Euro Opt Out

It is nice to be the one to post first on something that may shape our destiny, but I don't know what to expect?

MSN seems to be pouring venom on the decision, where the BBC seem to be a bit more middle of the road.

Any thoughts?

I have been too busy all week at work (redundancies!) to watch the news.

What's it all about?

this could be a real cameron fcukup

he has played the big boy and the rest of the eu, every other country are now agreeing a new treaty without the uk.

so either idiot cameron backs down, eats humble pie and gets back in with the eu or there is a real risk that the uk will be left on the outside. significant changes to trading arrangements, tax, employment etc could follow.

all because cameron wanted exclusive guarantees for the city. he was punching above his weight and they have called his bluff methinks.

Personally i wouldnt want Germany, Spain, Croatia, et deciding what level of corporation tax should be set for the UK. It's always been the case that the UK has about 80% of the financial markets in the EU, so things like corporation tax would be first ont he agenda for these other countries, where it is near enough a non-existent part of their economy.

I think it was a good move, and already their are people from nations like Denmark thanking England for making a stand becuase their leaders were too scared to do so.

So a British PM has finally stuck by his guns with Europe (so obviously not Blair then). Good on him. When Lithuania (who) is seen criticising a country that takes less out than it puts in, then fccuk off.

The Euro would not be in the position it is now if the EU had not waved it's own rules to accept weak economies in the interest of growing the Euro Zone.

The Europeans played hardball, DC batted it back.

Bring on the referendum. If we become "marginalised" then time to pull out. If we're not a major player, then don't give them our money to play with.

Thanks, Dave - no chance of winning Eurovision ever again

Come to think of it, the only chance of winning it anyway these days was with support from your neighbouring friendly countries, giving maximum votes and bugger the quality of the song.

The strategy continues in the Eurozone..

To be fair to Cameron he only had three choices:

1. Do what he did and then watch as the Eurozone forms an 'inner-Europe' and Britain isn't invited to the party.

2. Back down, let the deal go ahead and get torn apart by the opposition for failing to support the UK economy.

3. Give up and pitch Britain into the Euro as well in exchange for Eurozone support ... probably not a popular move in the Euro's darkest hour.

From three bad options 1 is best for Cameron and 3 is best for Britain, so we're stuck with a bad decision made for political reasons, which is going to haunt us for the next decade.

This is exactly why we shouldn't have a referendum. If we 'pull out' then we get all of Europe's rules and none of the say in what they are, unless we also pull out of EFTA - which would be economically disastrous.

Cameron was not in a strong negotiating position, i wonder what gave him the rationale to make such an ultimatum (or a real threat of using the veto).

The significance is the number of other countries that are party to the agreement. Cameron has not gained split support, he has gone alone and has to do a u-turn, exit the eu or renegotiate with his tail between his legs. I doubt the remaining majority will have much sympathy or provide much credence to his position.

Whilst the uk can boast independence of the euro, a certain amount of comparative economic stability it is reliant on the trade benefits that the eu provides. Separation that leads to trade barriers would be disastrous for the uk.

Like the rest of europe or not, our trade could be severely affected.

This is what gave him the rationale to make the ultimatum. UK pay a lot of money into Europe.(about 2.5 million per day!) IMO if we are sidelined it's no big deal. We'll simply be sidelined watching the Euro Zone disappear up it's own jacksie

Why we're at it Heres a nice graph of where the governments (our) money goes

The Euro as a currency is a dead duck. The only reason it's still floating is because Merkel and Sarkozy keep prodding it back to the surface with Van Rumpouy clearing a path to allow them to do it. Of course, Europhiles are crying about how damaging the veto will be to the economy with the UK marginalised and forced to either jump feet first into the big bedpan that is the single currency or end up the financial leper of Europe.

I can't argue that it'll be good for our finances in the short term, but it certainly won't be bad. We still have the largest financial market in Europe and you're not going to see banks pulling out of London to trade on the Paris Bourse alongside the cattle herders. We're better off out so when the currency inevitably collapses taking Europe to the brink of WWIII at least we'll have our own sovereignty and the power to defend ourselves.

Germany will be left standing as the Ubermensch of the continent offering a sickly teat for each of its United States of Großdeutschland to suckle on, just enough to survive. It's not going to start with Germany invading Poland. Before this whole crapshoot really hits the fan it'll already own them plus the other 25 member states and they'll have no control of their own money or power to do anything about it.

My conviction is that a referendum will work in favour of those lucky people who have no room in their lives or minds for complex issues.

I've spent a good proportion of my life either studying aspects of Europe or living among Europeans and I can honestly say that I simply do not know enough about the economic, political or social consequences to be qualified to vote in a referendum. And of course everything would depend on the wording of the question. I really don't know how I would vote.

