What now? EU

Degenerate

A._Badger wrote: »

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in today's Telegraph raises an interesting prospect - a Nordic, Swiss, UK alliance - an 'outer tier' he calls it.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/ambroseevans-pritchard/100013758/europes-blithering-idiots-and-their-flim-flam-treaty/

.

Europe's blithering idiots and their flim-flam treaty

As soon as I read the title I knew I was going to enjoy reading that article. AEP nailed it again.

vivatifosi

julieq wrote: »

I have a suspicion that when the smaller countries - Eire in particular - see their investment tax breaks removed and preferential treatment given to France and Germany, there will be far more dissent.

That's my thought too. It doesn't matter whether you look at Greece, with its weak ability to collect austerity taxes; or Italy, with its unelected government of technocrats; or Ireland, with its historic reliance on low corporation taxes to gain FDI; or Estonia, where people are now having to work two jobs just to get by. Every country tells its own story, has different issues. I just don't see how they can keep this all together.

lionelator

gagahouse wrote: »

Those worried about the UK leaving the EU should look to countries like Norway and Switzerland which seem to manage just fine outside the Euro while their largest trading partner is the EU.

Posts like this are all over MSE. So many people here and broadly all over the UK seem to believe it. Im really surprised at how people dont correct these sorts of posts, it fosters ignorance which spreads rapidly.

Switzerlands agreement with the EU can be googled for simplicity. Theres something called a guillotine clause which means if they dont implement any EU laws then they dont get to benefit from the trade aspect of things. They can be chopped out cleanly. Big surprise, they dont have a problem adopting every single law passed. They also take part in the free movement, so you can have the dreaded immigrants in and out as they please. Theyre in the EU in everything but name, adopt the same rules as we do, everything.
Norway is one of the richest countries in the world, or is it the richest per person?
They have vast stores of gas and fuels. What do we have an excess of? Benefit scroungers? Teen pregnancies? Cant export those.
To even compare the 2 countries is ludicrous.

Much derided Germany has a fantastic economy and has numerous cities consistently in the top 10 most livable cities in the world. The UKs top city comes in at 50 something.
Ive said it before and Ill say it again, Britain needs the EU FAR MORE than the EU needs Britain.

The EU rules that people hate so much have some bad points, on the plus point they set things like a maximum working week, something UK employers always pushed to ignore, so they could work one person hard as 2 and save salaries.
Get rid of those 'bloody health and safety laws' and youll be back to truck drivers working insane shifts, doctors working stupid hours, poor patient care, accidents, and job losses as employers hire 1 person to do the job of 2 or more.
Its like turkeys praying for Christmas.

Its no wonder no party will call a referendum, the public is too stupid to know whats best for them, and by the time they realise theyll have screwed it so bad there wont be a way back. If we left the EU wed be begging to get back in in less than 5 years when reality hits, and theyll tell us to p!ss off, quite rightly.

RenovationMan

julieq wrote: »

As I understand the outcome of this week's drama, we're now in the Europa league but we'll probably take it reasonably seriously

Are you a Man Utd or City fan?

vivatifosi

lionelator wrote: »

Its no wonder no party will call a referendum, the public is too stupid to know whats best for them, and by the time they realise theyll have screwed it so bad there wont be a way back. If we left the EU wed be begging to get back in in less than 5 years when reality hits, and theyll tell us to p!ss off, quite rightly.

We won't get a referendum and at this stage we won't be leaving the EU either. We aren't about to flounce out in a fit of pique, whatever Tory Eurosceptics want us to believe.

The reality is that nobody here knows what is going to happen over the next 2-5 years. Because we are not in the Euro, we were always going to be a sideshow. Suggesting anything else is flattering to deceive. The levels of debt still have yet to be fully addressed. Whatever happens to the UK, the situation with the PIIGS is not going to be resolved quickly.

It is also absolutely right that those countries that are in currency union try to save it. Why wouldn't they? However at some point they are going to have to stop bank bashing and realise that while banks do have to take some blame for the state the world we're in, the Eurozone countries and the wider EU itself has to take responsibility for the fact that it fudged its own rules to get in unsuitable countries and that some of the countries were complicit in the fudging, if not leading it: Greece for example.

DVardysShadow

lionelator wrote: »

Its no wonder no party will call a referendum, the public is too stupid to know whats best for them, and by the time they realise theyll have screwed it so bad there wont be a way back. If we left the EU wed be begging to get back in in less than 5 years when reality hits, and theyll tell us to p!ss off, quite rightly.

Moreover, if there were actually moves to throw us out of the EU, complete with declarations that General de Gaulle was right all along and what a terrible partner the UK is, the stupid element of the public would be outraged. The silent seamless way this has happened convinces me that the rest of the EU have gently put us on an oiled slipway out of the EU in such a way that we will still be moaning about Brussels and "why should we do what they say" etc in 20 years time. So they never actually get put into the position of having to tell us to go away.

DVardysShadow

paulmapp8306 wrote: »

Im the other way. The UK imports far more than it exports - so fo rhte majority of UK citizens its better to have a strong £

That is confusing a strong currency with a high exchange rate. The old Deutschmark was always strong because the central bank always held it lower than the market would bear and it was consistently on an upward move. This also provided stimulus for domestic production.

Sterling by contrast has usually been kept as high as the market would bear, with the consequence that it would fall quite dramatically. Additionally, it has been a dampener on domestic production. A high exchange rate does not always mean a strong currency.

gagahouse

lionelator wrote: »

Posts like this are all over MSE. So many people here and broadly all over the UK seem to believe it. Im really surprised at how people dont correct these sorts of posts, it fosters ignorance which spreads rapidly.

