English Riots: Society Broken By Capitalistic Greed

Ah yes... sounds so simple doesn't. Reality is.. what if you German husband is denied a work visa in the UK? Or you are denied a German work visa? It happened before and would happen again if you had your way. Which is why I keep both my dual-citizenship, as I can't be denied by the US Government which only approves about 65,000 new work visas each year and why my wife is seeking Irish citizenship so she can't be denied work in the EU or have to deal with getting a residence permit.

The facts aren't black and white on this matter no matter how hard to you try to make it so. In the end it's a benefit for me (or anybody) to have a dual-citizenship, especially a citizenship with the country your partner is from.

Oh sweet jesus. I've never said the EU wasn't cramming what the United State did over 225 years. In fact I agree with you. My position is of course you aren't gonna like it, the EU is doing something that took the US 225 years just to get to in a span of 12 years. 100 years from now it will be the norm. There is always older generations who won't be happy and younger generations won't know the difference. Face it.. old people die and younger people live. They aren't trying to please the future dead of Europe but the younger crowd. As harsh as it is, it's the truth of the situation.

Don't disagree. But even US citizens don't elect the President (popular vote), or Federal Judges.

Congress doesn't make law. It votes on laws. It requires a President actually elected by an Electoral College (read up on that fun bag) and a Supreme Court (which are not elected but appointed by Presidents and approved by the Senate).

You need all 3 branches to make a law. Congress to pass it, President to sign it, and Supreme Court to rule on it's Constitutionality (for example Obamacare, it's legally not enforced yet due to court cases).

In fact most laws that are passed aren't even written by Congressional members but NGOs (Non-Government Orgs), unelected people write the proposed laws and congressional critters rubber stamp it.

In theory the economy should have recovered after spending trillions of dollars as well. What matters is reality. Reality is Congress has never used that power. Next point here is.. the US is not a Democracy. Never has been and never will be. It's a Constitutional Republic, even though many insist it's a democracy, case in point, you. Which is why the US system is comparable to the EU. As what it started out as and what it is seen as public are two different things.

That's the UK's fault, not the EU.

 

The present situation is so diabolical I'm prepared to take the risk. Besides, before the EU people managed to marry people of other nationalities and live normal, hassle free lives, and there's no reason why they couldn't do so again. Relatively few people marry people of other nationalities, and I don't want immigration policy run with those people in mind because that immigration policy is detrimental to the vast majority. We're perfectly capable of weighing the pros and cons up for ourselves, y'know.

Is it not a black and white fact that you can bail out of the EU as you have dual nationality? It is indeed a benefit to have dual citizenship, but not many of us enjoy such a benefit, so think about that before you, flippantly it seems, tell me that the EU will be "the norm" in a hundred years.

How do you know your scenario will be the norm in a 100 years? I think the situation could well turn to civil war well before a 100 years are up and the EU will break up. I don't see many "pleased" people in Europe just now. Maybe it would be different if the EU actually worked in the people's interests, but it isn't. To say it will be the norm in time is to say that young people are more stupid and apathetic than old ones are. I'd say older people are a lot more apathetic than young ones are.

Did you imagine how Tea Party candidates would feel if American affairs were being run from Mexico City of Bogota or Canada? Can you imagine how the average American would feel about that? Would it be ok if they used the stealth tactics used by European leaders?

The popular vote counts for a lot more than the popular vote in European elections does, and I know US citizenns don't elect Federal Judges, but at least they are American.

OK, what do you make of this?

As per the Constitution, the U.S. House of Representatives makes and passes federal laws. The House is one of Congress’s two chambers (the other is the U.S. Senate), and part of the federal government’s legislative branch.

It sounds like you have the checks and balances that the EU lacks. Why do you say Congress rubber stamps laws? You only need one branch to make an EU law after the Council has decided what it wants the policy to be. The European Parliament gets to pontificate but barely gets a look-in in reality. Westminster rubber stamps EU laws as they must because EU law is superior to national laws.

However you want to label the US, and I didn't say it was any kind of utopian democracy, and US problems are the US's fault. The EU is still much, much worse. That's the reality.

