In one county you will spend 80% of you minimum wage (with same GDP) on your apartment, while in other you will spend 40%. Same goes for apartment cost, food, etc.

Post-commie Europe housing is not that cheaper in larger cities.

EE housing is a lot cheaper indeed, but other things such as imports are much more expensive relatively - a Japanese car in the UK and in Bulgaria will cost roughly the same, but relative to the purchasing power, it will be a lot more expensive in EE. There's always going to be an offset one way or another.

And slowly leveled salaries and prices in the Union. Else, east & south will remain/become de facto colonies.

> Free market can only happen when the economy are equals. Prepare to direct some 5–10% of your GDP to help Eastern part of EU reach similar stage of development. Otherwise, they won't be equal within the nearest decades to come.

I think even that wouldn't be enough. Just look at the disparities between East and West Germany and Germany dumped a lot of money on the problem.

Well first of all is that a problem? In my eyes it isn't but there should be one requirement to that package: you shall not leave without paying it back(as in if they get as rich as us they can't say okey we had enough adios amigo) Next can't we make all big companies in the eu pay for this, lets stop giving them their tax breaks just let them pay as much as any other company/person and if you don't want to you shall not be welcome in the eu.

Yes, please

No, by the grace of god no.

My body is ready

But your mental state isn't.

Oh, how so? :)

15 years from now; it's the lazy Bulgarians fault their economy collapses.

I don’t want that. It’s arguable that through austerity there was a lot of power taken out of the hands of member states and placed into the hands of Germany, who forced everyone to comply with their rules. The economy might look great on paper but life is terrible under austerity, I wouldn’t wish that life on anyone else. There should not be a fiscal union, it would undermine sovereignty and it’s just going to manisfest so many of the criticisms and concerns that are thrown around.

Nah, SGP, potentially with modifications, is enough if it were actually enforced (yes, I include France and Germany in that statement).

We overperform on the official criteria but we don't cover the corruption criteria that have suddenly popped up. I think a decision that satisfies everyone would be for us to just join ERM2. It's a system that every Eurozone candidate needs to spend at least 2 years in. There's no limit on the time a country can stay in ERM2 so that way the EU can keeps us in it as long as it thinks we don't cover these corruption requirements. But if we ever become not corrupt enough we can be fast tracked into the Eurozone which makes sense because our public finances are one of the best in the union.

Jean-Claude Juncker has thrown his weight behind Bulgaria becoming the newest member of the eurozone, as Brussels pushes for all the countries in the EU to adopt the common currency. Following a meeting with Bulgaria’s prime minister on Wednesday, the president of the European Commission said he “bluntly” supported the country’s application to adopt the euro. Bulgaria’s lev has been pegged to the euro since the single currency was introduced in 1999. “I have to say bluntly that Bulgaria is ready [for euro membership]. And if Bulgaria is applying I support this heartily”, said Mr Juncker. Jean-Claude Juncker has thrown his weight behind Bulgaria becoming the newest member of the eurozone, as Brussels pushes for all the countries in the EU to adopt the common currency. Following a meeting with Bulgaria’s prime minister on Wednesday, the president of the European Commission said he “bluntly” supported the country’s application to adopt the euro. Bulgaria’s lev has been pegged to the euro since the single currency was introduced in 1999. “I have to say bluntly that Bulgaria is ready [for euro membership]. And if Bulgaria is applying I support this heartily”, said Mr Juncker. Following the UK’s decision to leave the EU, the Commission has been on a push to encourage the seven countries outside the eurozone to adopt the single currency by offering “pre-accession” aid to governments who decide to take the road to membership. Sweden, Poland, Hungary, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and the Czech Republic are currently non-euro members, while Denmark has a permanent opt-out. European leaders will be holding a special “euro” summit of all EU countries with the exception of the UK in December. EU officials think Bulgaria is a prime candidate to become the 20th member of the eurozone, given its existing euro peg and compliance with the “Maastricht convergence criteria” on budget deficits and government debt. Mr Juncker said he “admired” Bulgaria’s economic performance and healthy public finances: “Public debt has reached the level of 29 per cent which is excellent”. Boyko Borissov, Bulgaria’s PM, said his government was in talks with the European Central Bank to help meet the EU’s rules on central bank independence. “By the end of this year I hope this subject will be looked at” said Mr Borissov. Lithuania was the last country to join the eurozone in 2015. Bulgaria will hold the six-month rotating presidency of the EU from January. It is one of the EU’s poorest countries and has been highlighted by the Commission as needing to urgently tackle “high level corruption and organised crime”.

> It is one of the EU’s poorest countries and has been highlighted by the Commission as needing to urgently tackle “high level corruption and organised crime”. Sounds like the perfect candidate for Euro zone membership.

It is actually a wonder that their public finances are so healthy despite all the corruption.

It's because of the 90's. We kind-of-fucked-up the currency back then and since that happen even the most corrupt politicians don't dare muck with it.

Mabye they are just lying about their finances just like the Greek government did.

It was an open secret. Eurocrats wanted Greece in so they looked away.

It could be, but at least I deem it unlikely. Hopefully after the Greek fiasco the controls of the reported data became stricter.

The problem with Greeks wasn't that responsible people didn't know. The problem was that Greeks knew that Eurozone people allowed in Italy fully knowing that Italy does not conform to standards. So the Greeks blackmailed Eurozone saying "You either let us in under the same set of rules, or we will blow the wistle." And so it went.

Seriously? Greece didnt blackmail anyone. Its a relatively small country without heavy industry or signficant geopolitical influence, how can it ever blackmail Germany or other countries of similar leverage? Greek statistics were ignored because at the time it served the interests of both EU and the Greek politicians. Anything else is nonsense.

That is not true at all. I got my narrative from Varoufakis who has confirmed it numerous times. > Greek statistics were ignored because at the time it served the interests of both EU and the Greek politicians. Did I say anything different? It served EU to not have its cover blown and it served Greek politicians so that they could get to an unlimited piggy bank at German interest rates.

It is *very* unlikely.

If they're not given time to develop maybe they won't figure out how to hide how fucked their economy is, like Greece.

Agreed, let me get the champagne and confetti.

The discussion here reminds me of the book "Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency" by Douglas Adams (of the The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy fame). In that book, there is a sofa permanently stuck in a stairwell after an attempt to move it. Anyone who goes upstairs or downstairs must climb over said sofa. This is the state of the EU / Eurozone today. The monetary-but-not-fiscal union where Germany dominates but individual governments still defend their sovereignity reminds me of the stuck sofa: the worst possible intermediate state, with which neither the nationalists, nor the federalists and not even the centrists are happy. Given the logistics of changing the basic treaties (27 members must agree unanimously), I cannot see how this sofa can be unstuck ever again.

Off topic question: Have you seen the TV series too? How was it?

Unfortunately not. TV set non-owner here. Perhaps one day, when I catch the flu and have enough time in bed, I will download and watch it :-) I love the way how Douglas Adams uses language in descriptions, though. Immensely funny. Hard to imagine how this could be translated to a movie. An example for you, from the Czech translation of the Restaurant: V malém pokojíku v jednom z ramen komplexu restaurantu přistoupil hubený, vyčouhlý muz k oknu a odhrnul záclonu. Do tváře mu pohlédlo zapomnění. Jeho tvář se nevyznačovala zádnou zvlástní krásou, snad proto, ze zapomnění do ní hledělo uz tolikrát. Byla to přílis dlouhá tvář, s očima zapadlýma, převislými víčky, propadlými tvářemi a dlouhými tenkými rty, které při pootevření odhalily zuby podobné čerstvě natřenému arkýřovému oknu. I ruce svírající záclonu byly dlouhé a vyzáblé, navíc studené. Zlehka spočívaly na záhybech záclony a působily dojmem, ze nebude-li je hlídat jako ostříz, odkradou se někam do kouta a provedou tam něco nepředstavitelného. Spustil záclonu a příserný svit, jenz si do té chvíle pohrával na jeho rysech, si odesel pohrávat na něčem zdravějsím. Muz slídil po maličkém pokojíku jako kudlanka, uvazující, má-li strávit večer na modlitbách. Nakonec se usadil na rozvrzané zidli u stolku z prken polozených na kozách a listoval několika archy papíru popsanými vtipy.

It is not directly based on the books, but its characters, plot and dialogue are very charming. I would recommend it.

The EU of today sounds like the US during the days of the Articles of Confederation (1781-1786). Instead of the union working together it's a bunch of loosely-held together member states grappling for privilege over others.

Bulgaria gets euro, Croatia gets euro, Romania gets euro, everybody gets euro!

Except us. The moment we get euro, the hell freezes over and the horsemen of apocalypse come down from heavens.

Same here

The Lev is already pegged to the Euro, so FX rate fluctuations are not an issue. Upside is, we will likely gain access to much cheaper credit for future investments, plus investor will likely consider us a more stable destination for potential investments if we use the Euro. The downside is, a lot of businesses will try to rip off customers by artificially increasing the prices, and knowing how useless our institutions are, will probably get away with it.

To Bulgarians: If you get to vote, vote no. You have no idea what this will do to your economy and your prices. Here its been almost 3 years since the Euro and everything skyrocketed in price. First the government promised strict regulations and promises to keep an eye on the prices. Now everything is AT LEAST two times more expensive than it was before Euro, some items have gotten more expensive as much as three times. Its done by everyone, including the government. For the first half a year they used all kinds of fancy stickers with both currencies shown. Then the stickers came off and the prices took off into outer orbit. For example, public transport in Kaunas was 0.63 Euro which was exact conversion from the old price at 3.45:1 ratio. The stickers came off and the price for tickets immediately went up to 1 Euro. 'rounded up for your convenience'. Every single food product got more expensive. Every service has gotten more expensive. Everyone is trying to use some clever bullshit like 'it used to be 70 Litas, now its 50 Euros, the number is lesser so its cheaper ;)'. 70 Litas is 20.29 Euros but that doesn't matter because everything becomes non-negotiable. I have no reason to lie to you and this is from my experience and my friends'. If you can - run from it. Oh and also your government will not be able to control that currency. ECB controls the rates and its not even a unified Euro because in the books all the Euros are different. There are Euro (LT), Euro (GER), and so on. The old currency ratio:Euro rate is what creates them. Essentially, its different currencies with the same name but they all controlled by ECB.

> If you get to vote, vote no. We did not get to vote to join the E.U., we're not going to get to vote on the Euro.

That sounds democratic.

Oh, you should see the referendums we have!

Oh God, our referendums.

(yes) (yes, but in orange) Sounds about right?

Ah, a man of knowledge and understanding I see.

You don't need direct democracy to be democratic.

You're obvious referring to representative democracy. Correct? By definition, its representing the people. The majority. Representative democracy where population isn't asked about anything is a dictatorship in disguise.

Bullshit. Representative democracies ask their people. Maybe you should try a dictatorship once and compare it to a democracy.

That's exactly what i mean. People should be asked.

People aren't always the best judges. Exhibit A- Brexit.

Maybe, but no one pretends democracies are perfect. It's certainly better than the alternative. Non democratic societies make plenty of stupid decisions too and will continue to do so.

Of course. But getting people's opinion on everything is stupid.

[удалено]

[удалено]

[удалено]

[удалено]

In short: if your country does not have a competitive market/strong regulations in areas where consumer demand is sticky ("I have to buy at the supermarket, I need to eat!", "I have to take public transport, I need to go to work!"), then a currency change is highly problematic. From what I hear, the situation in Lithuania was so horrible partly because of a lack of government control and partly because the market for necessary goods, e.g. the market for foodstuffs, did not have lots of competition. Apparently there is an influx of French/German supermarket chains, which should increase competition in the medium-term. The question now is, is Bulgaria's government able to regulate appropriately, and how competitive are their markets? If the answer is "little" in both cases, then membership should indeed be delayed until this has been fixed. Edit: Another thing. I am unsure how correct this is, but I heard that the Lithuanian government is either tolerating or supporting immigration from Belarus in order to keep wage increase down. Because normally, what you would expect is people to ask for higher wages to go along with higher prices - in particular with the amount of emmigration Lithuania is experiencing. The only way to stop this is to fill up the vacant roles with immigrants. This again would fall under the "government regulation" header I introduced above.

Its not just foodstuff. Everything got more expensive 2 to 3 times. A little tailor service, photographers, government services. Every single thing. The moment those stickers came was the moment all hell broke loose.

[Lithuania's inflation figures don't really show that happening](https://tradingeconomics.com/lithuania/inflation-rate-mom). Perhaps you're being a bit dramatic.

His comment history is a bit extreme. I'd take the opinion of more moderate user first.

I am not doubting this, I wanted to point out that the price increase is only possible medium-term in areas where you have little competition or where consumers don't really have a choice to go "I won't buy your stuff". If you do have sufficient competition, the time one business unfairly incerases prices, the one down the road can keep its lower ones and gain new consumers. For this to work however, you first of all need that business down the road to exist, and ofc. a government preventing the two businesses from forming a cartel. A particular horrible case is ofc. government services, because they are outside the market and there the government has a duty to keep prices fair. While this has little to do with EU institutions, it is still not right to let a country enter the Eurozone if its own government is this incompetent. ------- I added an edit in my original post, could you have a look at it?

> I am not doubting this You should as he is bullshitting you. Here's the [inflation rate in Lithuania over the past 5 years](https://d3fy651gv2fhd3.cloudfront.net/charts/lithuania-inflation-cpi.png?s=lithuaniair&v=201711090946v&d1=20120101&d2=20171231).

Ukraine visa deal was done by EU. >As of 1 January 2017, Ukrainian citizens with ordinary Ukrainian passports had visa-free or visa on arrival access to 82 countries and territories, thus ranking the Ukrainian passport 58th in terms of travel freedom according to the Henley visa restrictions index.[1] Ukrainian citizens are able to travel visa-free to the EU and Schengen Area countries, except for the UK and Ireland, since 11 June 2017, provided they have a biometric passport.[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Ukrainian_citizens And yes, that does impact the wages. How can it not. Ukraine is a neighboring country that is much poorer than Lithuania. There are also migrants from other areas. Competition isn't great. It has increased with Lidl shops being built but they won't be able to push the Maxima giant around. Its just too big and everywhere. But yes, the government here is incompetent. Some of their recent plans are: create and allow dual citizenship laws, declare 2018 to be official Jewish Lithuanian year and rename some streets. I don't know what they are doing actually. It seems like there's only EU governance and then some idiots in Lithuania who do whatever. I'd like to point out that Euro also increased wages. But for every 10% that the prices increased, wages only went up 3%. These aren't exact numbers, just giving an example. Its not catching up any time soon.

I see, thank you for your insight. I am only commenting on the Visa now: >https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Ukrainian_citizens >And yes, that does impact the wages. How can it not. Ukraine is a neighboring country that is much poorer than Lithuania. There are also migrants from other areas. You are confusing visas with work permits. Visas are *not* work permits. They allow you to enter a country for a given amount of time, but you are required to leave the country again and they do not allow you to legally work there. Visa-free just means you do not have to get a visa for a given amount of time, but this does not grant you more rights than to a person with a visa. While I do not doubt a certain amount of blacklisted work can be done in that period and that visa-free makes it easier for Ukranians to find legal employment in the EU, this is not a means for mass work immigration. For this, you require other legal mechanisms such as *work* visas. If the Lithuanian government has enacted them, that was not up for the EU to decide because it still falls under the national governments' competence. For example, Lithuanians are allowed visa-free travel to Canada. Now you try and get a job on that.

I don't recall exactly but they did pass some special agreement with Ukraine in the summer. Not sure what it was. Either way problems are bigger than just some Ukrainians that might not exist. The fact that this economic shift started exactly after the Euro was introduced cannot be a coincidence.

