Those of us in Sterling GBP are having our backsides kicked

Those of us with our money in Sterling are having our backsides kicked well and truly by the Bank of England, a year ago £1 bought just over 5zl, today it's 4zl and 25gr.

BoE weakening the pound or Bank of Poland strengthening the Zloty - either way it's painful if not earning out here.

Graph & Stats

internationalmoneytransfer.org.uk/online-transfer-rates/history/table/GBP/PLN#

10 years ago I got nearly 40cz crowns to the £, now I get 26cz when I go there - thats life, as countries evolve and their economies start to strenghten the £ isnt such a wonderful thing.

Yes. Whe I came to PL I was paid from the UK and got 6.3zl to the £. I'm once again paid in sterling and getting 4.3 - not good.

It wasn't so long ago when I was a small kid buying Warhammer minatures, they all had prices in pounds here in Poland and it was soo expensive... it still is but not to that degree...

Thread title " Poles in work-life balance crisis ".

It,s worth reading posts 10 and 12.

As well as screwing the EU, the current Polish gov is screwing its own people too. ( refer to the recent Solidarity demonstration in Warsaw )

But of course Solidarity are whining - they've got a nice track record of whining and protesting against every Government that doesn't give in to their ridiculous demands. Funnily enough, they also just so happen to support the opposition - so they cannot be taken seriously.

That I realise, but the Bank of England are kicking the pound deliberately too IMHO.


Will do.

But the problem with wage increases is surely that it causes the cost of living to again rise as purchasing power of individuals rises? Then you're back to needing wage rises again, round and round? Maybe I'm guessing wrongly but it seems likely to be a never-ending trap.

It's called Obanomics, print A LOT of new money, use fancy words for creating inflation such as "quantitive easing" and hope that the Zimbabwean dollar drops in value faster than your own currency.

Here's the US$ to Złoty graph, a pretty similar trend, wouldn't you say?

exchange-rates.org/history/PLN/USD/G

Yes, not so good at all.

Is Poland set to raise interest rates at its central bank? If so, is that already factored into the poor forex of the £ and US$ v the PLN I wonder.

My prediction is that they will closely mirror the ECB rates plus a slight "non-Euro nation" premium, similar to Denmark. Remember, it's not so much that the Złoty is ultra strong but rather that the £ and the $ are ultra weak. The dollar and the pound will remain weak for a few more years. Once the deficit hawks prevail in the US (and in Britain), and they will prevail, the currencies will start rising again. That's my personal opinion.

No, it's called debauching the currency with conducting unnecessary wars in third world backwaters like Afghanistan and Iraq and outsourcing manufacturing that is the reason for the weakness of the currency. The dollar is still way over valued.

agree, only a matter of time.

A country can't maintain a strong currency when they outsource their manufacturing overseas. You have to produce something. A weak currency will attract investment. It's how the Chinese did it. They pegged their currency to the dollar.


80 to the dollar isn't my idea of strong.

From 160 in March 1990,135 in 2002?

In March this year it was the strongest it has ever been in more than 20 years.

While I agree with your first statement your overall reasoning is very flawed. A temporarily weakened currency will indeed attract investment. However, a currency that's being continuously devalued created distrust in the business and investment community and leads to inflation which is the "poor man's" worst enemy. Rich people can always find a way to hedge their investments while to poor people pay the brunt of an inflationary policy. Greece would benefit greatly from a devaluation right now, unfortunately they gave up that option when they switched to the Euro. The US on the other hand is double punishing itself each time we print extra money as "cheapening" of the dollar means more expensive commodity prices. Oil, copper, aluminum are all good examples. In order for the sellers to maintain their profit margins the prices on those commodities had to rise to offset the falling dollar.

We tend to blame the Chinese no matter what they do but the truth is that their economy is more capitalistic than most western nations, including the US. Not too long ago we praised China for not devaluing the Žuan during the Asian crisis when the Thai Bhat, Korean ₩on, Indonesian Rupee went through double digit devaluations. At the time a slow and moderate currency appreciation or depreciation was what the world needed. The US, Canada, most European leaders, Australia all praised China for averting an even larger crises had they chosen to devalue their currency. Fast forward to today and now everyone wants them to make a drastic, rapid revaluation (raising the value) of the Žuan or RMB. Well, the value is rising but slowly and gradually, just like it did 5, or 10 years ago.

As far as a peg to the dollar, the Chinese Žuan is NOT pegged to the dollar but rather to a "secret ratio" of several currencies where the dollar and the euro are the largest "ingredients" but many other currencies are part of it too. The Hong Kong dollar IS pegged to the dollar and a few years back (due to the decline of the dollar) the Red Chinese (Peoples Republic of China) Žuan for the first time ever became stronger than the Blue Chinese (Hong Kong) Dollar. Today for example 1 YS dollar will give you 7.78 Hong Kong dollars but only 6.47 Žuans.