Indeed that part of it is, and I didn’t say it was the EU’s fault, but given the unlikelihood of that ever changing, I want politicians kept on a short democratic leash, not acting with foreign politicians and bureaucrats to bind our future governments, when they have even less regard for the people of the UK than our own politicians and bureaucrats do.

 

What do you think the UK does? It has an immigration policy even without the EU that supports my position. I as an Irish citizen can move to London, work and live there and not have to go through formal immigration procedure. I am considered settled as soon as I move into a place. Funny innit?

You really think I am gonna bailout of my Irish citizenship? You don't know me and again all I can say is ask Viv about the odds of me bailing out of Ireland.

I am not flippantly telling you anything. I am telling you in a hundred years nobody will be complaining about it, because you have 2 or 3 generations of British married to French or whatever nationality..same with Germans, Irish and whoever. This is a fact. Why do you think there are terms like Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Mexican-American, German-American and so on. It's because a German immigrant married a American and so on.

It's not about being apathetic but the fact the younger generations are socialist leaning and tend to support the idea more then older generations. From CUL

Then you have the recent Eurobarometer showing 53% of younger EU population is willing to work abroad.

Uh, I already do. Look up North American Union, NAFTA Superhighway. Ideas are being tossed around.

 

The EU’s immigration policy is the UK's. The fact that Irish citizens can move to the UK without any paperwork long pre-dates EU membership and it’s something that the British population has accepted for years as the Irish are our close neighbours, and we speak the same language, so the Irish have integrated very well (and some of them have even Anglicised their surnames; string ‘em up eh?) It’s a little different to allowing free access to nearly half a billion people. The UK’s pre-EU immigration policy did not support your position.

I haven’t even implied that you should bail out of your Irish citizenship any more than I implied you should bail out of your American citizenship. As I’ve said several times now: The fact remains: you can make use of your American citizenship if you find you don’t like EU citizenship. Most of us don’t have that luxury. Comment on what I’ve said, or not, if you want to.

Sounded pretty flippant to me. How do you know it will be the norm for people to accept EU membership, when government by the EU is crap? And it was you who said what the EU is doing will be the norm in a 100 years time. People can marry Martians if they want to, provided we govern our own country.

You do know that study is funded by the European Commission? And younger generations have always tended to support socialism, but they get older and then they tend not to. Socialists have as much reason to reject the EU Capitalists do. The EU is the worst of socialism and the worst of capitalism combined and neither side keeps the other in check.

And more from the European Commission! Its findings aren't the same as saying they’ll support EU membership. I’m a case in point. I’ve worked abroad and would recommend it to anyone.

You didn’t answer the question. (And I’ve already looked up the North American Union.) As the Tea Party candidates want less Federal government, it’s pretty safe to say they’d be against their affairs being run from Mexico City, Bogota or Canada as would the average American. And what about you; how would you feel about that? How would you feel if the US sold out to a North American Union on the sly like European leaders have sold out to the European Union? You’re angry about the American federal education programme’s dishonesty with children. Is it ok to lie to adults?

And you seem to have missed this from my last post, after you'd said Congress does not make laws:

?

 

Yes, it goes back to when Ireland left the commonwealth. But when Ireland left the commonwealth it was given the same rights as members of the Commonwealth of Nations (today). Members of the Commonwealth of Nations aren't as integrated nor do they speak the same language. There are 54 commonwealth nations and a total of 2.1 billion people.

 

Re work permits: As Europeans, Tamora and her husband can work anywhere in the EU without need for permits, and not only that.
.
"You are entitled to be recruited under the same conditions as nationals of the country in which you are seeking work. You cannot be asked to meet any additional requirements. This means that you can apply for any job vacancy advertised in any EU country, including public sector jobs. However, certain public service posts may be restricted to nationals of a particular country where the job in question involves safeguarding public order or the interests of the state... "

http://www.workpermit.com/european_union/employment_issues.htm

 

But Irish citizens always had the right to live in the UK and never needed a visa as Commonwealth citizens still do. Irish citizens are not Commonwealth citizens and they still don’t need a visa. That's a big difference. And a democratically elected government should seek the right to allow outside bodies to dictate its policies, something no British government ever did in relation to the EU or its forerunners.