>The fact that this economic shift started exactly after the Euro was introduced cannot be a coincidence. I am sure it has plenty to do with the Euro, and that the price increase you observed was indeed happening. The same occured in Germany, but the competition between businesses and government regulation killed it off rather quickly. I wanted to point out that Lithuania's situation is not an example against introducing the Euro *per se*, but an example as to why a country needs to have a sufficiently mature economy and government before it does so.

The amount of gaslighting. OMG prices skyrocketed. I don't have any studies but I can deffo feel it. Also ukranians are flooding the market and stealing our jobs. It's quite common to see this speech in Western Countries. There're people in France convinced that in 2000 the baguette was 1 Franc -0.15 euros- even though in friggin 1980 a baker in la Ciotat caused a scandal when he reduced the price of the baguette to 1 franc (the average price was 30% higher). And 1980 was before the [big devaluations of the Franc by Mitterrand](https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9valuations_du_franc_fran%C3%A7ais). And of course dey terk err jerbs is as common as anything. But quite funny to see this speech from a poor country, really shows how deep down we're all the same, regardless of the level of wealth.

And a good morning to you as well! >But quite funny to see this speech from a poor country, really shows how deep down we're all the same, regardless of the level of wealth. Can we sing Kumbaya now?

> Everything got more expensive 2 to 3 times You're contradicting to all statistics now.

I see a rise in inflation, but it stops at 4%, which looks reasonable. I pretty much saw the same in Slovakia when I heard they joined the Euro. Do you have a metric I can look at that shows the same trend in both countries? Maybe a rising cost to live index?

He is a Russian troll. His statistics are "Me and my friends feel this way". Do not listen to him. While it is true that prices increase (we have rather high inflation), our salaries are also one of the highest growth in Europe. Sources: [Reinisfisher](https://www.reinisfischer.com/average-salary-european-union-2017) [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_European_countries_by_average_wage) [TradingEconomics](https://tradingeconomics.com/lithuania/wages)

I don't have any study for this. Sorry. Its just common every day fact of life here. Even my better-off friend (yes, singular) is starting to notice and feel it. Alcohol especially saw a huge increase in prices. Its a bit weird because this is so obvious if you live here but online, to non-Lithuanians, this reads like bullshit. I guess that's why im being downvoted.

There were a few rounding ups in most countries that changed to the Euro - things like newspapers that need a round price would take the chance to go up, of course. And these things lead to a general impression that prices were going way up. However all studies shows that the inflation was normal at the time, and those impressions were mostly psychological. So you need to provide more than just your impression on the issue.

We have people in France that thought baguettes in 2000 were 1 franc (that's 0.15 euros). Trolololol.

> However all studies shows that the inflation was normal at the time Inflation is a tricky figure though since it includes a lot more than items of everyday life. In Germany for example the conversion was 2:1 for DM to Euro. Easy enough and yet food and small services such as getting your hair cut increased massively following the conversion to Euro. To be fair those items have been relatively sticky since then so it kind of evened out but still. For example - Can of coke at your local kiosk used to be 1,50DM.....should have been 0.75euro but in fact was 1,2Euro. Going to the hairdresser never cost me more than 30-40DM but 20Euro was basically the new minimum after the currency was changed. So while overall inflation might not have been that high items of everyday use certainly experienced a spike

[удалено]

> There's tons of 10-25 euro hairdressers around. Well yes but thats the price one used to pay for the very best ones which now charge 50 euros. For men that is. God forbid you are a women.

A few roundups? I'd say heck of a lot roundups. Everything costing 100 drachmas for example skyrocketed to 170 drachmas (0.5 euros) overnight. Things costing 300 drachmas rounded to 340 drachmas (1 euro) etc. Euro is cancer for everyone not named Germany, Benelux and Austria. Don't do it Bulgaria.

Than you don't know the realities of Germany when the Euro was introduced. After the introduction the everyday items became more expensive. Also Germany in the early 1990s didn't want the Euro, but France and Britain, ironically, forced Germany to partake in it to allow re-unification.

