1. Avatar Craig
    December 7, 2016 @ 8:02 am

    Interesting – been reading about this but only via American news publications. Interesting to read observations from someone on the inside.


  2. John Henderson John Henderson
    December 7, 2016 @ 10:49 am

    Craig: I’m not really on the inside of Parliament, just inside my Italian friends’ heads.


  3. Avatar Un po' di pepe
    December 9, 2016 @ 8:51 am

    I did a lot of research before I voted no. Even though I agreed with a lot of the things Renzi wanted to change, I wasn’t comfortable with a lot of the details. Mannaggia!


    • John Henderson John Henderson
      December 9, 2016 @ 9:35 pm

      I don’t know how I would’ve voted. Italy is so screwed up, it needs change. But apparently the people in Rome didn’t have enough faith in Renzi to change them correctly.


  4. Avatar Marcello
    December 10, 2016 @ 3:29 pm

    The reforms were rejected simply because they were simply awful: power transfer from local entities to the central government, shorter time for parliament to vote on and amend government-proposed legislation, and the EU would have been mentioned 12 times in the Constitution. Surely the fact that Renzi promised to resign in case of loss added an incentive for all of his opponents, but that wasn’t necessarily the main reason of the victory of the No campaign.

    I also think that the Italians showed spine in this referendum, because media, corporations, bankers, etc… tried to terrify them by saying that the economy would collapse if reforms didn’t pass, they would lose their savings, etc….
    Well, guess what: Italians voted No anyways, and for some strange reason the Italian stock exchange has just had one of the best weeks in years (the FTSEMIB index increased by 7% this week).

    As for government “stability”, Italy has never really had it since Fascism: more than 50 prime ministers in 71 years!
    And this permanent “instability” has no correlation to economic growth at all, because Italian executive cabinets used to change very often also when the economy was booming, from the ’50s to the early ’90s.

    All in all, the result was the best outcome for Italy and the Italian people. Not really for some politicians, bankers, lobbyists, and Bruxelles’ bureaucrats instead.


    • John Henderson John Henderson
      December 11, 2016 @ 3:14 am

      Great analysis, Marcello. I agree with your points, some of which I didn’t know about. My girlfriend didn’t mention anything about scare tactics. Maybe it’s because, like the other Italians, she ignored them.


  5. Avatar Sandra Panici
    December 14, 2016 @ 12:58 pm

    I voted No here from Chicago, for the same reasons mentioned above in the OP and replies.

    As for Lire to Euro, my family in Italy said that move cost the people 2,000 Lire for 1 Euro, effectively impoverishing them, an event they never recovered from.

    If Italy changes the money again, it could be another opportunity for further impoverishment!


    • John Henderson John Henderson
      December 14, 2016 @ 2:53 pm

      Sandra, a proper reply to you should come from an economics, which I am not. So I’ll take your word for it.


Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: