# A couple observations



## Jimster (Mar 16, 2008)

I just got back from Ireland, Scotland and Britain.  I am not a world traveler but I have been to Europe 10 times in the last 7 years.  I would make a couple of observations.

1.  The prices of everything now make travel very difficult.  The dollar is at an all time low against the Euro and Pound.  If you go be prepared to pay heavily for everything.  Most of the rather modest meals for my wife and I cost between $40 and $100.  If you charge them on many CC (which I never do) many of the banks will add another$3-$10.   Admission to a typical attraction is 15e- That's $23.  

2.  If you are a senior (defined in most places as over 60) ask for the senior or concession rate-even if it is not posted.  We probably saved $150 because of this.

3.  Since our trip involved 4 plane connections, another issue is the extra baggage fees.  While I didn't pay any extra baggage fees, I was asked for them 3 out of the 4 times (Aer Lingus, BA and AA).  It certainly doesn't hurt that I am an premier executive with United, but the key is that most airlines give transatlantic passengers a break.  You generally get what you came with (not always-ie Ryan Air).  So when they ask you to pay the extra fees, simply say that you recently flew transatlantic and this was the approved allotment and they may let you out of extra baggage fees.

Does this mean don't travel to Europe?  No, but it means you are going to pay a great deal of money for the experience.  I don't know how people with several children can afford it.  I can't complain too much since I got many free nights from hotel reward programs, prepaid my TS lodging and had FF airline tickets using an open jaw.  BTW I stayed at Fitzpatrick Castle in Ireland and Duchally Country Estates in Scotland and several Starwoods including Edinburgh and London.


----------



## Carolinian (Mar 17, 2008)

Eastern Europe is still much more affordable than western Europe, but even here, the dollar has fallen 20% against our lowly currencies in the last six months.  The euro effect has been a big part of what has made western Europe expensive, and it will eventually come east, regrettably.  Some non-euro countries, like the UK, Switzerland, and Scandanavia have always been expensive.  Decimilization of the pound in the 1970s had the same impact there as the change to the euro did more recently elsewhere in western Europe.  The fall of the dollar has only added to that.


----------



## alanmj (Mar 17, 2008)

*UK and European inflation - the facts*



Carolinian said:


> Decimilization of the pound in the 1970s had the same impact there as the change to the euro did more recently elsewhere in western Europe.



These statements that (a) decimalization of the pound and (b) introduction of the euro caused inflationary price increases are points that you make at whatever opportunity but are both shown to be fallacies by considering appropriate monetary statistics.

(a) decimalization of the pound
Both western Europe and the U.S. experienced high inflation rates during the 1970s compared to before (1950s and 1960s) and after (1980s and 1990s). See Chart 18 in:
http://www.helsinki.fi/iehc2006/papers3/Carreras103.pdf
Britain's average inflation rate for the 10 years (1972-1980) after decimalization was three times greater that for the 10 years prior (1971-1980), but in fact the U.S. and average European inflation rates were also almost exactly three times higher when comparing the two periods.
Misguided and misinformed people in the U.K. associate the high inflation seen in the U.K. (up to 24% in 1975 - the highest inflation in the last two centuries) in the 1970s with the introduction of decimalization, whereas it was a global phenomenon (at least amongst the industrialized nations).

(b) introduction of the euro
I have commented on this before when you have made this statement. You are not alone in your erroneous perception that the introduction of the euro caused inflation - apparently 93% of Europeans in euro countries agree with you. To quote from eurozone: "In contrast to these public perceptions of euro-related price rises, Eurostat data clearly show that the effect of the earlier euro changeover on prices was negligible." See:
http://www.eurozope.org/html/188.html
plus a myriad of other sources.
For Germany in particular, the Bundesbank undertook a very careful analysis of some 18,000 prices of goods prior and subsequent to the introduction of the Euro. Their full report can be read at:
http://www.bundesbank.de/download/volkswirtschaft/mba/2002/200207_en_consumerprice.pdf
They conclude that "This finding is consistent with the conclusion, derived from the official price index as a whole, that the changeover from D-Mark to euro did not play a major role in pushing up prices."