There are unquestionably advantages to being involved at the heart of the decision-making of where our continent goes. But what we Brits have never been good at is the concept that we have to relinquish certain things that we have hitherto seen as our sovereign rights in order to shape the future. My experience of France suggests that - despite the volatile and often violent protests by the general citizenry - the French political and management class is more open to accepting change at European level as there is a feeling of moving forwards towards a future that will require adaptation.
The truism that France sticks close to Germany through fear of it once more rising to become a threat is an outdated cliché that no longer persists. The Franco-German axis at the centre of Europe is driven by a genuine desire to lead the EU forward as a trading and cultural bloc able to rival the US and China. This can only happen if Europe is strong and genuinely feels united, rather than a loose coalition with members bickering constantly about major and minor issues.
The European vision is bold and strategic, but quite possibly over-ambitious, especially as a number of states were unwisely allowed to board the bus without paying for their tickets. But the desire nevertheless exists and is widespread and passionate that Europe must move forward together.
The problem for Britain is that historically our island status has meant we've always been independent and violently opposed to allowing others to "tell us how to run our country" (except America, but that's OK, because we have a "special relationship"). Continental Europeans feel this, but far less strongly and tempered by an undersanding that their National boundaries are lines on a map, not a stretch of sea.
We're a bit like a bloke that won't commit to a serious relationship, we don't want to be tied down.

I feel very ambivalent about the whole thing because, although it makes me groan with frustration when the only stories you ever hear in the British media are about how "faceless Eurocrats" are going to ban "our" bananas or make us all wear grey or some other bollocks aimed at knuckle-grazers , I simply don't understand how we can have a Common Agricultural Policy that suits Greece and Scotland equally well.

Interesting times, but if we're going to have a referendum, I hope people will at least try to find out what the issues are from independent or at least well-informed sources and vote on the facts not idiotic prejudice spouted by those with no vision at all.

Yeah, but he gets to drive a 911 instead of a Renault Espace.

Dont be daft Jim, we both know that the sheep will just vote the way their tabloids tell them too.

Since out government has managed to p*** off both the commission, and the big players in EU, the idea that we can leave, then be given some kind of special deal like Switzerland & Norway (EFTA) and just get away with a trade agreement is laughable.
Who will we be then left to trade with??

I can only imagine democracy is a terrible thing when you're trying to get a mandate for a dictatorial superstate.

I certainly feel rocked about it.

And not the way OS thinks they should so they must be wrong?

As for being stuck with european law, if we go, so can they. If things go really tits up for the Euro, watch France and Germany move into self preservation mode..

This takes me back to what I said before: people should make an informed decision, whether it is to stay in Europe or to leave I won't mind as long as it is based on knowledge and not because they have some vague idea that they "are fed up with being pushed around by Europe". It really will make a difference to all our lives and either decision wioll lead to positive and negative consequences. Remaining in Europe will require some tough times, but wrapping ourselves in the Union Jack and cheering as we wave goodbye to the Frogs and Krauts will mean some unpleasant medicine as well once the strains of Land of Hope and Glory fade.

Also, Brewster, I wasn't saying it was necessarily wrong for Britain to want to avoid commitment to Europe and to drive the metaphorical 911 (although it may get rather costlier), just that our needs may change.

I say grow some balls, kill the Euro off and pull out of Europe.

The reason people don't know how to vote in a referendum or how to generally make any decision in this country is because they cannot even teach their own children manners.

I for one do not want to be locked into a special relationship with an isolationist country that was actively preparing to go to war with Great Britain in the 1930s.

I refer of course to the United States of America, that bastion of freedom to the west of us.

Whether people like the idea or not, the European Union and its predecessors have been good for Europe.

I come from a generation whose parents had had to become used to the idea of a major European war every 20 years or so. No one in their right minds would want to go back to those times when disputes were settled by force rather than words.

It seems to me that the USA has not leant that lesson.
They still go in all guns blazing when something happens outside their borders that the USA disagrees with, or they see as against american corporate interest.
Hanging on to their coat tails is the only thing that the eurosceptics seem to come up with.

Like it or not, the world is about commercial rivalry between ever larger groups.
The UK cannot survive on its own, it needs to be an integral part of a larger grouping.
That can never be with the USA as its partner unless one wants to become the 51st state and hand over virtually all sovereignty to a parliament an ocean away.

We live on the east side of that ocean, that makes us Europeans.
Ignoring that fact and burying our heads in the sand as the red-tops and eurosceptics would have us do will prove disastrous.

If we want to become increasingly marginalised where decisions about our future are concerned Cameron has taken a giant step in that direction.

As I explained above, I don't know how I'd vote in a referendum as a lot depends on the wording of the question, the issues are complex and there's a huge amount at stake - now it seems I'm a failure as a parent too. Can anyone explain the link? Biggenz?

Although while we're looking at history, I'd point out that since there could have been a war with the US we have fought an actual war against Germany, Austria, Italy, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. One that the US (eventually) were instrumental in winning.





Although some want to pass virtually all sovereignty to a Parliament across the English Channel. The difference being that at the moment the US is not attempting to take our sovereignty.

