In an interview with the Washington Post‘s Ezra Klein, economics professor at Chicago University’s Booth School of Business Austan Goolsbee (who was also a member of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers) had severe doubts over the future of the Euro.
… the flaw in that was not recognizing the importance of mobility. In Michigan, in the mid-’80s, the unemployment rate goes way up because a lot of factories shut down. And then, the mid-2000s, to pick a date, the unemployment rate in Michigan isn’t that much higher than in the rest of the country. But the main way that happened is people moved. What makes us a workable currency area is that people can move around. And that happened in East Germany too. They could move around. But the Greeks don’t even speak the same language as the Germans. Seven million Greeks can’t pack up and move to Germany. So low mobility, plus having the wrong currency values, plus no subsidies, is a toxic mix.
I have not previously addressed the issue of physical, as well as social and economic mobility on this blog but it makes sense. If there is a job somewhere else in the field you do now, why not move? My only counter to Goolsbee would question the mobility allowed to EU citizens through the schengen treaty. However, I imagine ever after that there exists a real problem of communication via language.
Does this mean Esperanto should be revived?*