Sorry, Wolfgang, I have no more information on the survey than I posted, but I don't argue with your thesis that the answers allowed to survey questions can affect the results. I posted without comment, as much to keep this thread alive as for any other reason, but it appears to me that the site I linked puts an overly rosy slant on results which could be interpreted somewhat differently: eg if 30% of British youth have a jaundiced view of Europe, presumably 70% feel either positive or neutral about it (or "don't know"). And how do you come to get your hands on euro cash early?

No, QQ, I am not American, but English. I chose my nom de plume, Bald Eagle, because it was a nickname bestowed upon me by someone I admire, which my daughter then picked up and ran with. You are not alone in having been misled by my chosen name, and in retrospect it was a poor choice.

You are also misled in thinking that my anti-Europeanism (I'm not actually anti-Europe, merely anti-EU and fervently anti-euro) is based on pro-Americanism. At least, I think that that's what you think, but your elaborate sarcasm really interferes with my understanding of the points you try to make. In fact, I am anti-EU because it seems to me that another tier of government is unnecessary, particularly a tier that seems to be run for the sole benefit of politicians and bureaucrats, is undemocratic, corrupt and opaque.

You claim that the only arguments for joining (or not) the euro are economic, not political, but you ignore the quotations from leading European politicians that I cited above which imply the opposite. The most important argument against joining, imo, is that to join would be to give away control of our economy, and that argument is more political than economic (paradoxical though that may sound).

If the argument is to be based on economics, then lets hear the economic arguments. I list several above against joining: do you refute them?