With a simple and rather modest understanding of how things are supposed to work when acknowledging the inseparable link that exist between political decision-making and the economy and vice versa, recent orientations of decisions having been made in different member states of the EU are worrying, and rightly so. This thought might well be the result of a compulsive tendency to sift through the French press in the last weeks. In particular, one article dated the 6th of July, of which the title is "And what if the crisis was only starting now?", reports on the meeting of the think tank organization of the 'Cercle des Économistes' at the Aix-en-Provence Economic Forum. According to economic sources, OECD figures state that unemployement has raised up to 40% in the wealthiest countries between April 2008 and April 2009. Forecasts for the period from 2007 to 2010 assert that there will be a leap in the number of unemployed people to 26 million more jobseekers and a rate jumping up to 80% more unemployed persons in the shortest time ever observed. Some believe that the worst is yet to come and that the job loss is irreversible. Some even conclude that in four to five years, OECD countries debt will be higher than their GDPs and that this will result in a reduction of social welfare, number of civil servants and a rise in taxes. The president of the European Central Bank, Jean-Claude Trichet, is warning governments off: "We created a world-wide financial economy, there is a need for a world-wide governance. G20 is not enough and every country has to internalize the effects of its policies for the superior common good of the globalized economy". This can be analysed and translated into the fact that, in countries having either excessive budget surplus, like China today and Germany tomorrow, or just as excessive deficits, like the US today and France tomorrow, governments undermine a globalization, for which they do not feel responsible, but of which everyone is taking advantage. If there is any solution, it can only be a collective one, says the article. And yet, there is nothing less than certain, as the lack of a voluntarist Europe makes impossible a world-wide cooperation. The former EU commissioner for competition, Mario Monti, stated that "there is a need for Europe, even in China. The reason for this is that for fifty years now, the European Union has been bringing about regulation. But as to an offer of Europe, nothing is less than secure". And indeed, between France and Germany chosing divergent policies, the European Commission being almost absent and a selfish Great Britain only thinking about rescuing the City and nipping in the bud any attempt at regulate, the European Union has already lost the influence it had during the November 2008 Washington G20 summit. When looking at what France and Germany are currently doing, one has tangible reasons to feel concerned. Let us explain the issue at stake with an example. As clarified in a Le Monde column, the French government of Nicolas Sarkozy recently announced a huge public loan while at the same time Germany is writing in its Constitution a new provision implying that from 2016, public deficit will have to keep under 0.35% of the GDP and that any budget will have to be balanced from 2020. Within the next decade, such a provision will impose upon Angela Merkel's successors to carry on austerity measures as they would need the agreement of at least the two thirds of the MPs to modify the text. Of course, some might cynically argue that German investors being less endebted, they would come to buy the Treasury bills issued by Sarkozy and his successors. But as the article says, it is pure myopia to think that Germany, which is currently favouring the balance in its budget, will then assume the role of a European economic driving force reducing French deficit and giving a boost to French growth. If France and Germany pursue two very different, or even opposite economic policies, is it permitted to wonder whether this is compatible with a common currency? The author draws the conclusion that it is certainly not in the long run. As yet another article in Telos states it: If the Prussian austerity of Angela Merkel's policy might not be a solution to cope with the current and deep crisis of the demand, French actual loans must be guaranteed by firm commitments to reduce other spending as soon as today and allow a future reduction in spending used to operate the state. With an 80%-rate of debt, political communication must now promote sustainable spending. If France and Germany continue favouring an "every man for himself" approach, the European Central Bank and the next president of the EU Commission will need a sustained determination to maintain what remains of a common economic policy. Let us just hope that this is indeed an alarmist scenario and not the renouncement of collective ambitions in front of us.