The problem is that lots of people know exactly how they'd vote in a referendum, they just don't have any concept of the issue beyond a jingoistic feeling that we should be a sovereign nation.

The issues involved and their implications are enormous and stretch well beyond teaching kids to say "please" and "thank you". It's exactly this "grow some balls" nonsense that makes a referendum such an incredibly dangerous strategy.

We're up to our necks in a world of super-block players; the US, China (the world's dominant industrial force), a rapidly modernising India (which will be the world's most populace country within the next decade), the Eurozone - we either throw our hat in with one of those powers or we become a third world country with only our precious damn sovereignty left to our name.

I suppose there's no chance they could tag a "bring back capital punishment" vote on to any referendum... It could be worded:

Should we:

Pull out of Europe

or

Bring back capital punishment

or

Pull out of Europe and bring back capital punishment.

You must tick one.

There's a difference between throwing your hat in with one of the big players and surrendering your sovereignty.

No, no there isn't. Our sovereignty is our belief that while we may nominally be part of something larger we're independent of it. We can't be half-hearted about this - either we're an integral part of a union or we're out of it.

I've use the United States as an analogy before, but when we think of a united Europe that it the model we're should be thinking of; overarching federal law which provides a framework, within which individual states can enact the legislation supported by their own population. We should be aiming towards having state representation at the federal level and local legislators, but not sovereignty.

Why do you think our sovereignty is something that we should hang on to? What's its value?

I liked this quote from Hugo Brady of the Centre for European Reform.

"If you're not at the table, you're on the menu."

Hmmm... fried in garlic, steamed, then coated in breadcrumbs.

I'm proud to be British. I know you believe that is ridiculous and it's simply down to chance as to where you are born, but I believe being British is far more than that. We've been an island nation of battling beer swillers for centuries. Being British is about how you feel about this fair isle, the values that are instilled and the way you conduct yourself.

Let's say my parents were holidaying in Manila at the time of my birth, would that make me Filipino? It's this "progressive" thinking that being British is simply defined by where your parents happened to be at the time of your birth that has led us to having inner city state schools teaching in 20 languages, disaffected groups of minorities rioting because they haven't clue who or what they are and a system that has marginalised them because "it's right they should be taught their times tables in Swahili in Peckham Primary."

Beyond the fact that we're of the same species I have absolutely nothing in common with an indigenous Greek, Pole, Frenchman, Hungarian, etc. Just because this island floats off the coast of that fragmented continent doesn't mean I should, either. I have some sympathy with Germany. The easiest way to get things done, especially in a Union of completely un-unified people is to simply take control and tell them what to do. Indeed, the Germans make a good fist of doing things well too. I am not, however, German and I don't want them telling me what to do or how to do it.

I have family that fought and died within living memory so I wouldn't have to and yet you and OxfordSteve scoff at Cameron for putting a halt to our slide into the this socialist dream of a unified Europe. A "Union" where the Berlaymont bathes in cash from every member, sticks its fingers into everything and anything it can to justify its existence, deposes incumbent heads of state when they don't do as Brussels tells them and allows Germany free reign to bully any sovereign nation that's on its arse because the Germans shouldn't have allowed them to join the single currency anyway.

What would you have Cameron do? Sign away control of our own budgets and as he's getting off the plane at Heston Aerodrome wave a copy of the treaty saying "There shall be peace for our time..."? Being British is about Elgar, Nelson, Tennyson, Wellington, the Queen, this green and pleasant land. Pride in the people we are for the very stuff that makes us, not just that we we're born on a "European island."

I used to blame liberal socialism for the errosion of what truly made this Great Britain. Now I see that it's far more deadly serious than that. It's proponents are actively seeking to destroy Britishness all together at any cost, including that of throwing GB straight into a Fourth Reich just to have their way.

i was actually scoffing about the idea that we would have a reasoned debate around our future either in or out of the eu, rather than a tabloid led and tabloid level one.
Further i questioned who we are going to trade with going forward if we were to leave the union, and i do not believe Cameron or the party have either.

You do realise that of the few exports we have these days many go outside of Europe too? And those countries don't expect us to be dry-bummed for the honour of selling them our wares.

Yes, i am very aware. i also know the proportion of our exports that go to the eu.

And why do you think that will stop if we decide we'd rather not line the EU's pockets to pay for their meddling in our affairs, constructing bureaucracy to justify it's existence and in recent times getting far too big for it's boots?

It was meant to be a trade agreement giving marginal import/export tax benefits to member countries, not a protectionist racket whereby you can only sell into it if you're prepared to pay a heavy levy to subsidise the gravy train they all like to ride.

What it started as isn't really relevant, we are were we are and have to deal.with it.

Having totally alienated the eu and the member states, why do you going that we will be welcomed as merely a trading partner?

You could probably assume that any non eu based companies that set up here for a European base will pack up and leave too.

I say bring back the death penalty!

And there's nothing in giving up sovereignty that means you have to give up your pride. Are Texans not proud of Texas, for example?



You have a vast amount in common with them; you want an economy that provides you with a job, you want a stable currency, you want good schools, good health care, the rule of law, a future with prospects. That's what a union is about.



'Britishness' is an illusion. It's a yearning for halcyon days that weren't all that lovely at all. You're trying to get back to a past that never existed, at the cost of sacrificing Britain's future.

I've always opposed the death penalty, but I am starting to see the advantage of it in your particular case.

An unfortunate choice of example Andrew. If you've ever been to Texas you'll know that Texans are fiercely proud of being Texans. Being American comes a poor second to them.

Oh well that's alright then. All hail Führer Merkel, Reichsleiter Van Rumpouy and Obergruppenführer Sarkozy.

Trouble is there are far too many EU countries now trying to agree on all and sundry that the time, trouble, effort and cost of it all has become unsustainable, compared with USA who only has to agree with itself, and in the days of the Soviet Union, every Republic had to agree with Moscow or else o

If Greece left the EU with an affordable debt, maybe she would survive and prosper better - with tourism, ancient history, food industries as productive infrastructure and potential to draw investors.

-and how come Italy is in trouble - it has what Greece has, including Fiat, Ferrari, and fine cuisine ( tiramisu)

And with the comparison of the eu to Nazi Germany, your level of debate is made crystal clear.

I'm out.

But to achieve that, they don't need to leave the EU, but they need to leave the Euro, default on the debt, and comrades back with a devalued new drachma.

I made the reference much earlier that the EU is removing heads of sovereign nations at will and enforcing it's own agenda across the continent in a dictatorial style with a view to creating a Fourth Reich. I genuinely believe that Europe is already on a slippery slope to WWIII and it's being orchestrated by the characters above.

The debate never got started as you've yet to make a qualified rebuttal of anything I've said. "You're wrong, Europe is lovely, the EU means you no harm, and we've got to be in it as it's a mess already" just doesn't cut it I'm afraid.

No, the thread is regarding the position taken by Cameron, not a generic one about the EU.

I agree that it was wrong to insist on the removal of national governments, as that's a matter for the electorate. That is a.million miles from your assertion that we are heading for the Fourth Reich.

Van Rumpuoy wants control of national budgets, to be able to remove heads of state at will, to enforce laws not passed by sovereign governments, the ability to enforce sanctions on any nation that doesn't comply, but don't worry it's all for the greater good of Europe.

Hitler only wanted the Sudetenland so we let him have it, you know, for the greater good of Europe.

The problems for Cameron started two years ago when he turned his back on the EPP and joined up with peripheral rightwing nutjobs.

If he'd 'grown some balls' back then and stood up to the rightwingers in his own party, he could have influenced a side agreement to the UK's advantage and none of this would be even be happening.

Idiot.

He would never have been able to come to a side agreement benefitting us. Germany and France don't give a crap about what we do. Right now the only circumstances in which they'd be interested is if it looked like we might join the single currency so they could help themselves to what's left in our meagre coffers to try to prop it up.

Well well well, gentlemen, it seems the forum needs some input from its resident God.

Fear not, Lord Shiny is always present and watching over his flock.

First things first - Brewster, you are on epic form sir.

I must confess to not fully understanding the whole EU scenario, and lets face it, if the politicians ever told the truth, they would admit the same.

Alas I was not even born when the 'common market' idea was first dreamt up, nor old enough to participate in any of the more recent votes on various incarnations of the initial concept.

However, frankly, it doesnt take a genius to see that what we have now is so far removed from the original plan its laughable.

A continous catalogue of failures that really, regardless of whether you believe its a good thing or not, should have been binned years ago, and only remembered as what happens when you give a bunch of morons too much money and too much power.

When the world is confronted with a COUNTRY going bankrupt, (i.e Italy, Greece) 99% due to its involvement in the EU, its really not difficult to see that you cannot take the many countries scattered across Europe, all with vastly different econmies, and wealth, and merge them into a single currency, single economy bloc, and expect it to work.

It cant work.

Trying to make everyone have the same, and everyone follow one set of rules etc is called communism, and that really doesnt work.

Just ask the Soviets.

Now, you all know my hatred for the EU, in my view nothing more than a biblical waste of taxpayers money, that gets us absolutely nothing except ball ache.

However, IF, and I must stress the word if, someone or something can prove to me that our continued involvement with the EU will make my life, or yours better in any way, I may be open to change.

But, as far as I can see it just plain wont.

The press and the politicians tell us that if we pull out of the EU, our trade and manufacturing industry will suffer.

Ok, well this country makes next to nothing anymore anyway, and even if we were not part of the EU, the people who buy our products would still buy them regardless.

They also tell us that we have trillions of pounds owed to us by EU banks.

Ok, so how would that change if were not part of the EU?

They would still owe us the money surely?

They also tell us that if we pull out, our economy will collapse and we will suffer a recession/depression.

Interesting... I was under the impression we were currently suffering the worst recession since records began.

