It just takes one country to pull out or be pushed out of the eurozone to collapse the econ
Fernando 10 (Vincent, adviser to the multi-strategy fund Railay Capital Partners, The Business Insider, Why A Eurozone Break-Up Would Trigger The Mother Of All Financial Crises, http://www.businessinsider.com/eurozone-break-up-would-trigger-the-mother-of-all-financial-crises-2010-5#ixzz0syGJzNe1)
No matter how much some may want a nation to leave the euro, the cost of leaving is just too great now. Just preparing for a euro-exit would trigger the 'mother of all financial crises' according to Mr. Eichengreen writing at VOX EU:. The economic costs: 'A country that leaves the euro area because of problems of competitiveness would be expected to devalue its newly-reintroduced national currency. But workers would know this, and the resulting wage inflation would neutralise any benefits in terms of external competitiveness. Moreover, the country would be forced to pay higher interest rates on its public debt. Those old enough to recall the high costs of servicing the Italian debt in the 1980s will appreciate that this can be a serious problem.' The political costs: 'A country that reneges on its euro commitments will antagonise its partners. It will not be welcomed at the table where other European Union-related decisions were made. It will be treated as a second class member of the EU to the extent that it remains a member at all.' The infrastructure adjustment costs: 'Reintroducing the national currency would require essentially all contracts – including those governing wages, bank deposits, bonds, mortgages, taxes, and most everything else – to be redenominated in the domestic currency. The legislature could pass a law requiring banks, firms, households and governments to redenominate their contracts in this manner. But in a democracy this decision would have to be preceded by very extensive discussion. And for it to be executed smoothly, it would have to be accompanied by detailed planning. Computers will have to be reprogrammed. Vending machines will have to be modified. Payment machines will have to be serviced to prevent motorists from being trapped in subterranean parking garages. Notes and coins will have to be positioned around the country. One need only recall the extensive planning that preceded the introduction of the physical euro.' The market costs: 'Market participants would be aware of this fact. Households and firms anticipating that domestic deposits would be redenominated into the lira, which would then lose value against the euro, would shift their deposits to other euro-area banks. A system-wide bank run would follow. Investors anticipating that their claims on the Italian government would be redenominated into lira would shift into claims on other euro-area governments, leading to a bond-market crisis. If the precipitating factor was parliamentary debate over abandoning the lira, it would be unlikely that the ECB would provide extensive lender-of-last-resort support. And if the government was already in a weak fiscal position, it would not be able to borrow to bail out the banks and buy back its debt. This would be the mother of all financial crises.' Thus the market effects of an exit from the euro-zone are the main challenge. A eurozone exit can't be done overnight since a lot of preparationg would be required. Hence the argument is that markets would push an exiting nation into financial crisis as they tried to trade ahead of the euro-exit. Thing is, does this only apply to financially-weak Eurozone nations? What about nations that might be far better off outside of the eurozone, such as Germany? We feel a nation such as Germany might be able to avoid the negative market effects described above.
Parker 02 (Randall, Professor of Economics at East Carolina University, Should Turkey Join The European Union?, ParaPundit, http://www.parapundit.com/archives/000790.html)
Update: The economic disparity between the existing and new EU members is already taxing the limits of the generosity of the taxpayers of the richer EU states. Martin Walker reports that the new EU members together produce less than the 16 million people in the Netherlands. The 10 new members have a combined population of 75 million, but a combined GDP of just $338 billion -- less than that of Holland. The EU is increasing its population by almost a quarter, but increasing its wealth by just 4 percent. The EU's GDP per head last week was around $25,000, close to that of the United States. The new, enlarged EU's GDP per head next week will be just $20,000 -- uncomfortably close to that of South Korea. According to the chart at the bottom of this article Turkey has a per capita GDP that is lower than that of all the 10 new EU members. While Turkey is ahead of Bulgaria and Romania they weren't let into the EU in the latest round either. Therefore money is a big obstacle to the acceptance of Turkey as an EU member. When West Germany merged with East Germany it was in a far better position to fund the reconstruction of East Germany than the EU is to fund the new Eastern European EU members, Bulgaria, Romania and Turkey. Yet, as Martin Walker points out, in spite of the large amount of money spent on East Germany East Germany still lags West Germany by a large margin and there is a brain drain and youth brain of the brighter and more capable East Germans toward West Germany. Imagine what would happen with a much larger income gradient between Turkey and Western Europe if Turkey was allowed into the EU with full labor mobility.
Turkey in EU Bad-Splits Europe
EU members don’t want Turkey- splits Europe creating conflict
Cooper 10- (Zaki, staff writer, Should Turkey join the European, theo think tank, Union?http://www.theosthinktank.co.uk/Should_Turkey_join_the_European_Union.aspx?ArticleID=2116&PageID=47&RefPageID=11)
Against this background of enhanced faith-based diplomacy, the issue of Turkish membership of the EU has been boiling away. Turkey was officially recognised as a candidate for membership in 1999 and opened its accession negotiations with the EU in October 2005. The country, with its 97% Muslim population, has harboured European ambitions for decades. Indeed it has been an associate member of the EU and its predecessors since 1964. However, not everyone is enamoured by the prospect of Turkish membership. The issue has split Europe. Many in the UK have been suppotive of Turkey's membership, and the accession talks were launched as a result of the British government's push in 2005. On the other hand, British public opinion has been less enthusiastic, as the issue of Turkish accession has become linked to migration concerns. Elsewhere in Europe, leaders have been less keen than British politicians. French President Nicolas Sarkozy has been outspoken in his opposition to Turkey's full membership, as has Anegla Merkel, the German Chancellor. Their reservations are surpassed by other member states, in particular Austria, which tried to block the accession talks and where the climate of opinion is implacably against Turkey's membership. The issues around Turkish membership are extremely complex. There is the dispute over Cyrpus, human rights issues, including treatment of the Kurds, and Turkey's position on the Armenian genocide, to name three leading issues. All these will need to be dealt with in the talks, which will conclude by 2014 at the earliest and probably much later.