I just came back from the voting station where I and the other Swedes voted wether we want to adopt the Euro or not. It has been a very heated debate about this in Sweden recently but it has been overshadowed in the recent days by the death of Anna Lindh. It has long been a fairly even battle between the two sides but leaning slightly to a 'No' to the Euro. The 'Yes' side has gained ground the past few weeks though so it will be interresting to see the outcome.

The voting stations closes at 8 pm local time and the results will be presented sometime tonight. I'll come with an update as soon as I know the final results (if I don't fall asleep before then :D ).

Edit: Let's not forget that Estonia has a referendum too today but that one is whether to join the European Union or not. The 'Yes' side is expected to win with about 70% of the votes.

[ 09-14-2003, 07:58 AM: Message edited by: Stratos ]

If I had to place a bet on it, I would say that the Swedish are most likely to vote 'No'. :(

The 'No' probably side still have an edge but some recent polls shows that the 'Yes' side would win so it's not decided yet. There's still a large portion of the Swedes that are undecided, something like 14% and that group have grown.

[ 09-14-2003, 08:03 AM: Message edited by: Stratos ]

Be prepared for unusually high inflation rates if Euro wins. Conversion between different currencies cannot be exact, and prices will be rounded up in most cases. It happened in most Euro countries, I guess it would happen also in Sweden. Wish you luck [img]smile.gif[/img]

However, it's not all bad as salaries (for most euro states) increased to off-set the changes in prices...

***Update***

Well almost all votes are counted now and it's quite obvious that the 'No' side won. The numbers I have in front of me are: Yes 41.8% and No 56.1%. These numbers are not expected to change much during the counting of the remaining votes. The participation in the polling was 81.2% which has to be considered fairly good.

Seems that Sweden has joined Denmark and Great Britain standing outside the single currency.

You can congratulate your fellow countrymen, because the Euro SUCKS ASS. Ever since we have our new currency things are much more expensive, some are just outrageous, like clothing.

I wonder why the hell they had to shove the Euro down our throats. To make us all bankrupt or something ?

Yes, but most salaries in most sectors increased in line with inflation or better - very few jobs had pay rises that did not at least off-set the price rises...

Furthermore, prices on the internet dropped dramatically (esp. electrical goods, music, software, and other goodies). Cafe prices rose and so did food - but the rise in income more than covered that.

Don't know about clothes can't say that I've bought any in the Netherlands - ever. Generally do my shopping in London or Paris and I don't think that there was any appreciable rise in prices in the latter city...

Well, my salary didn't go up one bit. And you'll notice it when you're going grocery shopping, everything went up, and not just a little like they do every year. You also notice it when you go for a haircut, the Euro simply replaced the Guilder in that branch, which makes a haircut almost twice as expensive.

A decent pair of jeans is up to 100 or even 125 Euro now, where it used to be 125 guilders. So there the price almost doubled as well. And the list goes on and on and on. Basically the Euro screwed us all. A lot of people are complaining about it. Why the hell did we never get to vote for this, like the Danes and the Swedes ?

This is a great loss for Sweden. Many companies have chosen to remain in Sweden pending the outcome of the vote and threatened to leave if the vote was a 'NO'. Even Ericsson (perhaps Sweden's most famous brand) had already threatened to scale back manufacturing operations in Sweden in favour of euro-zone countries or other countries with a more stable currency.

That said, unemployment in Sweden is rising, so reduced wages as a result of this may be enough to off-set the losses from exchange rates that some companies are experiencing; but only in the short term.

Being faced with unemployment or reduced wages is no cause for celebration - but that said, their loss is potentially our gain, as Ericsson demonstrates, so I don't see this as a bad result for the existing euro-zone members.

[ 09-15-2003, 04:46 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

Well since Ericsson has fired most of the employers already good riddance ;) Well not really, and also, the increase in unemployment has been waited for some time. Just check Germany for unemployment in the same paradigm as we are in now.

This is probably also one of the reasons why most Swedes voted no.

Other factors are that we don't like the closed system of europe, the ECB don't answer to anyone and all the votings and documents are hdden from the public for ut to 30 years.

I think that Sweden will join the EMU later on though, so in six-ten years we will probably have another vote about it. We are still in the third agreement or hwat it is called that makes the Swedish Krona bound to the Euro somewhat, so we are still taking after the Euro's ups and downs.

The same here in Italy: According to currency exchange rates, 1€ = 1936.27 £
In reality 1€ = 1000 £, with prices almost doubled.
Price increase since € introduction has risen outrageously, and italian salaries, like johnny's, didn't go up a bit.

But didn't companies in Denmark say the same thing? [img]tongue.gif[/img]

Personally I don't think the short term effects will be drastical but in the long term, I don't know. The No to the Euro was kind of expected in financial circles so those effects has been fairly small. But Sweden, with a population of only 9 million, have chosen to not to adopt a currency which has the potential to be, if you're going to believe the Euro gurus that is, one of the most powerful currencies in the world, perhaps even greater than the dollar. We will have to wait and see what will happen in a couple of years from now, was the choice not to join good or bad.

Yes they did - but, given that the vote was in September 2000, the economic data that is currently available can not fully quantify whether Denmarks economy has suffered in the long term.

What we do know is that GDP has dropped dramatically from an average 3% per annum up to 2000, to 0.9% by 2001 (and estimated to be no more than 1% in 2002), wheras the growth in unemployment has risen at a faster rate than Denmarks euro-zone counteparts in 2001/2002.