Why put fact in inverted commas? My fact implies nothing of the sort. Anyone with dual citizenship COULD renounce either of their citizenships, or make use of only one, irrespective of how they feel and that applies to you too. Most of us don’t have that choice, and that IS a fact whether you want to admit to it or not. I’d love to be able to say that EU citizenship benefits me now, let alone will for the rest of my life, but I just can’t see it. However, I wish you well in making use of yours.

I didn't give any reason why EU government would be the norm. Doesn't history also teach us that people will not live under bad government forever? That the longer it goes on the less likely they are to accept it? Communism is a prime example of this. The EU is an anti-democratic, expensive, corrupt bureaucracy, and it shows no signs of changing, so I can’t see how you could possibly expect it to be the norm, unless you think the people will become even more apathetic.

All Europeans are socialist? What an incredibly sweeping generalisation. In which fantasy world do you live? If the EU is capitalist in name only, why are state industries increasingly being privatised (or liberalised in EU speak) all over EU states, pushing the costs of basic services ever higher in the UK? It is true that employment and taxation legislation is pure socialism, but the multinationals and large corporations can deal with that, but it's two more things which are making life for small and medium sized businesses so difficult. No one needs to be far anything to see the EU for the crap system it is.

No European country is capitalist in the sense of Adam Smith, and it would be impossible to pick out a single EU member state since all EU member states have their trade, employment and social policies controlled by the EU anyway. The EU combines the very worst of both socialism and capitalism. And why screw the Swiss? They seem happy enough with life and they certainly don’t want to join the EU even though they are subject to EU single market rules.

And it doesn't matter that we have millions of people who are displaced by this labour mobility? I don’t think it should be the EU’s place to offer the right to live in any country. That should be up to the governments of individual countries unless their peoples decide otherwise. With such a high unemployment rate here, the last thing we need is even more unskilled labour. Screw the EU and what it "offers".

But I didn't ask about Tea Party candidates who are running for president. I asked about how Tea Party Candidates would feel if their affairs being were run from Mexico City, Bogota or Canada, and how YOU would feel if the US sold out to a North American Union on the sly like European leaders have done to the EU. The G20, G8 or G7 cannot impose legislation on the US, though US leaders may choose to act in accordance with those and other international organisations (whilst the UK can only do so if the EU agrees). As the US Constitution states, “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” Or has Congress now become inferior to some other international body? No EU member state has a choice but to implement EU policies if it's to remain in the EU. That has been established as a cold hard fact in the European Courts. EU law is often not even debated in parliament at all as it’s directly applied by government agencies (which are being increasingly privatised (or liberalised) or Quangos. Comparing the US’s sell out to the UK’s is risible.

And yes, we know your politicians don’t actually write laws, staff lawyers do that, but they are under the direction of Congress and its committees.

Exactly, though a child may also rely on its parents, and I'd also say that one person's truth is another's propaganda, and that applies to teachers, politicians and parents. And we still have the problem as to the limited detail a child can understand.

And for someone who is anti-EU you talk a strange game.

 

This thread is supposed to be about the riots in England and seems to have gone way off topic.

 

Not always, and the UK had to pass a law to give them the right after they left the commonwealth.. but whatever.

No, history shows us the opposite. There are rare occasions when people won't. Communism isn't a prime example of it. The transition to Communism failed not because the people didn't like it but the economic and political model failed in getting there. No country, be it the Soviet Union or little ol' Cuba, has ever been Communist in the pure sense.

People get more apathetic as time goes on. But like I said there are those rare occasions.

It's not a sweeping generalization. The privatizing of certain industries didn't push costs higher, but actually reflected the costs in a competition market, or in the case of Qinetiq it made the British citizens £800m. Even water privatization was a gain for the England and Wales. It wiped £4.95 billion in debt off the UK books and investment in the water system increased ($17bn over 6 years vs £9.3bn by the British government in the previous 6 years). Here the Regulators (Ofwat) report.

So you agree Europe is socialist despite the "reforms". But it requires reforms for the small and medium sized businesses to make it easier. That is something the UK population would despise happening as it would requiring lowering tax rates and cuts in social programs UK citizens depend on more and more.