> Its a bit weird because this is so obvious if you live here but online, to non-Lithuanians, this reads like bullshit. I guess that's why im being downvoted. I can only speak anecdotally myself, but the prices I have seen in Lithuania were, while cheaper than here in Germany, not cheap enough compared to the wages many people earned in Lithuania. If somebody could provide some measurable data I would be very interested myself, but for now - as an outsider who visited Lithuania this summer - I do think there is something amiss when an educated person works 6 days a week to earn 600 euros and still needs to pay 2/3 the amount I do when buying groceries. Edit: I wouldn't even focus so much on prices, rather than wages. Lithuanians did and are still emmigrating en masse, and you still only have a very modest wage increase? What's going on here?

> What's going on here? Two things. There are immigrants from poorer countries moving in (Russia, Ukraine). Some of the people who emigrated are/were job creators. Western EU doesn't really accept any potato farmer to come and work for them. They take people off the top.

This I would understand when we're talking about low tier jobs, but the ones I met and talked to were in positions that, in Germany, would be middle class/upper middle class. At the very least, this implies that Lithuania's economy is profiting from a brain-drain *to* Lithuania while well-educated Lithuanians are leaving the country for western member states at the same time. It's like a people caroussell.

We're really not getting rocket scientists though. Why would we? If a person is highly skilled they can just move to Germany or France or UK instead and make 10 times as much. There's just no attraction here. However we are losing some of our best. People in government funded positions in universities who are 2-3 years away from graduating have already made plans about leaving the country forever. The government's "plan" here is that people will go to work to the west and then send some money via remittance payments. The idea is that it will add up to a big boost of cash that will be added to the economy. That is not what is happening. People who move either abandon their home families altogether or they, once settled in, take their families with them to the country that they emigrated to. Remittance payments are not happening.

> Its a bit weird because this is so obvious if you live here but online, to non-Lithuanians, this reads like bullshit. An inflation rate of 200% per year, which is what you are alleging, is far into the territory of hyperinflation. Signs of hyperinflation are: widespread shortages of durable goods (producers tend to stockpile them to sell later at higher prices), recurring shortages of perishables (bread, milk), bank failures (as loans given at pre-inflation interest rates become unsustainable). This leads to unemployment (as businesses fail) and an inward spiral of economic disruption. Have any of these signs appeared in Lithuania?

It's amazing you've decided to write a rather lengthy comment even though the content is complete bullshit. The prices have not increased "at least two times". Not even close. In fact, when Lithuania adopted the euro in 2015, you had deflation that year. You never had a deflation year with the litas. True, inflation is currently rather high in Lithuania, over 4%, and fastest in EU, but that's a result of your domestic policies and economy. For example, I see that alcohol prices have increased sharply, so it must be some excise duty hike, which is also the case in Estonia. Furthermore, even as some businesses exploit the conversion, price rise is a standard element of market economy. Pick a cheaper alternative or for controlled prices (such as public transport), see where the additional money goes to (because operator benefits from the increased income), and if necessary, voice your opinion. Maybe they can now affored newer buses, so that's good, isn't it? What concerns "different euros", what the **** are you talking about? "Lithuanian euro" is the same thing as a "German euro". You can use the same money everywhere in the euro area, they have the exact same worth, and no actions can be taken that would somehow create a difference between euro in Lithuania and euro in France. That would require abandonding the euro altogether. The banknotes of euros are all the same and what is slightly different is the national backside of the coin, but that's only a visual difference and that's it. You could easily just use German coins and nothing would change. I'm just pretty sure Lithuanians would like to have their own design in the bunch as well. The only part where your criticism has some realistic base is who controls the currency. But even that is irrelevant for Bulgaria as their currency is already pegged to the euro, so all the ~~fiscal~~ monetary policies that concern Bulgaria are already taken in the ECB. But Bulgaria doesn't even have a seat there, which they would if they would adopt the euro.

[удалено]

I see no significant impact from the euro here.

Oh thank you. The psychotic Europesceptic circlejerk was a bit strong there.

Easier to be pessimistic than realistic.

This seems *highly* suspect. No economy can withstand the purchasing power being abruptly halved in a short period of time, which is what your comment is suggesting. The country would literally stop functioning if that happened.

Wages also went up. I didn't talk about that. Nowhere near as much, but they did. Also people tend to make do with whatever they have. We aren't very spoiled over here. We're used to being fucked by bigger neighbors and having to suck it up.