Continually re-stating and promulgating these erroneous perceptions serves readers of this board poorly. If you wish to respond, please do so based on published, authoritative FACTS, not on hearsay.


----------



## Keitht (Mar 17, 2008)

alanmj said:


> (b) introduction of the euro
> I have commented on this before when you have made this statement. You are not alone in your erroneous perception that the introduction of the euro caused inflation - apparently 93% of Europeans in euro countries agree with you. To quote from eurozone: "In contrast to these public perceptions of euro-related price rises, Eurostat data clearly show that the effect of the earlier euro changeover on prices was negligible." See:
> http://www.eurozope.org/html/188.html
> plus a myriad of other sources.



If you simply want to believe the officially published line that's fine but I, and most others, comments from personal experience.  If 93% of the population perceived an additional increase in prices following the introduction of the Euro are they really all wrong.  The most obvious inflationary aspect in a country such as Spain was the rounding of prices with the introduction of the Euro.  That is exactly the same as happened with decimalisation in the UK.  I was working in a shop at the time and can assure you that even if the equivalent price was for example 9.1 pence the price was rounded up - not down.
250 pesetas equated to roughly 1.6 euros in Spain.  Local people would notice a price increase of say 15 pesetas, but an equivalent increase of 0.1 euros isn't so obvious.  Add to that the general uncertainty and confusion at the time of conversion and you have a market ripe for exploitation, and that is exactly what happened.


----------



## Keitht (Mar 17, 2008)

Jimster said:


> I just got back from Ireland, Scotland and Britain.  I am not a world traveler but I have been to Europe 10 times in the last 7 years.



Scotland and Northern Ireland are parts of the United Kingdom.  Scotland and the island of Ireland are parts of the British Isles.  I'm guessing that by 'Britain' you actually mean England.  Our own government does enough to make the residents of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland feel like second class citizens so they don't need any help thanks.


----------



## Jimster (Mar 17, 2008)

*Sorry*

Sorry, I didn't mean any offense.  I know that Scotland and Wales are in the United Kingdom and you're right-I did mean England.  Maybe we can get the inhabitants of England, Wales, Scotland, etc to stop referring to my country as America but rather the United States of America.  It seems there are other countries in the Americas and/or the Western Hemisphere (even though we may forget that ourselves).  It may depend on whose Ox is being gored.


----------



## alanmj (Mar 17, 2008)

Keitht said:


> Scotland and the island of Ireland are parts of the British Isles.



You are showing your own insensitivity. The Irish resent that name of "British Isles". See wikipedia for a quick lesson:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles


----------



## alanmj (Mar 17, 2008)

Keitht said:


> If you simply want to believe the officially published line that's fine but I, and most others, comments from personal experience.  If 93% of the population perceived an additional increase in prices following the introduction of the Euro are they really all wrong.



With all due respect Keith - and I do respect most of your postings - that is complete, unmitigated drivel. If you lived 2000 years ago you'd be arguing for a flat Earth, and if you lived 500 years ago that the Sun revolved around the Earth, as both of them were the dominant perception of their times. What the majority believe does not make it true. 

I asked for published, authoritative facts, not hearsay. Do you have any?


----------



## Jimster (Mar 17, 2008)

*Euro*

delete this post


----------



## abbekit (Mar 17, 2008)

Jimster,

What did you think of Fitzpatrick Castle and Dalkey?  I'd love to read a trip report and review.

We were there in November 2007 and were hit by the higher cost of the Euro (and also the Pound during our week in Scotland).

I agree that travel to Europe can still be affordable for Americans with careful planning.  Especially if you can pre-pay in U.S. dollars for things like airfare, timeshare trade, hotel rooms, etc.  We also saved a good deal of money by eating in, the beauty of staying in a timeshare (or rental apartment).  We used our splurge money for Guinness in the pubs .

We were lucky to stay a week with friends in Scotland so our splurge there was one night at the Balmoral Hotel in Edinburgh.


----------



## Keitht (Mar 17, 2008)

alanmj said:


> With all due respect Keith - and I do respect most of your postings - that is complete, unmitigated drivel. If you lived 2000 years ago you'd be arguing for a flat Earth, and if you lived 500 years ago that the Sun revolved around the Earth, as both of them were the dominant perception of their times. What the majority believe does not make it true.
> 
> I asked for published, authoritative facts, not hearsay. Do you have any?



