Brexit, the economy and house prices part 5

cogito

vivatifosi wrote: »

That's an interesting article, thanks cogito.

It lists three reasons for the falling population: falling births, increased mortality and net migration.

I found the latter interesting. All the countries mentioned were in Eastern Europe, but some were not in the EU: Bosnia, Ukraine and Moldova for example. I wonder where their net migration goes to.

In the case of Ukraine, it goes to Poland believe it or not, and the reason is that Poland has seen so many of its workers go to western Europe and the UK in particular so it needs to find workers from other countries. Moldova, I don't know but would guess Romania which has a business friendly environment and is coming along quite nicely. This is despite the EU trying to coerce them into the Euro by withholding money for the Constanza container port development.

I spend a lot of my time in Greece and quite a bit travelling around eastern Europe. Twenty or so years ago, workers came to Greece from Albania, Romania and Bulgaria. Since the crisis hit Greece, many of them have left but not to go back to their own countries but mostly to the UK or Germany. At least the ones I know have. I also know Greeks who have left Greece to live in Romania.

kabayiri

cogito wrote: »

Because they would be the 'wrong kind' of migrants.

Just wait for the outcome of the forthcoming Hungarian elections where the two main parties, Fidesz and JOBBIK, will between them have a two thirds majority which will enable them to amend the constitution so that only Hungary will have the right to decide who can live there. They will do it which will put them directly on a collision course with Brussels.

If you can subvert the red line that is FOM, it's not really a red line is it?

It feels like FOM is only part implemented, and not truly balanced.

Enterprise_1701C

vivatifosi wrote: »

I think they would allow us back Kab. The EU would then be virtually impossible to leave... If big UK can't hack it, what hope is there for a Sweden or Netherlands. Plus of course they won't have a revenue hole to fill.

I also think there would be a sting in the tail. We wouldn't have to join the Euro, but we'd have to forego the rebate for example. Purely hypothetical on my part of course.

gfplux wrote: »

I can not let that mis statement just pass by as it is not correct.
There have been many statements about the EU by various EU officials.
However there was NO 2020 deadline for any member (Britain) to adopt the Euro.
What has been said is that any NEW member would be EXPECTED to join the Euro.
There have been too many wrong facts on both sides of the argument. This is one of them.

OK, maybe we would manage to wait until 2025 when they are forcing Sweden to join.

There is no question that they would force everyone to join, they cannot continue as they want to without full fiscal integration.

It would be either join or sit on the sidelines, we are better off out.

kabayiri

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

OK, maybe we would manage to wait until 2025 when they are forcing Sweden to join.

There is no question that they would force everyone to join, they cannot continue as they want to without full fiscal integration.

It would be either join or sit on the sidelines, we are better off out.

The Remain argument was interpreted by me as a sales pitch on staying with the status quo.

I felt this was disingenuous and just as bad as any big numbers on a bus.

When has there been stability in the EU?

Arguably, over the last 25 years we have seen the rate of change increase. The Euro; EU expansion; mass migration; these are big things. Why wouldn't we expect even more change in the next 25 years?

mrginge

cogito wrote: »

I've been making this very same point many times on here over the last couple of years. This is the very real damage that is being done by FoM. However, for the EU, this is something that they insist upon with the fervour of unthinking religious zealots. The alternative of encouraging the economic development of these countries to give their youngest and brightest incentive to stay does not seem to occur to them.

The way in which populations are declining in almost every EU member east of Berlin is frightening. The way it's going in Bulgaria, they may as well hand it back to Turkey.

https://qz.com/1187819/country-ranking-worlds-fastest-shrinking-countries-are-in-eastern-europe/

Don’t forget. If you are against FoM you are a racist.
The reality that it’s just asset stripping the poorer countries to prop up the rich is irrelevant of course.

Herzlos

vivatifosi wrote: »

I think they would allow us back Kab. The EU would then be virtually impossible to leave... If big UK can't hack it, what hope is there for a Sweden or Netherlands. Plus of course they won't have a revenue hole to fill.

I also think there would be a sting in the tail. We wouldn't have to join the Euro, but we'd have to forego the rebate for example. Purely hypothetical on my part of course.

The EU is trivial to leave, IF you know what you want the future relationship to look like and don't expect all of the perks without all of the commitments.

We could have left under any of the off-the-shelf arrangements by now if we weren't dragging the process out.

Herzlos

Asset stripping the poorer countries is a real concern, but let's not pretend that England voted leave to protect skilled workers in Poland or Romania.

Herzlos

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

OK, maybe we would manage to wait until 2025 when they are forcing Sweden to join.

There is no question that they would force everyone to join, they cannot continue as they want to without full fiscal integration.

It would be either join or sit on the sidelines, we are better off out.

In which case we could veto it, refuse or leave in 2025. Leaving a good thing now because it might not suit us in a few years time is frankly idiotic.

kabayiri

Herzlos wrote: »

In which case we could veto it, refuse or leave in 2025. Leaving a good thing now because it might not suit us in a few years time is frankly idiotic.

The single state veto will be a thing of the past in the not so distant future.

Maybe it worked when you had a core of 8 states. With 28+ states it is simply unworkable.

They are moving towards a majority voting model.

mrginge

Herzlos wrote: »

Asset stripping the poorer countries is a real concern, but let's it pretend that England voted leave to protect skilled workers in Poland or Romania.

You can pretend it if you want. I would rather think about real life than just making drivel up.