So in a nutshell a temporary devaluation or weakening of a currency might attract investment but in the long run it actually hinders it. Perfect example were the German Mark and the Italian Lira. No matter how weak the Lira was getting year after year the unemployment in Italy hovered higher than in Germany, if you consider the extra cost of reunification for Germany the performance of the Deutch Mark was basically phenomenal.


Please tell me you're joking? Or do you understand how foreign exchange values are derived? (not trying to sound demeaning toward you but frankly I'm shocked by your statement).

You do realize that countries have chosen different "base" values for their currencies, right? So just because it takes 80 units of one country's currency to buy 1 unit of another country's currency doesn't mean that the first currency is "weaker." In other words you must compare apples to apples. Korea for example adds another zero to the equation so 1 US dollar buys ₩1,065 (south Korean ₩ons) yet the ₩on is very strong against the dollar. Clear as mudd?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tables_of_historical_exchange_rates_to_the_USD

True, Greece gave up it's sovereignty when it joined the Euro.


Inflation of commodities helps America because that's one of the few things that we export. That's why the ag sector has been doing so well, additionally Inflation acts as a tariff on imported goods thus manufacturing moves here.


It depends how you define capitalism, but China runs a very top down Communist-corporate structure.


It's still pegged and doesn't float.

Japanese yen.

You're showing me a 60 year chart, of course the values are going to change. Japan was devastated after WWII. The Japanese are terrified of a yen stronger than 80 because ... guess what? They lose their export markets.

We have two choices, if you want a strong currency than you have to have tariffs. If no tariffs than our country needs a weak currency.

Next Sunday China's Trade balance figures are released watch the markets jump around though the figures are leaked to interests earlier.

Japan's stock market crash in 87 is the key in understanding how they operate these days.

One thing about a utter ignoramus such as you display here is that folk like SSM will share some decent knowledge. When a troll knows more then you on a subject to claim to know about...well you have to be gormless to still continue to make any statement. Unblocked a toilet at the CME and now you think you're an expert...tsk.

The RMB - dollar peg ended in July 2005.

Check for yourself.

"CNN MONEY

...NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - In a move that could trim the trade gap with the United States, China revalued its currency higher against the dollar Thursday and said it would no longer have the yuan tied to a fixed rate against the U.S. currency..."

money.cnn.com/2005/07/21/news/international/china_yuan/index.htm

What's the point in discussing economical issues when you use incorrect data as your facts and furthermore do not understand basic economics? A college student who's taken economy 101 has a better understanding of the currency fluctuations than you do. Frankly, your "Japan lost the war" comment only shows your ignorance of this subject, I don't mean to sound condescending toward you but you're basically contradicting yourself.

Yes, you will see changing values when a country has been devastated in a war. However, we're talking about a currency (yen) growing in value exponentially despite losing a war, despite numerous earthquakes, nuclear disasters, etc. Had people like you ruled our country a USToday newspaper would cost $200 and 10% yearly inflation would be the norm. In other words, Jimmy Carter would be proud of you, a president whose economical policies were derided even by very liberal economists as ruinous for our country.

First of all, Solidarity's track record is such that you are now able to live in Poland without a few SB agents following you. It's track record is such that it had an overwhelming support of practically every single Western country and of dozens of other countries around the world. I'm not sure if you're to young to remember, or too stupid to realize that.

And now let's look at those demands:

We are not expecting the authorities to manually steer the economy. However, we demand, within the framework of social dialogue, that the economic policies should serve all, regardless of their financial status, position and views or affiliation with specific interest groups. Our strength should be wise law, pro-development and anti-bureaucratic, investment in people and preservation of jobs - not cheap labor force!

mypis.pl/blogi/1250-gregory33-bloog-pl/wpisy/2880-solidarnosc-ruszyla-z-protestami-polityka-wasza-bieda-nasza

Which part of the above is so ridiculous to you?

It seems fashionable these days to criticize any labor movement. This is a big mistake. The top of the top is making increasingly more money. The vast majority of all those below the top are making less and less. What we're seeing is a reversal of rights that a few of the previous generations fought for. That reversal is easy. All it takes for its proponents is to throw in a few catch phrases - commies, socialist etc and crowds of fools start cheering.

You make the mistake of assuming that the Solidarność of 1980-1989 has anything to do with the trade union of today. It doesn't - in fact, their record from 1989-2011 in politics is dreadful. The track record in the democatic era is anything but "overwhelming" - if it was, Poland wouldn't have freely elected an SLD Sejm and President in 1993/1995 - would they?


Ignore the mumbo-jumbo and look at what's actually happening. Solidarity have actually blocked many attempts at reform in many industries - and directly ruined many industries with their inept leadership. Look at the shipyards, look at Ciegelski - all of them have had Solidarity management - and the same management has ruined them beyond repair.