Published does not equal authoritative, any more than personal experience can be dismissed as hearsay.  Statistics can be made to support virtually any argument, just look at the current Global Warming discussions!  As I said previously I am speaking from personal experience of _additional_ inflation which has happened in a number of European countries when they moved to the Euro from their own currency.  I'm not claiming that there are no other factors but when, as in the UK, the currency unit of the pound changed from having 240 pennies to 100 pence the minimum price increase is 2.4 times higher and will affect inflation even if only for a comparatively short time.  Once that inflation has happened it is unlikely to be reversed even after the new currency has bedded in. 
The flat earth argument is also a spurious one.  People didn't have personal experience to validate the belief, they do for inflation.


----------



## Keitht (Mar 17, 2008)

alanmj said:


> You are showing your own insensitivity. The Irish resent that name of "British Isles". See wikipedia for a quick lesson:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles



'Nowt to do with insensitivity or otherwise.  It's the current geographic entity.  It may change at some time in the future, but until then the term is valid and accurate.


----------



## hibbeln (Mar 17, 2008)

Well, I'm with Keith in the Flat Earth Society, I guess.  I absolutely found the "Euro Creep" on prices to be true......everything was rounded up.  It also struck me particularly in Spain.

I'm not looking at the government stats, I'm looking at the bottle of water for 2 Euros, which is probably about  exactly 0.9 Euros than it should have been.


----------



## Ireland'sCall (Mar 17, 2008)

alanmj said:


> You are showing your own insensitivity. The Irish resent that name of "British Isles". See wikipedia for a quick lesson:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles


.

 Agree !!!  ( a great debate to have on St Patrick's Day) but am off to the pub just now ...for a soft pint of Guinness...might be calmer for us all to do the same .Enjoy
G


----------



## dmharris (Mar 17, 2008)

I am no economist and don't even understand some of these postings, but I am laughing out loud at the pompousness of some of the posts.  If the earth were flat and I walked to the end and fell off, would I have to publish that fact for it to be true?  LOL!!  Or, since I'd be gone, someone else would have to publish the fact for it to be credible?  Or put it in the reverse, if I walked around the world and did not fall off, would I have to publish this for the fact to be true that the world is round?

I think not.


----------



## alanmj (Mar 17, 2008)

Ireland'sCall said:


> .
> Agree !!!  ( a great debate to have on St Patrick's Day) but am off to the pub just now ...for a soft pint of Guinness...might be calmer for us all to do the same .Enjoy
> G



Just returned from the St. Patrick's Day parade in Dublin. A great spectacle. And one that's not on a British Isle at all, but on what is known as a Celtic Isle, as in "British and Celtic Isles", one of the acceptable names for these islands. 

Unfortunately, some people insist on insulting the Irish by using the term "British Isles". For those of you who wish to be better informed, read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles_naming_dispute 

Those of you happy to wallow in pompous (good word dmharris) ignorance, continue to do so... just don't ever come over to Ireland, for your own sake! Some Irish will take offence.


----------



## alanmj (Mar 17, 2008)

Keitht said:


> Published does not equal authoritative, any more than personal experience can be dismissed as hearsay.



The German Federal Bank is as authoritative as it gets. Similarly, the other sources quoted are authoritative.

Again, I ask for authoritative references to your argument that the introduction of the euro has had inflationary consequences in euro countries. Your personal experience is immaterial, unless of course you are stating that you are an authoritative reference...


----------



## Keitht (Mar 17, 2008)

I can't remember the name of the organisation that publishes the fuel consumption figures for vehicles.  You know the Urban, Extra Urban and Combined figures for mpg?  That organisation is presumably defined as 'authoritative', but the figures they provide are rarely achieved in the real world.  
It may even be true that on the basis of the figures used by these authorities that inflation hasn't been affected, but their calculation is based on a far wider 'basket' than that which affects people on a day to day basis.  I look at food, transport and drink costs as the basis for my inflation calculations and on that basis there was certainly a noticeable upward movement.
It's clear we ain't gonna agree on this so we might both just as well stop bashing our heads against brick walls  
I have no problem with people having different opinions to my own - as long as they have no problem with being wrong.  :hysterical:


----------



## alanmj (Mar 17, 2008)

Keitht said:


> I look at food, transport and drink costs as the basis for my inflation calculations and on that basis there was certainly a noticeable upward movement.



