Thank you, Ireland!

[jayhawk]

...For voting no. Because of your citizens actions, it helped in part to strengthen the Dollar against the Euro.

June 13 (Bloomberg) -- The dollar posted its biggest weekly gain versus the euro since 2005 as traders speculated the Federal Reserve will increase borrowing costs this year and Irish voters rejected a treaty promoting European Union unity.

The U.S. currency rose to a one-month high against the euro on bets Group of Eight finance ministers meeting this weekend will signal they favor a stronger dollar. The yen dropped for a fifth week against the euro after the Bank of Japan left its target lending rate at 0.5 percent, the lowest among industrialized nations.

``We've seen a very sharp reversal of sentiment about the dollar,'' said Nick Bennenbroek, head of currency research at Wells Fargo & Co. in New York. ``The U.S. economy seems reasonably resilient, and the Fed is beginning to look hawkish.''

The dollar increased 0.4 percent to $1.5376 euro at 4:24 p.m. in New York, from $1.5439 yesterday. It touched $1.5303, the strongest level since May 8. The U.S. currency increased 0.2 percent to 108.21 yen, compared with 107.96, and touched 108.38, the highest since Feb. 14. The euro fell 0.2 percent to 166.35 yen, from 166.68.

The U.S. currency climbed 2.6 percent this week against the euro, the biggest increase since June 2005. The dollar rose 3.2 percent versus the yen, the most since December 2004. The yen decreased 0.5 percent versus the euro in its longest stretch of losses since October.

Irish Reject Treaty

The 15-nation euro weakened as Irish voters turned down the European Union's new governing agreement, a setback for the bloc's plans to strengthen its global voice. Results from yesterday's national ballot on the Lisbon Treaty show opponents defeated supporters by 53.4 percent to 46.6 percent.

``The rejection of the treaty undermines the EU's public legitimacy and may influence public sentiment in countries contemplating joining the euro zone,'' wrote Geoffrey Yu, a currency analyst at UBS AG, in a note to clients today. ``This change may undermine the ECB's price stability mandate in favor of a growth mandate.''

The Chinese yuan rose for a second consecutive week versus the dollar, increasing 0.3 percent to 6.9022, on speculation policy makers are seeking a stronger currency to control inflation. The U.S. wants China to keep allowing its currency to rise against the dollar and will discuss that stance in talks next week in Maryland, said Alan Holmer, the U.S. Treasury's top China negotiator, in a briefing in Washington today.

Lagarde on Dollar

French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde, before meeting with her G-8 counterparts today and tomorrow in Osaka, Japan, told reporters that the U.S. dollar's increase versus the euro is ``very satisfying.'' The group comprises the U.S., Japan, Germany, the U.K., France, Italy, Canada and Russia.

The U.S. currency strengthened versus the euro on June 9 after U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said in an interview with CNBC that he would ``never'' rule out intervention. Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke said on June 3 that he's aware of the impact a falling currency can have on price expectations.

``There's a serious intent in defending the dollar,'' said Richard Franulovich, a senior currency strategist at Westpac Banking Corp. in New York. ``It seems the days of benign neglect are over.''

The last time the major industrialized countries intervened was on Sept. 22, 2000, when they bought the euro after it tumbled 27 percent from its 1999 debut. They last propped up the dollar in 1995, when it sank almost 20 percent in four months against the Japanese yen to a post-World War II low. Central banks intervene in currency markets by arranging purchases or sales of foreign exchange.

Source.

[argatoga]

``The rejection of the treaty undermines the EU's public legitimacy and may influence public sentiment in countries contemplating joining the euro zone,'' wrote Geoffrey Yu,

Bullshit the EU undermined its own legitimacy by sneaking in the constitution under a new name.

[jetsetter]

I can't blame them. Have you actually seen the E.U. Constitution(this new treaty)? It's a 160,000 word "book" full of legal terminology. Compare this to the 4,600 word United States Constitution and you can see my point. It seems to have been created for use by politicians and lawyers, that is about it.

[Cobol74]

Thank you thank you thank you - The Irish deserve a Huge pat on their collective backs! Well done - you can not impose a constitution from the centre, it does not work. If Gordon Brown had some guts, he would have run the British one tonight too and I tell you it would have gone down by the same amount. ...

Europe: find out why we hate it do not piss about trying to railroad rubbish ideas past your inhabitants.

I have one for you Queen meets Europe President at Heathrow; now who defers to whom as they are they in-charge of the same bit of land/people?

/EDIT I think I am catching Spectre disease - he HATES the UAW, I hate what the EU has become and what it will become even more - mental note "Cobol enough with the EU already. ...".

[teeb]

I can't blame them. Have you actually seen the E.U. Constitution(this new treaty)? It's a 160,000 word "book" full of legal terminology. Compare this to the 4,600 word United States Constitution and you can see my point. It seems to have been created for use by politicians and lawyers, that is about it.

Yes, this is a huge problem with it. None of us are going to sit down and read a 160,000 document full of legalese, which means we rely on summaries (be it in the press, online or hearsay). And each of these - be it newspapers, blog posts, mates in the pub or on forums - are going to slant their opinion of it somehow.

Having said that I really don't know enough about it to form a proper opinion one way or another.

