Ludwig von Mises, Socialism (Liberty Fund Edition), p255. 

And now I realise why I was so puzzled.  They were wrong.

My argument against the Euro (should you be interested) was that freedom had a better chance outside a European federation than inside and so anything coming from the EU was likely to be a bad thing.

Anyway, the crisis that the Euro currently faces has nothing to do with “optimal currrency areas” (which I do not believe exist) and nothing to do with interest rates (at least not the sort set by central banks).

No, this crisis has one very simple cause: Greece (and others) borrowed too much.  Actually, even that isn’t the crisis.  The crisis is that other countries in Europe are worried that if Greece were to go bust their too-big-to-fail banks would indeed fail and disaster would ensue.  Others of us, of course, think that trying to prevent this from happening will lead to an even greater disaster but that is by the by.

Now, getting back to the crisis, you’ll notice that none of this has anything to do with the Euro.

Well, kinda. There is the little matter of the Maastricht criteria.  These were the levels of debt, deficit and inflation that all members of the Eurozone were supposed to meet.  And after a state had received the EU’s imprimatur, it was not unreasonable for banks to think that they (the states) were a good credit risk.

So, there’s sort of an implicit guarantee here although frankly I would be inclined to remind the banks that they are ultimately responsible for assessing the credit worthiness of the people they are lending to and if they lend too much to such sub-prime borrowers then it’s their funeral.

“Their shouting could be heard down the corridor in the concert hall where an orchestra was about to play the EU’s anthem, Ode to Joy,” said an incredulous EU official.

All is not well between Merkel and Sarkozy.

Caption

From the (London) Times, Tuesday 10 October 1911:

Many respectable citizens are giving up their weapons rather than pay the heavy licence fee, but few of the really dangerous classes are doing so.  Shooting affrays continue to be frequent, burglars and highwaymen carrying pistols as before.

Things that definitely differ from the book:

1. The Americans don’t have Karla tortured
2. Peter Guillam is not gay
3. Peter Guillam drives a sports car not a saloon
4. Jim Prideaux is shot in Czechoslovakia not Hungary
5. Ricky Tarr goes out to Hong Kong, not Istanbul
6. Ricky Tarr’s secret is not accepting money from the Russians but trying to get his family to safety
7. Ricky Tarr starts the fight not Guillam.
8. Irina is not shot in front of Prideaux

Things that probably differ from the book (I don’t have time to check):

1. There was no Christmas Party
2. Smiley does not make any promises to Tarr
3. I don’t think anyone thought Prideaux had been killed.
4. Tufty Thesinger is not killed
5. Haydon is not shot. 

Not all of these changes are important but they combine to significantly change the meaning of the book.  Where, in the book, there was a clear distinction made between East and West, the movie manages to muddy that distinction.  This is unforgivable.  Communism was appalling.  It killed and impoverished millions.  Sure, the West wasn’t perfect.  The book acknowledges this in spades but always makes it clear that the West is much, much better.

Other faults:

• Boy, it drags.  It even manages to feel slower than the 1970s TV series which in terms of running time was much longer.  Way too much effort goes into creating a world of brown, orange and grey and then taking long, lingering shots of it.
• Ciaran Hands (playing Roy Bland) doesn’t, if I recall correctly, say a word.  Not a word.  What a waste.

Things that I am pretty sure they did have in the 1970s but don’t appear in the movie:

• Flares

Things they got right:

• Gary Oldman
• Colin Firth

Anyone want to take me up on this bet:

I’ll offer £200 at even odds that before 23rd September 2012, some error will be found in the CERN experiment nullifying the alleged observation of superluminal neutrinos.

I’ll offer £1000 at odds of 1 to 5 (ie I risk £1000, you risk £200) that some such error will be found in the above experiment before 2016.

I’m only offering each bet once.

http://xkcd.com/955/