As Chris Pickles points out, there are a number of initiatives running in Europe at the minute, each of which has “an intrinsic tendency towards monopoly”. SEPA: why not have just one big clearing house for the EU? Securities settlement: why not just have one big CSD for the EU? How will customers access these services? – why not just have one big network for the EU? And so on. If you’re a hammer, as the old saying goes, the whole world looks like a nail. In other words, if you are a centralised institution, then you tend to regard to solution to any problem as being more centralisation. I don’t want to make any particular sort-of-political point here — although I did once surprise an EU official who asked me “why don’t you support the idea of a single currency for Europe” by answering “because I don’t support the idea of a single currency for the UK” — but I do want to note that it seems to me that the overall trend of technology is surely in the opposite: decentralisation and distribution. This is why I don’t believe that the science fiction concept of some sort of “universal credit” throughout the galaxy will ever come to pass: the computers on the Enterprise will be trading between billions of currencies as it boldly goes where no central bank has been before.
Incidentally, the Monster Raving Looney Party — who have been in vanguard of so many changes in our country — think that Britain should leave the euro and instead invite European countries to join the pound. At $2.03, they might extend the offer to our transatlantic cousins.
These opinions are my own (I think) and presented solely in my capacity as an interested member of the general public [posted with ecto]