Revisiting the Euro through Joseph E. Stiglitz’s Perspective: A Review of the “Euro. How a Common Currency Threatens the Future of Europe “

There was a time in which political authorities and decision makers were not collaborating with anybody else – here including scientific persons and bodies(authorities) – about documents that they were enacting. Such a typical aspect was easy noticed in the case of the international organization of “Latin Monetary Union” (1865-1927), of which’s written status at its time was including some exemplarily hilarious phrases. A new significant moment was the one of the international Conference hosted at Bretton-Woods in 1944 for a new international monetary system to replace the former gold standard – i.e. a tense dialogue between the hosting American administration and the famous JM Keynes, formally the UK’s representative, actually the lonely one in the audience with his own such IMS project and a legend in the area of economics. Briefly, there was a time of lack of or of not yet experience in relating the economic life and reality to the economic thinking. Economics, as a science, unlike physics or chemistry, to which the Nobel Prize is also addressed and which are natural and exact sciences, stays dominated by theories (instead of scientific postulates), so by the dialogue, despite not exactly like in democracy. In such an order, also economics stays different than the real economic life and even than the last’s specific policies applied. Just a natural mutual approaching each-other does complete this landscape since the times in which there was rather no contacts, but nothing could here be sudden or automatic. Today there is to be noticed and why not applauded the good habit in which Nobel Prizes' laureates do address to the communities about current issues in the specialty. Previously, in 1993 Paul Krugman, another Nobel Prize winner in his turn, had issued his “Lessons of Massachusetts for the EMU” and also other examples could be given.