The German Federal Bank monitored over 18,000 items before and after the introduction of the euro when forming their report. Worth a read:
http://www.bundesbank.de/download/volkswirtschaft/mba/2002/200207_en_consumerprice.pdf




Keitht said:


> It's clear we ain't gonna agree on this so we might both just as well stop bashing our heads against brick walls.



Objective debate is always useful. I will continue to quote facts, as long as others continue to promulgate erroneous hearsay and perceptions (which some do ad nauseam). 


I have not heard one whit of evidence in support of the view that the introduction of decimalization of the pound and of the euro increased inflationary pressures. I would like to read some, as it's something I have followed for a few years now, but I cannot find ANY report from any federal bank or even independent monetary institution that would be in support of that view.


----------



## sml2181 (Mar 17, 2008)

Hi - I live in the Netherlands and I just want to add some of my observations.

According to the Dutch National Bank, there was only a slight impact on the prices when the Euro came.

Below are some price differences we have had here  - before / after the Euro, same stuff in the same stores. (1 Euro was 2.20 DFL at the time the Euro was introduced)

1 bread: 2.50 DFL / 2.60 Euro
2 liter pack milk: 1.09 DFL / 1.20 Euro
1 pair of shoes: 200 DFL / 250 Euro
1 pair of pants: 160 DFL / 185 Euro
1 pound coffee: 2.39 DFL / 2.49 Euro
1 beer at our local bar: 3 DFL / 3.75 Euro
1 coffee at my former favorite deli: 2.25 DFL / 3.50 Euro 
My daughter's ballet class: 60 DFL per hour / 75 Euro per hour
And I could go on and on.

Some prices simply stayed the same, but the DFL was changed into Euro. The deli I used to visit almost daily, changed the DFL sign to Euro on the first day the Euro was there. So that same cup of coffee more than doubled in price within a day. I bought a pair of boots and noticed it when I got home - I paid 150 Euro but the "Euro" was written on a sticker. After removing the sticker from the box, the DFL sign appeared. Nowadays we are glad if we can buy a pair of leather boots for 150 Euro but most people would never had considered paying 330 DFL for these same boots. Funny how these things work. (And these examples were no exceptions.)

My regular weekly groceries at the supermarket used to be around 150 DFL, now more or less the same every week is 150 Euro.
My weekly visit to the butcher used to cost around 100 DFL as well and is now well over 100 Euro.
Dinner at one of our favorite restaurants used to be 200 DFL for the 2 of us, now it is over 250 Euro. 

We save all our bills, so I looked it all up - no imaginations here.
Ask anyone here - they will tell you the same (at least the people I know.) The salaries have changed over the years as well, but of course for most people not as much as the price changes. And of course it is possible to have more or less the same stuff for a lot cheaper at different stores but that is not the point here.

BTW - We consider Germany as cheap now. Our relatives live 10 minutes from the German border so they simply buy everything there, groceries included. They also go to restaurants there. When we have dinner at their local restaurant, it costs over 250 Euro for the 4 of us. When we drive 10 minutes, crossing the border, we will have dinner at a nicer and better restaurant, for much less: 100 Euro max, and that is if we take desert, which we normally skip.  Many Dutch people who lived in the Eastern part of our country have relocated to Germany, as everything is so much cheaper, homes included, even in the larger cities.

We are fortunate to not really feel the changes as much but many people really do feel them. In our small village, the number of homeless families is shocking - as we did not have any homeless families in our village before the Euro. People had to change their spendings drastically but it all came so quickly that for many families, it was very difficult to almost impossible to adjust. 

So, no authoritive references, but just life in a small village (with windmill) before and after the Euro  .