Thank you thank you thank you - The Irish deserve a Hugh pat on their collective backs! Well done - you can not impose a constitution from the centre, it does not work. If Gordon Brown had some guts, he would have run the British one tonight too and I tell you it would have gone down by the same amount. ...

The irony being the Labour party promised a referendum on it...

[Cobol74]

If you do not know then that tells you immediately which way to vote - the only people in favour are the non elected council of Europe and if it was good it would not be 160,000 pages of legalese now would it? The Irish are the only ones with the sense to ask the Electorate we should have but did not, and someone else in Europe should have done the same thing - now who voted no last time?

[Redliner]

Damn....I thought you were thanking Ireland for giving the world redheads...

[Lupin_IV]

Both are good reasons to thank Ireland.

[Karoug]

Thanx Ireland!

[Steve Levin]

When it comes to what the EU leaders think is right for the EU, though, they are like the Terminator. They will never, ever stop until they get what they want.

Nice was an example of a "second" pass when the original proposal failed. Lisbon is just a third pass of the EU Constitution. I'm sure there will be a third and fourth pass until they get all 27 states to ratify it.

Steve

[Scooby5]

I can't blame them. Have you actually seen the E.U. Constitution(this new treaty)? It's a 160,000 word "book" full of legal terminology. Compare this to the 4,600 word United States Constitution and you can see my point. It seems to have been created for use by politicians and lawyers, that is about it.

That's partially what makes the US Consitution as vague and outdated as the 10-Commandments.

[chvvkumar]

Damn, our's was (or still is?) the largest written constitution in the world at 117,369 words...

It is the longest written constitution of any independent nation in the world, containing 395 articles , 12 schedules and 83 amendments, for a total of 117,369 words in the English language version.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_India

[phuckingduck]

That's partially what makes the US Consitution as vague and outdated as the 10-Commandments.

Damn, here I was thinking it was a living document that was at the hands of the people to be formed continually and to have its positions refined through the trial and error of assessed judgements at court.

*Shakes fist furiously at American history instructors*

I'd rather have my constitution say...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

...than some long legalese. KISS applies to governing as well as it does to machine design. Is it as cut and dry as some 180,000+ word document? Nope. But it shouldn't be. If your constitution outlines exactly what you're allowed to say, and it isn't left to be interpreted, than you've lost the ability to speak freely. Precedence can be overturned at judicial discretion to adapt to a changing society, but Article 19, Chapter 65, Paragraph 32, Line 8, Sentence 2 is a bit more difficult. If you're willing to accept that a changing society will need to line by line edit their constitution rather than drop precedence then okie dokie. Have fun with a parliament in 20 years that does nothing but in-fighting over constitutional amendments while judges and governmental programs are handcuffed by restrictive language.

[Peter3hg]

I'd rather have my constitution say...

...than some long legalese.

You are completely missing what this constitution is about. The equivalent of what you stated is the European Convention on Human Rights which is about 5,000 words.

This treaty is essentially about the structure of the EU and it is going to be long as it covers so many different institutions and complex legal relationships between the countries. It simply wouldn't be possible to do it is less than 100,000 words.

[jetsetter]

That's partially what makes the US Consitution as vague and outdated as the 10-Commandments.

The fact that it is vague allows it to adapt and change. Citizens can debate meanings and issues.

This a good thing. The more specific a document is the less likely it is to change. There have been over 10,000 proposed amendments to the Constitution over the past few hundred years and some have passed. Many were debated and voted upon. If you begin with all of the rules in place you loose that debate.

Remember that the U.S. Constitution is the world's oldest federal constitution and it has survived as long as it has because of its vagueness.

The Constitution writes down the important things and lets the later generations figure out what they need to change or add.

[Steve Levin]

And the US Constitution is loosely based on the Magna Carta, which is also similarly short, yet no less critical to the development of Western Civilization

Steve

[D-Fence]

It will go this way: The central european states like BeNeLux, Germany, France, Italy etc will just do it, the rest will be left out as "second class eu". As easy as that.

On the other side, Ireland is acting like complete fuckers, because they were by far the poorest country to join the EU, got billions of money from the EU to get rich again, are now one of the richest EU countries and act like this. Fuckers. Bite the hand that fed them.

[jetsetter]

And the US Constitution is loosely based on the Magna Carta, which is also similarly short, yet no less critical to the development of Western Civilization

Steve

It's loosely based on quite a few documents, not just the Magna Carta. They took the best they could from many sources and added their own brilliant inspirations to make the Constitution.

On the other side, Ireland is acting like complete fuckers, because they were by far the poorest country to join the EU, got billions of money from the EU to get rich again, are now one of the richest EU countries and act like this. Fuckers. Bite the hand that fed them.

I would say that they are acting in the best interests of Europe as a whole. You owe them a great debt.

[phuckingduck]

You are completely missing what this constitution is about. The equivalent of what you stated is the European Convention on Human Rights which is about 5,000 words.

This treaty is essentially about the structure of the EU and it is going to be long as it covers so many different institutions and complex legal relationships between the countries. It simply wouldn't be possible to do it is less than 100,000 words.

I was using the 1st amendment and free speech as the easiest examples. Insert whatever you want in there, but a succinct document is better. See Jetsetter's posts.

[Karoug]

I would say that they are acting in the best interests of Europe as a whole. You owe them a great debt.

Yea! Many countries would have voted no if they were allowed to vote..