So lets say we pull out, for a start we would save the reported £40 million a DAY we piss away into the EU, and maybe, just maybe, we could give all the Police men and women their jobs back, build houses, hospitals, schools, prisons, parks, playgrounds, see a cut in income tax (or any bloody tax for that matter), fix the potholed roads, build factories and industry again, get the country back to how great it once was.

We could make our own laws, have our own justice system, fish our own waters, farm the way we want/need to, HGV's could drive at a sensible speed determined by us, we could work as many hours as we wanted, live our lives the way WE want to, not the way Brussels wants us to.

We would also not be expected to piss away MORE trillions of pounds to try and prop up the ever sinking ship that is the EU and the single currency euro zone.

Sounds good to me so far, I dont know about you.

Presumably, we could also expect to see the vast numbers of eastern european factory workers, fruit pickers, cleaners, rapists, theives, gypsies, dole srcoungers etc being told to piss off back where they came from as the UK is no longer the safe haven promise land and you are no longer welcome, so on yer effing bike.

This would obviously free up jobs for British workers, houses for British citizens, and indeed dole money for the British citizens who just dont feel like working bless em.

Still sounding pretty good to me.

However, there is a problem... this would need to be decided by the general public, in a referendum, something that the general public has been crying out for, for decades, but constantly ignored by its respective governments.

Why you might think? Simple, money.

Succesive governments all know how much cash is involved in us being involved in the EU, for them.

I emphasise the word them, not you, or me.

Political parties act in their best interests, 100% of the time, 0% of the time do they act in the general publics best interests.

Look at Cameron's actions in the last 48 hours, he veto'd the deal, because the deal would have seen money and power taken away from the City of London... and where does the Tory party get over 50% of its funding from?

Yup, you guessed it, the City of London.

No brainer then really.

And of course, with the Conservatives at the helm, they wouldnt want to implement the proposed EU corporation tax and take more money off their City friends now would they?

You scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours.

And of course, lest we forget, that any time talk of a referendum on the EU is raised, we are confronted with reminders that say Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats dont want a referendum, and are very pro European...

Y'know what? F*** the Liberal Democrats.

Nothing is more terrifying than seeing such a delusional party so close to the helm of my country, the sodding green party would probably have better ideas than those bunch of muppets.

Actually, scratch that, there is something more terrifying - Great Britain's continued involvement in the stinking quagmire that is the EU.

Politicians say we will be lost without the EU?

Utter bullshit.

We conquered the f****** world from our tiny little island, without help from the Germans or Lithuanians, and we can bloody well survive without them now.

THE REVOLUTION IS COMING PEOPLE...

Yes, and the point I was trying to prove was that not having sovereignty doesn't mean giving up national pride. Texans are proud of Texas, but they don't suggest that there should be a president of Texas, or a Texas dollar, or passport control for those entering Texas from elsewhere in America, do they?

So, it was a fine example, you just misunderstood the point.

You were right I did misunderstand your point. However back to my point, you've not been to Texas then Andrew?

So you won't be coming to the particular part of the quagmire that is SpaItalia then Matt?

So I'll write your refund cheque right now.

No, which is strange, really as the only American friend I have lives in Texas.

Is it worth a visit?

Nah you've lost me there Pete.

There is nothing wrong with European countries, nor their motoring events.

Ah, Brewster, I see your minion has arrived.

Absolutely. Texans are fanatically proud of Texas, which could be tiring, but somehow isn't. There appears to be a genuine belief that the Lone Star State is the only state of any consequence. They are also very Conservative.

They can be incredibly insular, but that is an American failing in general. They are also gracious and generous hosts. I'd go again, I should I've got a standing invite I've not taken up.

I'm assuming the "other arrangements" SS is arranging is the hotel cloud cuckoo land

I was going to argue your rabid nationalism point by point, but to be honest I just can't be bothered. So I left the only salient point you made to describe your post.

Well you could say that the American (Western) system of free market capitalism has failed too? I am not for one minute saying that communism is the answer but that is not what is on offer from Europe, is it?.

Then again the Chinese seem to have made their version of communist capitalism work. They currently hold much of the world debt (the americans are very aware of this!) and are now the most cash rich nation in the world.




That is just not true, the UK has a HUGE export market. We attract foreign investment for manufacture specifically because we are part of the EU. If we exit then there would be nothing to stop Europe making it difficult for us to trade. Policies of protectionism could become part of the EU solution, where would that leave Britain?




Matt, read your history books again. Britain did pay soldiers from other nations to fight under the flag

Britain did have an empire, but just what was the Britain of those times like? Perhaps we should bring back the exploitation of population for financial gain? Let us end all employment rights, bring back the work houses, disolve all social welfare systems, allow child labour and see a return to the massive mortality rates. You might not like the liberals but they were the ONLY political party, before Labour and others were formed, to seek an end to such practices.

With China now the leading economic power it would seem exploitation of the population is the key to world domination.

