What now? EU

Yorkie1

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

perhaps they will be fined - thereby adding to their defecit!

I must confess this point had occurred to me. If a country (e.g. Greece) continues to struggle to pull itself together with an ongoing depression or recession (or whatever the technical term is), how is fining it lots more money going to help it cope?

A._Badger

ruggedtoast wrote: »

There are only two outcomes now. Either the EU project fails, or they pull it off and it becomes a new super power. Cameron has ensured we will have no input into either.

Do try to take off your party political blinkers, toast. Cameron may be a fool, possibly even a knave, but at least he has, finally, drawn a line in the sand.

As for a potential superpower. How do you square that with the prediction that the EU's share of world GDP is forecast to fall to 15 per cent in 2020, down from 36 per cent in 1980?

Europe, as an entity, is destined to slip into relative obscurity even if Merkozy pull off a miracle of bliblical proportions and salvage their bank of toyland experiment.

The UK needs to develop stronger trading ties with countries outside the sclerotic, demographically doomed, wannabe empire - not shackle itself to a doomed Franco-German experiment.

vivatifosi

I've been watching the footage of how many people were in the negotiating room, plus hearing news feedback on Clegg's anger. Is anyone else surprised - given how important this issue was to the Lib Dems - that Clegg himself or at least one of the Lib Dem ministers didn't travel as part of the negotiating party?

Wheezy_2

Nick Clegg, Friday 9/12:

Clegg defends Cameron's use of veto at EU summit

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/dec/09/clegg-cameron-veto-eu-summit?newsfeed=true



Nick Clegg, Saturday 10/12:


Clegg 'furious' at Cameron EU veto


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jzN6zUj5RNXqUGK8Q932Wi3eZcVw?docId=N0384821323572276264A



:T

Linton

ILW wrote: »

So are UK companies not in competition with EU companies?

Please explain, unless you are referring to some type of anti competitve cartel.

Individual companies in all countries all over the world are in competition with each other. Is there any real difference between "our" companies and "their" companies? In practice the companies that comprise much of the economy are multinational.

By cooperation between the governments of Europe a large single market (as in the USA) can be created with the economies of scale which benefit everybody.

CLAPTON

Linton wrote: »

Individual companies in all countries all over the world are in competition with each other. Is there any real difference between "our" companies and "their" companies? In practice the companies that comprise much of the economy are multinational.

By cooperation between the governments of Europe a large single market (as in the USA) can be created with the economies of scale which benefit everybody.

there is a single market in europe already in existance

Linton

CLAPTON wrote: »

there is a single market in europe already in existance

Only partially. Currency and tax differences do impose some extra costs.

But my initial point was that the attitude of the present government that everything has to be seen in terms of a zero sum game between them and us, and a similar attitude of the popular media, is counter-productive.

IronWolf

Linton wrote: »

Individual companies in all countries all over the world are in competition with each other. Is there any real difference between "our" companies and "their" companies? In practice the companies that comprise much of the economy are multinational.

By cooperation between the governments of Europe a large single market (as in the USA) can be created with the economies of scale which benefit everybody.

Yes but Europe is not the USA, it does not operate a federal system which can redistribute wealth from the economic centres to the poorer parts.

Like it or not, we are in competition for tax revenue with the rest of Europe because other countries wont distribute some of theirs to us like in the USA. Yes it DOES matter if they're "our" companies, because the UK then gets TAX from them, which it can spend on Britons.

drc

Wonder if we are now headed for a major split in the coalition and a call for elections?

CLAPTON

Linton wrote: »

Only partially. Currency and tax differences do impose some extra costs.

But my initial point was that the attitude of the present government that everything has to be seen in terms of a zero sum game between them and us, and a similar attitude of the popular media, is counter-productive.

comparable with USA; they have different taxes and rules and regulations in different states

and while I agree in principle about the zero sum games bit; it practice it seems more like a negative sum game with the costs of the excessive rules and regulations that don't apply in other parts of the world