Iveta Radicova Quotes

The participation of our country in the eurozone is a guarantee for the country's monetary stability. It is a driver of financial prosperity.

The only way to have several currencies from divergent nations lumped together is if they are culturally close, such as Germany, the Netherlands and Austria. If they aren't, it simply can't continue to work.

A common currency imposes on us a duty to cooperate more on policy.

A stable currency and an excessive external debt are incompatible. A similar relation holds as between a country's currency and an excessive internal debt

A national currency, with the Euro as a common currency - that wouldn't bother me.

I believe that high, sustainable growth rates can only be possible on the basis of macro-stability.

Let's start with the euro. What on earth were we thinking? How could anyone with the faintest grasp of economics have believed it was anything other than sheer insanity to yoke together diverse national economies such as Greece, Ireland, Germany and Finland under a single exchange rate and a single interest rate?

There are some things that are under our control, and that is to ensure that we ourselves follow sound macroeconomic stability rules.

The foundations of a strong economy don't rest alone on the decisions of Chancellors or the spending programmes of government.

And so we have to be careful with looking at additional stimulus that we don't provoke an increase in the bond rate and then offset a lot of the stimulus we've already got.

We must stress that the euro has been beneficial to the European Union because, otherwise, in this context of international turmoil, every country would have to devalue their currencies.

There's a stability and growth pact which was agreed for the eleven countries which tries to limit the size of budget deficits among the eleven countries.

I think it's important that people know what raising the debt ceiling is. It's Congress giving permission to the federal government to borrow more money that we don't have, and we borrow it for the purpose of spending it.

The national debt is totally unlike a family budget for about a gazillion reasons, not the least of which being that families cannot raise money by fiat or deflate the size of their debt unilaterally and that family members die instead of existing infinitely.

If we don't get a grip on government spending, there will be no growth.

Fiscal policy is not just, or even not even principally, the purview of the president.

The euro is a vital issue for Germany. There is no other country that derives as much benefit from the common domestic market and the monetary union as Germany.

Our membership of the euro is a guarantee of monetary stability and creates the right conditions for sustainable growth. Our membership of the euro is the only choice.

Eurobonds are absolutely wrong. In order to bring about common interest rates, you need similar competitiveness levels, similar budget situations. You don't get them by collectivizing debts.

I was sure we would never see the adoption of the Euro. Countries giving up their currencies for a common tender was, it seemed to me, completely out of tune with currency being a carrier of people's cultural identity, celebrating national heroes and events, as it had been for hundreds of years.

When the economy is growing, there's a lot that can be done to deal with the deficit.

You talk to any of the job creators, and they'll tell you one of the things that concerns them the most is the debt. And so high levels of indebtedness are going to lead to high levels of taxation, which lead to high level of unemployment.

Monetary discipline forces fiscal discipline on the politicians as well.

Most of the policies that support robust economic growth in the long run are outside the province of the central bank.

In the area of macroeconomic policies, I think we'll see more centralization, like in the budgetary sphere.