It's funny to see the microscopic level of thought some people put in their posts. Get those filthy Europeans out of our country that are doing nothing but clean our toilets! So... we can have real Brits to clean our own toilets? Now there's progress! I mean... thinking on the same level as some above...

I personally don't care too much for the political Europe at the moment. Quite some countries have been 'saving up' to reach the 'requirements'. And once accepted they can't keep it up. Unfortunate for them, and yes it currently drags Europe down. But indeed to play in the worldwide economic theatre with the 2 puppet masters that are currently on there, to become puppet masters ourselves and not puppets, it is almost a must to join forces. I personally think that Brittain did a lousy job protecting their future some 10 years ago, not because they would fare well in Europe, but because in fact they would be a key player in the whole setup. Those times are over unfortunately. Brittain has gone from 'expensive' to 'cheap'. With a better vision I'm sure they would have protected the economy succesfully and prevented the situation we all find ourselves in.

USA? The USA isn't known for historic consistence and surely everything changes every 4 years, so don't expect to rely on 'remember the days'.

Yups, Europe is in a terrible state. Mainly because of political unrest, misaligned economics and a too many rose tinted glasses without real backup plans. What about the bullshit of fines when you don't reach certain goals? Surely if a country doesn't reach a goal it should be supported rarher than fined? Aligning legislation on paper takes ages, so what do you expect from practical abstract economies?

Ayway, just saying: it took far too long already, the problems we are seeing is a consequence of that, and indeed those countries that are always 'in doubt' should decide: yes or no. Then at least we can move forward.

real brits: * wont clean toilets / cant clean toilets / dont want to clean toilets

(* delete as appropriate)

don't forget to add the option: real brits make such a mess in the toilets it's no surprise nobody wants to clean them

I clean toilets and am not ashamed of it either.

The pay is ok, due to working in the evenings, it's a secure job and I have no hassles or stress

I couldn't care less what job I do, as long as it brings in the money and as prostitution wasn't paying much due to me putting on weight, I now have a more reliable source of income

You've been working the wrong corners, T

I did look into the more specialist areas, but got the cleaning job instead

But they are not the worst by a long way. The Spanish have a lot to answer for.

Theresa - I'm glad, and relieved (ahem), to see that you are not even thinking about joining in with the erudite economic debate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjxY9rZwNGU

I give you the 2011 winner of the "Stating the bleedin' obvious" award

What I would like to see from those who want out of the EU is some costing of the cost / benefit rather than blaming johnny foreigner for being the cause of all our own problems. From what I see we have done pretty well out of the Euro.

As I see it there are quite a few MP's who would love to be proved right just so that they bang on for the next 20 years how they (correctly with hingsight) predicted the fall of the EU. They wouldn't be affected by the fallout of any experiment to the leave the EU (that would be shared amongst the lower/middle class) but they could carry on pushing their own xenophobic agenda.

I'm not educated enough on the topic to make an informed opinion on my stance, as such im going to shut the hell up and perhaps do some reading.

+1

Without getting into the politics of it all I don't think a common Europe would ever work as there are too many cultural differences between so many countries. After all we've spent hundreds of years fighting each other to define our boundaries and protect our cultures.

The only way it would work IMO is if there was one central seat of government and policy and each country gave up their right to an individual culture & language perhaps speaking Newspeak and eating soylent green. After all those Germans wont want to be pricking about with Tapas and spaghetti.

As for Britain I think we'd get along fine without being part of the European Union. From a non political perspective I've never felt anything in common with any European country. I've visited most and I love most of them too but it is the differences that are exiting. As a people I think we have much more in common with Americans.

Morning worshippers. Let us pray...



You could, and indeed I would.

America has many financial problems, one of which being a 9 year, $1 Trillion war in Iraq...



Yeah, fair points there Bob - but surely IF we were to stand alone, and implement our own trade policies, tax brackets, and business regulations etc, foreign investment in our country would still remain strong.

The EU will inevitably fail sooner or later anyway, so a country that has set itself up ready for the fall out can only be a smart move in my opinion.

Im curious to know, how the EU, can impliment policies that would be harmful to UK interests, if we were not a part of it?

Sure, the EU could set up various schemes to try and lure business to The United States of Germany, BUT, if we were freely allowed to compete with them for the business investment, its a win win all round for the UK.

As for our own import/export(s), surely again, if we stood alone, we could make our own tax rates for this, and be competitive with the EU, or indeed undercut them, to get the trade back to the UK.

Where as my first comment was a little over the top, the UK has a paltry manufacturing industry compared to say 30-40 years ago... round about the same time this all started.

Funny that.

But then, I'm sure it was all Mrs Thatchers fault hey?



C'mon Bob, that one really let your post down, as its really only a statement to argue with me, not a valid point.

Obviously, I was referring to the claims that the UK will fail spectactularly if we pull out of the EU, not debating if soldiers from other countries helped forge the British Empire.

That they might have, but for OUR benefit, and under OUR control.