Furthermore, prior to the 2000 vote, 2/3 of all Danish exports went to euro-zone destinations, now only half do - with the remainder going to Eastern block countries who themselves are about to join the euro-zone. This suggests that Danish products are finding it hard to compete with euro-zone competitors, especially as manufacturing output has fallen rather than remained stactic.

Finally, one might also mention that the value of the Krona has only been sustained by some rather severe austerity measures in the last two years - this is a fact that is also worth considering.

Well about the allmighty Euro and all the possible growth and fabulous effects it has.
As mentioned above, sweden is roughly 9 million people, has a small market compaired with many countries in Europe. France and Germany both will brake the given control interest set by the ECB this year as well.

What is the penalty for the other countries that do the same I ask you?

The Euro still seems like a currancy trying to establish itself and will need more time to be a balanced thing. So waiting some more years seems like a pretty good choice.

The debate has promised heaven or hell depending on who you wanted to believe in in the debaes. NEver have I seen the choices beeing so "stupified" and leveled down. The arguments were more of fiction then facts, speculations taken for granted from both sides. Bah.

I hope the poiliticians learn from this and shapes up for the next round.

The problem was that both camps fell into the immediate dire/fantastic consequences of not having/not having the euro. In reality, economic changes occur much more slowly over a long period of time. It will take up to a decade before there are enough indicators to prove or disprove the case completely.

Unfortunately, if Sweden has erred in its decision to remain outside the zone, it will take as long to repair the damage as it took to sustain it. The No campaign said: "Well we can always join later on" as if there would be an automatic repair to the economy in the event it was damaged.

Unfortunately, life doesn't work that way. Customers that switched to competitors will not automatically return unless there is an advantage in doing so (cost, delivery etc). Manufacturers like Ericsson will not immediately close down their new euro-zone production lines saying "All is forgiven Sweden!" because it took a large investment to build a new plant/re-tool existing production lines and train personnel.

The No campaign emphasised that the world is not only Europe and that there is a whole world-market out there from which to buy and sell. That is true, and there is no reason why Sweden can't survive and do well by ignoring the EU market. But it will have to work hard and produce cheaply to overcome transportation costs.

International companies looking for an EU foothold will not see Sweden as a natural choice from which to tap into the geographical european market, so inward investment is likely to suffer too - this has certainly been the Danish experience so far.

Time will tell, the no-vote certainly does *not* spell immediate dire consequences for Sweden - but it certainly doesn't indicate either a boom period or shielding from the general world-wide economic downturn either.

Considering that Sweden hs alot of trade with none EU companies, the country importing most from Sweden is for example Norway. We sell alot of tree and steel to asia, pulp over the world market. Ericsson, what is this about Ericsson?

Ericsson is no the biggest company in Sweden anymore. They have sacked people like maniacs to survive even before the Euro. Lately they have started to stop the downfall. They are partners with Sony now for the new line of mobile phones. Sweden has alot of multinatinal companies with plants all over Europe. Take Mölnlycke SCA for instance, has plants in most parts of the world. Volvo and SAAB both are owned by foreign countries, regrdless of Euro or not.

I am not listening to the No sayers of parties, cause I think they are as stupid as the Yes sayers fie hard in this matter. What is more of interest is that for once the politicians are finally understanding that they have work to do. The social party has received a hint from the liberal, and right parties to work together to influence the market and to get strength to make reforms for the best of the market for Sweden. This is IMO much more valuable then to join the Euro. A country with strong "make it happen" power is also favoured for investments.

So, still, there are many countries outside the holy Euro, and inside there are still alot of troubles, and the vote to say no to the third step for now doesn't mean that we are leaving EU or anything. We will still have the economy closely tied to the european market, and when we think it is right to join, we take a new decision or not.

Quite true, although 9/10 CEO's of Sweden's biggest companies were declared that they were for the euro, which suggests that they were worried about the costs of staying out.

Those multinationals that you mention have shielded themselves by basing their main production operations elsewhere in europe - which means that the jobs and taxes from those companies are being enjoyed by other European countries (not to mention the 'local' suppliers which feed from them).

To my mind, if the issue to join the euro-zone was fought only on economic terms, Sweden would be joining it in 2006. In reality though, it was about (false) perceptions of a EU super-state in which Swedes would be ruled by Brussels, Germany and France, and the fears of the erosion of Sweden's (comparitivly generous) social security system that really settled this debate.
Is that a false assesment?

[ 09-16-2003, 04:31 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

For certain thoose were arguments used by many, and giving up controle to other countries haven't been a popular idea. For the companies however, they have been "fleeing" for a long time Skunk. And we still get new companies here, but we have to change something to make the country more appealing for companies here since the Euro was one such benefit. Ericsson has based their operation in England for instance. Asia etc etc etc. Many companies went abroad before the euro existed.

But as you also might know we have very high taxes here in Sweden so cutting in some of would make that appeal. If it will compair to the Euro?, we will see.


"To my mind, if the issue to join the euro-zone was fought only on economic terms, Sweden would be joining it in 2006. In reality though, it was about (false) perceptions of a EU super-state in which Swedes would be ruled by Brussels, Germany and France, and the fears of the erosion of Sweden's (comparitivly generous) social security system that really settled this debate.
Is that a false assesment?"

If the vote would be based souly on our fears, we wouldn't be in the EU to begin with.

It is alot more multifaceted then this I believe. Alot of people don't like how the EU handles the EMU up to dae and wants to wait and see how it turns out. We would also like a more "open" system to which people have more insight into the affairs that make impacts in their lives.

Thanks for the insight.

And thank you.

I think this debate will still run hot up here for the years to come. IMHO, I think Sweden will join sooner or later though anyway. It is but a matter of time.