It's expensive in Switzerland just for basic items like Food because of it's import taxes on Food. Instead of buying an item at the cheapest production cost Globally, you are buying food that is subsidized via import tariffs.

No, because what you are failing to grasp is that if the UK would address it's unskilled labor it would mean higher paying jobs for UK citizens. This is needed no matter what. You could cut off all immigration, and still need it. As the world economy is changing. Much like it did during the Industrial Revolution. Today it's a battle between North-South divide.

I talk in economic terms.

 

Yes always. That law came into effect before Ireland left the Commonwealth. The Irish never needed a visa, but whatever.

So supply an example of people accepting an artificially constructed country from a group of countries ... And, specifically, how could the Soviet Union have been more communist? How did it not "get there"?

Nope, people are apathetic only until they reach their tipping point. That's human nature.

You say "All Europeans are socialists" and then claim that this is not a sweeping generalisation. How odd.

The costs of privatisation did push costs higher and by a lot more than the rate of inflation, and the situation has been worsened even more by the costs of "green" legislation. I can see it my own household bills and industry can see it too. The money that was made from the privatisations has not done the taxpayer any good, but it has given politicians even more money to waste. I don't put much faith in toothless regulators and their reports.

As I said, the EU (Europe is a geographical continent and doesn't have a political doctrine so it can't be 'socialist') is the worst of the socialist and capitalist systems. And people, including European Commissioners have been talking about the need to reform for years, but the EU's love for red tape gets stronger anyway. Some UK citizens might despise reform and lower tax rates, but not the majority. We think our governments have had more than enough to provide us with good public services, and are not willing to give them even more money. (A couple of English cities had referenda on whether to pay more in taxes in return for promises of better services. In both cases they voted for the lowest possible increases on offer. Needless to say, the exercise has not been repeated.)

So you want to "screw Switzerland" because their cost of living is high? Just as well Switzerland isn't looking to outsiders to dictate its affairs any more than they already do. And the EU adds to the cost of food. Three words: Common Agricultural Policy. Maybe it will be reformed one day.

I'm not failing to grasp anything and I didn't say all immigration should be stopped, but it shouldn't be dictated by the EU. I have nothing against higher paying jobs for anyone, people should be paid what they're worth, and they should not have to compete with immigrants with lower costs because they're living 10 to a room or in sheds! I don’t want government run to suit multinationals and other large corporations. The immigrants we need should be here on a work permit scheme, allowing skills gaps to be plugged and more jobs for our own able workforce, because the taxpayers of this country are starting to wonder why they bother to stay here and work at all.

And it's more a low tax-high tax divide than a North-South one. Businesses are leaving for lower cost countries with less red tape. I'd like to see reasonable subsidies to attract business (which of course is forbidden under EU state aid rules) and a sensible business environment which isn't hidebound by petty, jobsworth red tape.

But there's pro-EU, pro-big government and anti-EU, anti-big government economic terms and all the shades of grey in between. I'm not sure where you stand, but you're pro-EU enough to think it's properly reformable. I don't think it wants to be reformed because so many people having a vested interest in keeping it the way it is.

 

Uh no... in 1939 all free movement was suspended and didn't resume until 1952. You also have to remember it was and is virtually impossible to have border patrols along Northern Ireland and Ireland as many homes and property span the border. It's literally the "wild west" in terms of having a black market in which both RoI and UK lose out on taxes due to the import and exporting by locals. For example: Buying Cigarettes in RoI and then selling them in Northern Ireland.

But you knew that right?

United Kingdom!?!?! How about France, Spain, Germany, Italy, even Republic of Ireland to name a few.. as all of these countries consisted of several different kingdoms under the rule of different families. Ever hear of the Kingdom of Navarre, Kingdom of Bavaria, and so on?

Soviet Union was an Oligarchy in which a few held power. Communism requires a Stateless and Classless society in which there is no "Government" but a collective society. They never got past Dictatorship of the proletariat stage. But rather were fascist in nature then Communist.

Different people act different ways.

It's not odd. Because what Governments do, doesn't reflect what the people want. Case in point your next complaint.