Switzerlands agreement with the EU can be googled for simplicity. Theres something called a guillotine clause which means if they dont implement any EU laws then they dont get to benefit from the trade aspect of things. They can be chopped out cleanly. Big surprise, they dont have a problem adopting every single law passed. They also take part in the free movement, so you can have the dreaded immigrants in and out as they please. Theyre in the EU in everything but name, adopt the same rules as we do, everything.
Norway is one of the richest countries in the world, or is it the richest per person?
They have vast stores of gas and fuels. What do we have an excess of? Benefit scroungers? Teen pregnancies? Cant export those.
To even compare the 2 countries is ludicrous.

Much derided Germany has a fantastic economy and has numerous cities consistently in the top 10 most livable cities in the world. The UKs top city comes in at 50 something.
Ive said it before and Ill say it again, Britain needs the EU FAR MORE than the EU needs Britain.

The EU rules that people hate so much have some bad points, on the plus point they set things like a maximum working week, something UK employers always pushed to ignore, so they could work one person hard as 2 and save salaries.
Get rid of those 'bloody health and safety laws' and youll be back to truck drivers working insane shifts, doctors working stupid hours, poor patient care, accidents, and job losses as employers hire 1 person to do the job of 2 or more.
Its like turkeys praying for Christmas.

Its no wonder no party will call a referendum, the public is too stupid to know whats best for them, and by the time they realise theyll have screwed it so bad there wont be a way back. If we left the EU wed be begging to get back in in less than 5 years when reality hits, and theyll tell us to p!ss off, quite rightly.

You may have read that in a paper but here on the ground that is simply not true. They do not adopt everything here in practice, that notion is just laughable.

Greater fiscal, monetary or political union with the EU is simply not on the cards here in Switzerland. The mood is increasingly anti-EU, anti-immigrant since the adoption of Schengen. The people recently voted to kick out foreign criminals and benefit cheats in direct conflict with the govt's free movement deal with the EU. This is being challenged by the EU but I doubt the federal govt will provoke a constitutional crisis by trying to reverse an irrevocable constitutional act of the people. The EU will retaliate and the Swiss people will say that's fine, that's the price we are prepared to pay for our independence.

The Swiss have a deal with the EU on their terms, it is like a call option they're happy to pay the premium on while never fully exercising it. They retain their currency and monetary policy power. They don't have any obligation to bail out their basket case neighbours. And the people retain the final say on any policy they feel strongly about. This is what is important to a very nationalistic nation, there is a limit to how much power the federal govt can try to cede to the outside.

From what I see around me, Switzerland pays relatively little cost and enjoy's much benefit from it's current deal with the EU outside the EU.

lionelator

gagahouse wrote: »

You may have read that in a paper but here on the ground that is simply not true. They do not adopt everything here in practice, that notion is just laughable.

Greater fiscal, monetary or political union with the EU is simply not on the cards here in Switzerland. The mood is increasingly anti-EU, anti-immigrant since the adoption of Schengen. The people recently voted to kick out foreign criminals and benefit cheats in direct conflict with the govt's free movement deal with the EU. This is being challenged by the EU but I doubt the federal govt will provoke a constitutional crisis by trying to reverse an irrevocable constitutional act of the people. The EU will retaliate and the Swiss people will say that's fine, that's the price we are prepared to pay for our independence.

The Swiss have a deal with the EU on their terms, it is like a call option they're happy to pay the premium on while never fully exercising it. They retain their currency and monetary policy power. They don't have any obligation to bail out their basket case neighbours. And the people retain the final say on any policy they feel strongly about. This is what is important to a very nationalistic nation, there is a limit to how much power the federal govt can try to cede to the outside.

From what I see around me, Switzerland pays relatively little cost and enjoy's much benefit from it's current deal with the EU outside the EU.

From Wikipedia:

The bilateral approach, as it is called in Switzerland, was consistently supported by the people in various referenda. It allows the Swiss to keep a sense of sovereignty, due to arrangements when changes in EU law will only apply after a joint bilateral commission decides so in consensus.
The commission can never discuss or change contents, i.e. unlike full EU members, Switzerland has no influence over the contents of EU law that will apply. And while the bilateral approach officially safeguards the right to refuse application of new EU law to Switzerland, in practice this right is severely restricted by the so-called Guillotine Clause, giving both parties a right to cancellation of the entire body of treaties when one new treaty or stipulation cannot be made applicable in Switzerland.
From the perspective of the EU, the treaties largely contain the same content as the EEA treaties, making Switzerland a virtual member of the EEA. Most EU law applies universally throughout the EU, the EEA and Switzerland, providing most of the conditions of the free movement of people, goods, services and capital that apply to full member states. Switzerland pays into the EU budget and extended the bilateral treaties to the new EU member states, just like full members did, yet people had to decide upon this in a referendum.


If someone tried calling that full independence in this country, theyd be slaughtered for thinking we were thick.
It also means youll dont have a say in the contents of laws etc, so youll arent a part of negotiating laws you need to uphold.
I think that would be a huge step backwards for Great Britain.

jjlandlord

Interestingly, serious publications do not seem to see Cameron's veto as positive move:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2011/12/britain-and-eu-summit

They go as far as talking of a victory for sarkozy.

Especially that it now looks like all other 26 members have agreed.