Hacker News Reader

You have to be careful to make a distinction being in the EU and using the Euro as your currency. You can benefit from the EU common market, with its uniform rules/standards, easy capital flows, subsidies, and industrial policy. All without using the Euro as your currency, and being subject to the monetary policy of the ECB.

Being in the EU without using the Euro has been pretty good for Poland.

> Being in the EU without using the Euro has been pretty good for Poland.

That's an interesting perspective. From what I see in the news, the EU isn't as happy with the outcome.

Probably because the success undermines using the Euro.

Debatable. The original comment was good, because it specifically noted the advantages of using a sovereign currency in certain situations.

Once Poland becomes more prosperous and its growth rate slows, it would make sense for it to move to the euro. It just doesn't now.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_in_...

They are free to be. When joining the EU, Poland accepted to join the monetary union at some point, but there is no date set, so in theory it can be infinite. And with its current strategy to drastically modernize and increase its military force, there is no doubt it will not met the financial criteria anytime soon so nobody is worried about that.

> Even ignoring the real economic cost of having two currencies, there is no serious economist that would argue Poland joining the EUR zone is negative for Poland (as opposed to for stronger EU economies). Every single historic metric points in the other direction.

The inability to set monetary policy is a strong argument. Just ask Greece (and Spain):

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euro_area_crisis

Also, not for nothing but the Polish economy is mostly doing as well as it does because of the metric ton of EU subsidies injected into it the past decades.

That's one part of it. The other part is that the country had just as much human capital and economic potential as Western European states, but was held back artificially by the Partitions, WW2, the Soviet Union, and the lack of Marshall Plan investment that Western Europe received.

Sorry, but the narrative of "Poland is only doing well because the EU is helping" (of which German companies are benefitting from tremendously) is a historically narrow way to analyze the situation.

Well, it's a fact, not a narrative. I think the actual debate is whether or not boosting economies of countries in the EU that for one reason or another were or are behind on the curve is a net win. I think it is. Just as it is perfectly justified for other countries to feel a bit hard done by if that same country after an estimates 280 billion euro injection is still rejecting the shared currency of that body.

The point is that "feeling a bit hard done by" rings a little hollow if the country feeling this way is the reason the recipient country needs investment in the first place. 280 billion euro is still less than a third of the estimated amount of damage from WW2 alone.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_material_losses_during_...