Here is the thing, IF the UK stopped aiming for world domination, and focussed on its own land, we wouldnt be in the mess we are in today.

Despite my admiration for the Empire, that was an awfully long time ago, and frankly nothing similar will ever happen today.

America could do with taking the same approach to its foreign policy.

Isn't it ironic - take a country such as Canada, or Australia... both have vast populations, both have good import/export industries, both have an NHS style free medical care system, both have very strict immigration rules, and both are not bankrupt, not at war with anyone, never been attacked by muslim terrorists, and best of all, neither has signed up to be a 'member' of any dimwitted club such as the EU.

Maybe, just maybe, if the UK followed suit, and stopped meddling in other peoples affairs, massively tightened immigration rules, deported hundreds of thousands back to their homelands, pulled out of the ever sinking ship that is the EU, and put itself, and its citizens FIRST, we would all be alot better off.

Food for thought no?

Thankyou, where can I collect my award from?

Thing is srm6 - you went to the trouble of insulting me, but offered no explanation as to how you know better.

I'm sure you have a vast intellectual knowledge of the EU, so why dont you share it with the rest of us?

Britain needs to stop blaming everyone else for its failings an take a look at the way it has behaved.

Britain did used to have a huge industrial and manufacturing base and we were often near the front when it came to technological innovation. Instead of supporting and developing such business however our governments decided to take the path to easy riches. The yellow brick road that led to the Financial Services industry. This route offered quick riches and huge short term growth. We lapped it up whilst at the same time laughing at our struggling neighbours in the EU.

The route relied upon urging our big businesses into floaton on the stock exchange. Why bother invesing in you products when you can get huge quick wins and be rich beyond your wildest dreams...

We floated our national services (Gas, telephones, Electricity, National grid, UK Airports and many more)and used the money made to offer tax breaks and the city made billions.

Once floated business had to meet the needs of shareholders rather than the needs of business. So often without any real improvements in service the costs began to rise, the investment in infrastructure fell off, staff levels were reduced and the business sought to sell off any elements of the asset they could. This short term approach is called bleeding the asset.

This ultimately resulted in many UK owned businesses, with huge world wide brand names, being too weak to fend off often foreign take over bids. The shareholders were offered deals that brought instant rewards so they obviously opted to sell, nobody was in this for the long term.

It even happened in the finacial services industry. Businesses that had been formed as mutuals (Building societies) offered their members a quick cash win and most of them accepted it with open arm, only to discover that the benefits they previously enjoyed from their non proffit mutuals dissapeared (Short term win long term loss!!).

Another element that was required for financial services success was to get as many UK households as possible to get into debt. So buying a house was seen as a "Must Do" and relaxation of credit rules allowed people to borrow more than they could really afford! Greed was good and the UK population lapped it up. Hence we are where we are today!

If the UK was to opt out of all EU integration and go it alone as a nation just what are the strong brands and businesses that are going to bring us prosperity? Many of the big UK brands may still be made in the UK but they are not now UK owned. There is nothing to stop the brand owners deciding to manufacture their products in their home nation or even cheaper places.

If the UK were to pull out of the EU we would have to make ourselves ultra competetive to make us viable. The only way this would be possible would be by de-regulation. People really, and I mean REALLY, need to understand exactly what this term means before they wish it upon us....

If Britain was strong and had a huge portfolio of big business and big brand names that the world wanted to buy then yes perhaps we could go it alone. The trouble is we don't. Those who foster imperialistic british views really need to wake up and realise it has gone. I am not sure when it started but sometime after WW2 we Brits decided that short term greed far outweighed any long term vision. Our Germanic neighbours may have not had our huge growth -in 80's and 90's but what growth they did have was reinvested. This is perhaps why when our Prime minister was glowing at sighning a £1 Billion trade deal with China the Germans sighned an £8 Billion deal the following day!

So your solution to attracting business is to make them pay less. So... you want more money by making people pay less.

Sounds like an excellent idea.

And you're comparing the UK with country slash continents like Canada and Australia, both of which have vast natural resources and are twenty to fifty times the size of the UK with less than half the population. Go on and compare cost of life, debt,... Your whole idea about economics is quite messed up - unless if you want to become a third world country?

Economic union is a good thing, if implemented correctly. Monetary union is something completely different. Personally, I think the Euro is very positive for some countries and very negative for others. Unfortunately it seems the ones for whom it is negative are trying the most to join it, seemingly just to get economic protection. And then there's government vs. people, who each have their own ways of getting the best out of the system.

Anyway, remember 7 years ago, the GBP was Euro x 1.8. Now it's Euro x 1.2 (well at least it was yesterday). But generally, prices are still the same (you didn't have the Euro to 'allow' for some 'illegal' hidden price hikes). Which is another thing that might be the downfall of your economic ideas. In order to compensate the VAT, some big suppliers are taking a hit by lowering prices for goods. This is good for national stuff. When I buy in the UK, that's win + win: devaluation + I pay the tax in Belgium so fully benefit from the compensation.

