This is such a strange thing to say. Do you think China and the Euro Area don't have 'negative stories'. Have you heard about Greece for example? Either compare numbers or stories.
Furthermore there is no evidence at all that people are losing confidence in fiat currencies.
And I'm not sure why you trusted CHF more before, its just another fiat currency. You could by Australian, New Zealand currency, they are well managed fiat as well.
In fact this was great for the majority of people as nobody profits in the long run from a deflationary spiral.
Very little context provided, would have probably been served even better with just a graph of the euro zone growth from 1999 quarter by quarter versus other economies like Japan, US, China for context.
Journalism feels lazier and lazier as it constantly searches for more clicks and ad impressions.
The biggest gains: China, Russia, Romania, the Baltics, Czech, Slovakia, Poland
The worst: Japan, Greece, Italy, France
Lithuania $3,113 -> $16,680 (436%) | Latvia $3,151 -> $15,594 (395%) | Estonia $4,119 -> $19,704 (378%) | Slovakia $5,636 -> $17,604 (212%) | Ireland $26,284 -> $69,330 (164%) | Slovenia $11,442 -> $23,597 (106%) | Spain $15,678 -> $28,156 (80%) | Finland $26,178 -> $45,703 (75%) | Austria $27,174 -> $47,290 (74%) | Netherlands $27,951 -> $48,223 (73%) | United States $34,620 -> $59,531 (72%) | Belgium $25,444 -> $43,323 (70%) | Portugal $12,474 -> $21,136 (69%) | Germany $26,795 -> $44,469 (66%) | France $24,673 -> $38,476 (56%) | Italy $21,936 -> $31,952 (46%) | Greece $13,245 -> $18,613 (41%)
China $873 -> $8,826 (911%) | Russia $1,330 -> $10,743 (708%) | Romania $1,610 -> $10,813 (572%) | Czech $6,307 -> $20,368 (223%) | Poland $4,389 -> $13,811 (215%) | South Korea $10,409 -> $29,742 (186%) | New Zealand $15,322 -> $42,940 (180%) | Australia $20,521 -> $53,799 (162%) | Canada $22,167 -> $45,032 (103%) | Switzerland $40,581 -> $80,189 (98%) | Sweden $30,577 -> $53,442 (75%) | Denmark $33,440 -> $56,307 (68%) | Japan $36,026 -> $38,428 (6.6%)
Plenty of other examples one could give, but the chart on this article (https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/why-the-world-looks-a...) may do. Free trade hit a peak in 1913, the highest it had perhaps ever been. The period that followed was not exactly peaceful.
That might have been what the elites believed, more political ingratiation. That of course is good for them as well.
In reality when they 'sold' this is was all about economics. And the routes of the whole thing are economic as well.
Exor hold 43% of the Economist the next biggest shareholder is the Rothschild family with 26%
Also, why do you think brexit is not a bad idea?
It had the right and power to implement its own immigration policy. But it turns out the UK is so racist it doesn't even want to grant citizen status to those it had already granted to in law but then failed to process them.
UK is not part of the Schengen Agreement, like, Ireland they can decide if a particularity nationality need a visa, I have dual nationality and I can enter Ireland or Uk without a visa using one passport and need a visa using another.
> You can travel to the so-called Schengen states (Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Greece, Ireland, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Romania , Sweden, Switzerland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Czech Republic, Hungary) without a visa, if you do not stay longer than three months and you do not work there. 
In the EU that's a moot point anyway as I haven't seen any border control in years. So at least travel-wise they're quite free to move.
you need a visa, is not free to move.
One of my favorite stats is that 100 years ago the population of Europe was nearly 30% of the world's total. Now its <10% and falling quickly.
Finally Yes I dont think its necessarily a bad thing, but you can't expect strong economic growth will falling working age population.
I don't think the 'warm bodies arms race' is going to end well for anyone, another perspective might be more apt.
If you look at USA growth vs. Western Europe, the USA does better, but not so much if you account for headcount.
As Western nations have fewer babies, there's a push for more migration, which in some places can work, not so much in others.
Europe has quite a lot of people and there are real physical limits to that growth - surely, it could all be as dense as Hong Kong but at some point, there needs be some consideration.
The West should not be trying to compete with Asia by having as many babies as them, surely.
If anything, we should maybe be trying to help tackle population explosion in some places, which can be done even with fairly non controversial methods like basic economic prosperity.
Where's the money going to come from in a non-controversial way?
But we still have a long way to go in applying technology and processes to make our lives better.
Also, as 5B poor people in the world come online and become consumers, they're going to need a lot of iPhones and eat a lot of KFC etc.
The taxes in Europe are too high and Government and Welfare programs need to be scaled way back. The fact that you have for example millions of young foreign men walking on foot all the way through the continent to access welfare-rich States indicates that something is amiss.
A distant fifth is Germany at around 7%. Ireland is up a couple percent.
Everyone else in the Eurozone is either near flat or negative on growth over the last ~11-12 years.
Greece is down 35%, Italy is down 15%, Spain is down 14%, Portugal is down 7%, France is down 7%, Finland and the Netherlands are down about 5%.
While the article is criticizing the Euro, Denmark and Sweden have also seen essentially zero per capita growth since 2007. The UK is down 20% over that time.
Outside that group and the Euro, you've got Romania up 30%, Poland up around 23%, Czech up 11% and Russia up 18%. I've excluded Norway, just because their figures swing wildly with oil.
There's definitely a sustained, serious growth problem in most of the Eurozone, however the baltics are doing quite well. The Netherlands, Belgium, Ireland, Finland, Germany and Austria are starting from quite high per capita figures, it's not a trivial task to keep pushing those higher.
The real issue isn't growth generally, it's that the next slide backwards in terms of recession, is going to badly damage the bunch that hasn't held their ground or seen enough recovery yet: France, Italy, Spain, Portugal, Greece. I'm not sure how the Euro survives if those sink lower in a recession and see another lost decade. Which would then actually be a lost two decades - a 1/3 to 1/2 real contraction for all of them, inflation adjusted over time. Losing that much of your purchasing power over 20 years is brutal, people won't sit idly by and absorb that forever, they'll rebel against the institutions.
France has pretty considerable exports, equivalent to nearly 20% of their GDP (the US is closer to 11% by comparison). If I'm them, I'd be seriously contemplating that I'd be better off controlling my own currency, so as to undercut the Germany export juggernaut rather than suffer from a currency that is too expensive (while simultaneously being artificially cheap for the German economy, spurring their exports and trade imbalance). Spain, Italy, Portual and Greece are all similarly suffering from a Euro that is too expensive for their situations (to varying degrees) and is harming their export potential.
> I'm not sure how the Euro survives if those sink lower in a recession and see another lost decade.
This seems like a non sequitur to me. Why wouldn't the Euro survive? If Japan had a lost decade, would you speculate about the survival of the yen?
You cannot imagine that once free of the shackles of Communism, a high-IQ country like Poland will stay forever poor, instead they will eventually equalise with neighbours like Germany:
I think EU have actually little problems compare with others.
If necessary, Italy will again be put under special measures as it was at the end of Berlusconi’s run; but it will never, ever default. Italians will self-tax to death before they default on their public debt, because too much of that debt is with themselves.
1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Central_Bank
If there is one money then by definition there can only be one monetary policy.
The issue is precisely that under different fiscal rules monetary policy effects different places in different ways.