Likewise, reform of PKP was repeatedly blocked on a local level by Solidarity members - including one ridiculous case not-so-long ago when workers went on hunger strike because of a few job cuts. That's socialism, through and through.


The problem is that many labour movements fall into the trap of not working with the businesses for the sake of greed. I know one case in Poland where Solidarity was offered a deal by a factory owner that their wages would be in line with the profits of the factory. Fair, right? But no - the workers wanted a high salary (with increases every year) regardless of the profitability of the plant.

Incidentally, if you spent much time reading the Polish press - you'd soon see that Solidarity are hugely politically motivated right now.

I have been paid in Sterling for over 13 years now and back then I was getting 7.8zl to the £ and it's swings and roundabouts really and I can moan but it will not change anything, just have to lose one holiday in a year.

Not really You made a mistake of throwing all of Solidarity's track record in one bag.


The "reform of many industries", as you cal it, consisted (in most cases) of former commie oligarchy to become capitalist oligarchy. I full understand the grievance. The people have been robbed and in may cases, the proceeds of the robbery were sold to foreign interests.


That's a gem. A worker making 3000 pln would like to make 5000 pln and that's greed. A business owner person making 1,000,000 pln wants o make 2,000,000pln and that's not greed :)


Wow. It took you only what, 20 years to realize that? Of course Solidarnisc is politically motivated. It has been from day one and it needs to remain such. Politics that is bad for the working class is surely the first thing any trade union needs to fight first.

The problem is that actually, Solidarity from the beginning were dreadfully socialist. I'm almost certain that the "split" in Solidarity partially came about because the intellectuals realised that simply giving the workers what the Party members had was a recipe for disaster in a bankrupt state.


Many industries were/are still State owned and have suffered with huge problems with this. Look at the ridiculous privileges handed out to miners, for example - again, a direct result of emotional blackmail.

You might also want to consider that Solidarity management ruined many State owned businesses - as I said, Ciegelski is a great example. Likewise, the shipyards - they refused to modernise. I met one director personally from Ciegelski, who made it clear that they were bound by the workforce - a workforce that doesn't want to change with the times. One example I was given - there was a proposal to produce some new equipment for ships, in a brand new production hall. It was going to involve the re-training of many workers, all at the company expense. It was refused by the trade union - because - the workers didn't want to do something new.

Utter nonsense, don't you think? And that's in a State owned company!


No, greed is when the workers demand payrises in a company which is losing money. The risk should be shared, no? Greed is also deliberately obstructing reform in order to protect your own position - I know this is why Solidarity are almost non-existent in many large Polish companies, because they simply cannot be trusted to cooperate with management.


Shouldn't trade unions be apolitical, fighting for the best possible deal for their members irrespective of political inclinations?

Walesa's words when quitting the trade union should be listened to - it had no longer become a trade union, but rather a mouthpiece of the Kaczynski leadership. And that wasn't good for anyone - not least the workers.

Spare yourself catch phrases. "Socialist" a scare crow that few even understand. Is equal opportunity socialism? Is earning decent wages socialism? If so then we need to get rid of a few of the top socialists. we could start with the Rotchilds.


That is a common technique used in business. Don't let rue democracy in. If it is in then do everything to prove it isn't working, under-fund what is working well and offer a solution. The solution is ALWAYS privatization and a big kick in the workers' colective rear end.


Strangely, the owners of those companies don't seem to be switching from their BMWs to Fiats 500s. And if the company is loosing money what is exactly its purpose? Shouldn't it be closed? Something is missing here.


Nonsense.

Employment, wages, workers' rights is all politics. Any detachment of labor laws (which is definitely a part of politics) from the political is just an artificial construct. If a country has, for instance, minimum wage laws, then labor is a part of politics. If the workers are allowed to or prevented from strikes then it's also politics.

You can't separate the two. The same took place in UK under Thatcher. A political leader who meddled with labor movement. What gives!? Shouldn't she have stayed away from labor and concentrate on politics?

Shouldn't she have stayed away from labour and concentrate on politics? You answered that in the paragraph above :)

well then, labor movement is also a political movement, and politics, among others, deals with labor laws. The right to strike, negotiate etc is one of those. Hence I reject criticism that labor movement should stay away from politics.

If politician want labor to stay away from politics then politicians should lead the way and stay away from labor.
Neither is doable.

Brits are accustomed to boom+bust as it has typified the economy for many a year. As Wrocław recommended, check what the OP wrote. OK, let me remind everyone that it was 7.2PLN to the pound in 2004 so we shouldn't moan so much. Poles did very well there. If times get tough, tighten your belt and show your intelligence in adapting. That's what I do!

this never happened in the UK with the TUC and the Labour party being in each others pockets for the best part of a century

Eh? Fighting for the best possible deal for your workers is a political act.

Looks like a well-known British/American chocolate firm is feeling the pinch too with GBP so weak, as a good few of its exec staff were on my budget airline flight recently.