But go ahead, lower taxer for foreign companies that you don't actually want to colaborate with. I'm sure you'll go to meet some serious suffering, ref. Dexia, BNP Paribas,... or will see you become just a money-moving country that houses European HQ's for international firms that officially make no money.

Canada, population <35M
Australia, population <23M

So the "vast" population of these two countries combined is less than the UK population.

You really, really don't know what you're talking about, do you?

With a topic as complex as this, I never trust anyone who is fiercely in one camp or the other because they are usually (though not always) guilty of seriously over-estimating their own knowledge.

To quote Bertrand Russell: "The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt."

In response to Bob's post... We've seen some serious trouble in the banking industry, and I'm pretty sure the worst is yet to come. In order to protect 'the people' you know what the 'accepted' solution is? The government to buy the bank. I might be able to find a few pitfalls there, especially at this period on time. Results? You pay your own interest on the money, the bank has bought a company that is actually losing money, no longer has the protection of its larger international mother,... Might have been cheaper to just let it die and pay the savers their money + interest and get the loaners a government loan. Adding insult to injury, in order to keep the existing Big Customers they get tax free deals.

Another fancy idea: sell and lease back. Rather than maintaining government buildings that are government property, these are sold to private companies / investors / banks (ooh!) who lease them back to the government. Ahaa, so while the maintenance was in fact tax-free, we now have buildings that are being maintained privately (add profit, worse deals on maintenance pricing,...). Estimated: in 12 years time the deal will strike a break-even point for the government, and then will become more expensive.

I don't claim to know anything about economics on extremely large scale, but I can see the results of it. It all smells like 'hoping for the best' and not adding 'but preparing for the worst' like we're all told we should in chaotic times like these where stability is not on the cards for a while yet, especially with the ripple effects of international economy (which is a given, not a result of 'the euro').

Fair enough, both countries have smaller populations, but still, they are in a far better financial state than the UK.

In comparison -

Greece, population <12M Bankrupt.
Italy, population <61M Bankrupt.

I wouldnt argue that a smaller population should mean a cheaper cost to the respective government, but surely its how the government of any country spends its money that effects said population.



Quite.

But that said, should the UK really be relying on the EU to get it out of the current financial crisis?

Or indeed have a vague belief that it can?

Where will it end?

What happens if we put all our eggs in the EU basket, and then it DOES go down the pan?




Forgive me if I'm wrong, but is this not what happens every single hour, of every single day in the world of business?

Undercut your rivals to get the business.

Then, once you have captured the bulk of the market, suffering the cut will bring you the profit.



That is true Bob, no doubt, and a move which would need careful consideration.



No, we dont.

Mainly because everything we had, was sold off, or outsourced to other countries who pay less in wages, infrastructure is cheaper, tax is cheaper etc etc.

Worth a look, if you like that sort of thing...

So... you proved yourself wrong.

Holy thread resurrection Batman!

Hasn't this all got interesting. Sovereign states being overruled by unelected heads of international banks. Germany dictating upon the forced removal of savings from members of the public in foreign countries. Russia freezing German assets in retaliation.

Cyprus is now a dead duck with no financial sector that provided 70% GDP. They can't devalue their own currency to make farming exports cheap and tourism popular there again. They're being forced to suckle at the teat of the corrupt heads of the EU while being made to live in poverty for the foreseeable future.

How long before a run on banks in PIIGS? I still maintain that Europe is on course for all out war in the next decade. The gravy train is ploughing straight into oblivion at the expense of millions of ordinary people across the EU, but whilst they can manage to keep it on the rails the corrupt political class will do everything they can to protect their feathered nests.

OMG, it must be old as SHiny Shoes was on a rant It does seem that you no longer have to go to the expense of creating well armed forces in order to control another country, just do it from behind a tellers window instead, far more civilised.

On a side note 2014 see the restrictions on Romania and Bulgaria lifted so expect another massive imigration surge. Far from creating a more united Europe the free boder crossing enjoyed by all now seems to be fueling the far right again It will end in tears I fear.

It's OK. The 1,000,000 unemployed young people in the country have nothing to worry about. We'll probably just get 50,000 unskilled Bulgarians and Romanians like we were promised by Tony Bliar with the Polish...

50,000 is the goverment figure for a year, although many think that will be a monthly figure. Much scare mongering is going on with sensational tabloid headlines. However other changes are happeing in 2014 too which make France and Germany a more likely destination.

What I do find different in the last 20 years is the number of people living emigrating to countries only to live there and openly declare that they hate the place, the customs and the laws. Why move then ?

And at what point does the world in general wake up and realise that banking is *not* a wealth producing industry, and merely a wealth *moving* industry?

At what point to people realise that the only thing permitting governments to tax them is force of arms?

At what point do governments wake up and formally note the difference between a bank depositor (aka customer) and the share/rights/bond holders - the ones who should have their money at risk?

And no, I'm not going to mention the risks of spending more than you earn...