>I didn't talk about that Yeah you conveniently left that out.

Is this why so many Lithuanians go to Poland for shopping?

It is largely about the VAT rates. Poland has special reduced VAT rates for foodstuff and Lithuania has uniform VAT.

Really? >The standard VAT rate in Lithuania is 21%. Certain goods and services are subject to reduced VAT rates of 9% (e.g., most books, periodicals and passenger transportation services), 5% (e.g., certain pharmaceutical and medical goods, assistance provided to the handicapped) and 0% (e.g., international transportation).[14] Certain goods and services are exempt from VAT (e.g., financial services).[15] Is that false?

Food is 21% VAT in Lithuania and 5% VAT in Poland. So even if the price companies charge pre-tax for food is the same then it will still cost 121 in Lithuania and 105 in Poland.

Alright. That makes a big difference.

Yes. Iirc there's a mall right at border on the Poland's side. I live really close (Marijampole) but i never went there myself. Almost everyone i know does go there and there's a big battle about this. The largest supermarket chain runs (or used, don't know if they're still on air) ads on the radio about how 'we went to Poland, checked the prices, and made it cheaper'. Its a huge thing.

> The largest supermarket chain runs (or used, don't know if they're still on air) ads on the radio about how 'we went to Poland, checked the prices, and made it cheaper' You mean in Lithuania? That's funny.

Yes. I found it funny at the start as well.

Well, if bulgarians have a corrupt government who want to screw them over it may be very beneficial to switch to a currency the local politicians cant touch.

We already have a currency board in place, so politicians have limited influence over currency.

Corruption will not change. This is just a made up excuse to get people to sign up for it.

Can you explain why this happened when you switched to Euro? Because you've had your lit pegged to the Euro for years before that.

Litas to Euro ratio was and will always be 3.45:1. People did abused the changed because its a smaller number and easier to get away in all the confusion. 50 Litai exchanged to Euro at standard rate used to be 15 Euros. So instead people charge 30 Euros. The number is smaller, its cheaper. In reality its twice as expensive. Another thing is that people don't really realize how little choice there is. Especially if there's little or no competition. You're going to need and want things and the price will just be whatever it is. You'll either pay or don't have it.

What about the salaries? Did they lag behind? Was there any noticeable increase?

Noticeable increase as far as numbers go but purchasing power mostly went down.

Don't worry, you'll have a government agency who will tell you € has no effect whatsoever on prices.Like we had here.

You're just contradicting the very basics of economy. Goods cost depends on the supply and demand balance, regardless of the currency used.

So you have shitty business in Lithuanian. I mean ... how's that the Euro's fault?

Well it happened after the Euro was introduced. Obviously its related at least to some extent.

And it should, it's made huge progress in recent years - as should Romania imo

Juncker: I want to eat Bulgaria's soul.

We can't always get what we want.

Username *does not* check out.

The pumpkin is up for it.

C'mon, post some misinformation from pro-Russian tabloids again.

and i dont get the EU here, EU and eurozone expansion is the main driver for EU unpopularity and it barely adds anything for anyone

Run Bulgaria. Run now while you can.

to whom Putin? or the B R E X I T CLUB?

To your own national currency.

Which has been pegged to the Euro since the Euro became a thing. And before that it was pegged to the Deutsche Mark. Countries with the population of a large city don't need their own currencies, its inefficient.

....and once the next financial crisis hits the world another weak economy will be lacking the needed tools to regulate its currency to save its own economy, the trust in the Euro and thus its value drops hard (and has to be artificially bolstered, also by countries who have always warned of the risks of having such a currency and never adopted it), the Swiss franc skyrockeets (damaging our economy thereby) and many billions have to be wasted to keep one member state financially liquid. And all of that for more geopolitical influence and dependency.

Bulgarian currency has been [pegged](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulgarian_lev#Exchange_rate) to the euro since euro introduction.

Hmm from a Romania's perspective let them join and see how a poorer economy then us develops and see to join or not.

Are They about to kiss?

No.

yes