----------



## alanmj (Mar 18, 2008)

sml2181 said:


> Hi - I live in the Netherlands and I just want to add some of my observations.
> 
> So, no authoritive references, but just life in a small village (with windmill) before and after the Euro  .



Perhaps you might like to consult an authoritative reference, which is your own Government's statistics. (Maybe you don't think of your Government as authoritative?)

You'll find a discussion at CBS (not the U.S. news network!) - Statistics Netherlands - at:
http://www.cbs.nl/en-GB/menu/themas/prijzen/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2002/2002-0898-wm.htm

As with the high inflation in the U.K. in the 1970s that was incorrectly attributed to the decimalization of the pound, there were a number of reasons for inflation of 4.5% in 2001 in the Netherlands which was higher than previous years (2.5%). 

There is though a figure of just under 1% increase in inflation that cannot be explained by these other pressures (see the report), and the CBS cannot exclude the effect of the introduction of the euro as causing it. But that figure is far less than the 50% or doubling we're constantly hearing quoted based on hearsay and erroneous perception.

If the rest of the Netherlands only saw less than 1% increase due to the euro, and you saw much more, then merchants in your small village took the opportunity to rip you off...


----------



## Cotswolder (Mar 18, 2008)

Sorry Alan,

A famous line come to mind here

"Lies, Damn Lies & Statistics"   My wife is an accountant and we all know you came make figures say what ever you want them to say.

Those of use who lived through decimalisation in 1971 all know the truth of the rise in prices and we all know the spin and government rhetoric. Prices did go up.

No amount of official figures and statements produced will convince me otherwise.

Having travelled all around Europe, especially Spain, I can also agree with the same line on the introduction of the Euro. Should it ever be introduced into the UK we will have the same scenario (and inflation)  :annoyed:


----------



## sml2181 (Mar 18, 2008)

I know - I should have moved.... 

I did not and do not have the intention of debating - I simply wanted to show you how things have changed within the last years. I do feel that many people would strongly disagree with the terms "erroneous perception" and "hearsay". The price increases are definitely not just hearsay - they are real. However, the reason is debatable. 
I also think that most people would agree now that it may not be the Euro thing only, but the fast price increases started when the Euro came so to many people it is pretty hard to keep things in the right directions.

I know these figures - we all do  . Most people just laugh - and not out of joy. Many people do believe that these figures were presented to cover the fact that the Euro did have such an impact. In other words, most people just don't believe these figures. And indeed, many people don't see our government as authoritative. At least not anymore. Maybe sad, but true. Please understand that I am not stating my own opinion here, but this is simply what is being heard on the streets and in many discussion programs on tv. 

All I can assure you is that most people in the country have seen the price differences. (People who did not notice simply did not know how much they spent before, like my husband who really doesn't have a clue what things like groceries and clothings cost.) To some people it may not have felt so bad but to most people, the changes within the first year the Euro was there, were simply enormous. And indeed, the greed of merchants may have made things worse. But somehow, all their bills have risen as well. (Not doubled in 1 year though.)

Like I said, we as a family can live with it and this is the case for most of our friends and relatives. But unfortunately, we have seen families struggle hard during these first years with the Euro. Don't get me wrong, most people have gotten used to it and many others will survive. The salaries have been adjusted better now and one can tell that restaurants and stores are packed again. But still, these "authoritive figures", to many people in the streets, are just laughable - to put it mildly.

If it were so simple that the rest of the country, outside our village, only saw less than 1% price increase, I am pretty sure that our village would be very empty by now.


----------



## Keitht (Mar 18, 2008)

Office for National Statistics says inflation in the UK is 2.5%.
Office for National Statistics says inflation in the UK is 4.1%.
These aren't figures put out at different times, they were both announced at the same time.  Why the difference?  Quite simple really, different criteria are used to give different answers.
The lower figure is the one used by Government to provide a base level for pay negotiations, pension rises etc. (Now there's a surprise).  
The higher figure includes mortgage interest repayments, which obviously affect most working people.
What does this prove??  Nothing more than has been stated previously - statistics can be used to prove or disprove any argument.


----------



## alanmj (Mar 18, 2008)

Keitht said:


> Office for National Statistics says inflation in the UK is 2.5%.
> Office for National Statistics says inflation in the UK is 4.1%.



You are not by chance mistaking and mixing CPI (Consumer Price Indices) and RPI (Retail Price Indices) are you? Two very different measures of inflation. The Feb 2008 figures are now available at:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=19

CPI is 2.5% and RPI is 4.1%, which are the numbers you quote. What is important for most of us, and what is taken as inflation and what I have been quoting, is RPI.... as in the amount of money that leaves your pocket.

Of course you are not attempting to prove a point through Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics are you?

Just to emphasize the point - these are two very different beasts and to give them both and pretend they are the same and somehow that no-one should believe any inflation statistics presented by anyone is disingenuous to say the least.


----------



## damorgan (Mar 18, 2008)

This is fun, getting more like FlyerTalk every day...


----------



## alanmj (Mar 18, 2008)

damorgan said:


> This is fun, getting more like FlyerTalk every day...



I'm there too! But I keep a very low profile - they are really vicious!


----------



## Keitht (Mar 19, 2008)

alanmj said:


> You are not by chance mistaking and mixing CPI (Consumer Price Indices) and RPI (Retail Price Indices) are you?



I'm not "mistaking and mixing" anything.  If you read my post properly you will see that I actually say they are two different measurements using different criteria.
The 'headline' point is that they are both measures of inflation.


----------



## alanmj (Mar 20, 2008)

Keitht said:


> I'm not "mistaking and mixing" anything.  If you read my post properly you will see that I actually say they are two different measurements using different criteria.
> The 'headline' point is that they are both measures of inflation.



You should enter politics Keith. Yes, you are not guilty of lying, but you are guilty of attempting to mislead.

NOWHERE, in official UK Government publications, will you find the statements


> Office for National Statistics says inflation in the UK is 2.5%.
> Office for National Statistics says inflation in the UK is 4.1%.


what you will find are the factually correct statements:
Office for National Statistics says the CPI rate of inflation in the UK is 2.5%.
Office for National Statistics says the RPI rate of inflation in the UK is 4.1%.

You might find the former in the gutter press, but unlikely to find it in The Times. Or are you more a Grauniad reader? (Only makes sense to those of us of a certain age and political affinity. For those not of that age and affinity, Private Eye used to call the Guardian newspaper "The Grauniad" due to the copious spelling errors in the days before word processors.) I would have a hard time thinking of you as reading Rubert Tits-and-Bums Murdock's Sun.

I thought you'd cried Uncle on this? You do always seem to want to have the last word... I guess that comes with being a Lifetime Member of TUG.


----------



## Ireland'sCall (Mar 20, 2008)

Have to say having lived here for over 60 years ...have never heard the expression "British and Celtic Isles". Not sure how we strayed into this area.  Everyone ,most particulary our good friends in Britain are most welcome ......"Cead mile Failte"
G


----------



## alanmj (Mar 20, 2008)

Ireland'sCall said:


> Have to say having lived here for over 60 years ...have never heard the expression "British and Celtic Isles". Not sure how we strayed into this area.  Everyone ,most particulary our good friends in Britain are most welcome ......"Cead mile Failte"
> G



Nope, neither had I until I used the expression "British Isles" in a formal document and was severely reprimanded - by both Northern and Southern Irish - for being insensitive. Read the article I linked to on wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Isles_naming_dispute

Note the remark that the Irish Government does not use the term at all, and the British Government tries to avoid it. The term that does seem to be acceptable, and of all that I have heard is growing in favour, is "British and Celtic Isles".

On another point perhaps not widely known, the English name for "Eire" is "Ireland", not the Republic of Ireland, although the latter is usually used to distinguish the country from the island.

As you say, all good friends of Ireland are very welcome to come here, especially it seems U.S. High School Marching Bands! They comprised almost half of the St. Paddy's Day Parade. Didn't see any U.K. High School Marching Bands, nor actually any U.K. groupings... Wonder why that is...


----------



## Cotswolder (Mar 20, 2008)

I think this one has gone far enough in its current format and I am closing the thread. 

Too many subjects in one thread

If anyone has comments please PM me.


----------