Ah, yes let's look a fuel. Since you are so insistent that costs have gone up due to privatization. Current prices per litre is roughly 135.00p. Of that.. 57.95p per Litre is for Fuel duty. 14.66p is for the VAT. So...

135.00 - 57.95 -14.66 = 62.39p that is the cost of the fuel. You pay roughly 62% or more (or less depending on what oil is trading on the market) tax on fuel. It's the Government that has increased cost above inflation, not privatization. In the US it's about $3.50 a gallon (depending on where you live). If we paid UK taxes on it we'd be paying £4.75 a gallon. In Dollar terms: $7.51.

This also comes down to the decline of the GBP vs Dollar. As oil is sold in Dollars not GBP.

Uh, it does have a political doctrine. Third way Economics. Thank Tony Blair.

These reforms are coming inform of the Third Way. Which should have died already.

Yes, because this is the 21st century. There should be no reason why any country has import tariffs on food. Switzerland does and does so at the cost of it's people. Why force them to buy more expensive potato from a farmer in Switzerland when a US or Irish or whoever farmer can produce it much more cheaply?

CAP is on it's way out, 2 more years left and it hardly effects the Swiss.

You completely ignore that the UK and many EU countries becoming less industrial and more service side in economies. This is a huge difference between the UK now and 40 years ago. Until the UK population (between 16-40) become better educated in matters that are need in a service economy, you will always have a problem. Immigration or not and that's my point, which you fail to grasp again.

Uh, it's more about cost of labor, transportation and growth then taxes. As Brazil has a tax rate of 34% and the UK is at 26%. It still cheaper to produce in Brazil and sell in South America then it is to produce everything in the UK. This happens in Africa as as well.

EU forbids subsidies? That's funny. Airbus got state loans from France, Spain, Germany and the UK. We won't even get into the banking bit.

No there isn't. In economics there is a bit of all it. Now you think I am pro-EU because I favor labor mobility which the EU gives. Fine, but I am also anti-Euro in the manner of how it's economically screwed up every country under the ECB. I'd rather have Ireland leave the EU as it would allow Ireland to address it's underlying problems of debt which the ECB refuses to do, same with Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal. But I am also realist and realize why they are denying any country the option of leaving as those in power, and not those on the Council, but those of real power know what I spoke of. The longer it's around the more accepting people will be of it.

You also have the issue of if any of these countries left it would leave HUGE debts on banks in Germany, France, and UK. Those debts would have to be paid for by the citizens of Germany, France or the UK either way. But you'd have Capital disappear overnight and it would cause banks that hold no debt from the PIIGS to have funding issues. It would cause an economic depression which previously lead to rise of Hitler. Remember UK and other EU countries aren't individual countries anymore. What happens in Greece effects you more then you know. Which is why they are doubling and tripling down cause if it doesn't work, you aren't worrying about immigration or green jobs or even can you get petrol in your car. Your gonna worry about can you afford food for the day.

I, on the other hand, have no issue with countries leaving as I wouldn't be effected by it directly and I have put myself in a position to which I wouldn't have to worry. People in the UK, Germany, France and the rest of the EU haven't. So while you are saying "may I have some more please" while your in the soup line, I'll be in Ireland dealing with inflation and having a growing economy.

That's the reality, economically and socially, as it's not even bad yet. It's gonna get a helluva lot worse.

 

I had to snip some of your comments to get everything in one post, sorry.

Whatever happened to ‘whatever’? Whatever.

Of course. It happens between the UK and the continent and between other EU member states too. And the visa free policy extended to mainland UK, not just to Northern Ireland.

So nothing after countries became democratic, apart from Germany after the fall of the Berlin Wall for obvious reasons. No wonder pro-EU politicians have long been practising such deceit to further their plans.

Ah, the workers’ paradise. Like that was ever going to happen.

I find it very odd and I’m quite sure than most grassroots Conservative supporters, most UKIP supporters, and large numbers of businessmen and women and Labour Party supporters would agree with me ... all Europeans are most certainly not Socialist, but you can delude yourself until your old age if you want to. That governments don’t reflect what the people want in no way proves your point.

I didn’t mention fuel, though taxes on it are ridiculously high in the UK, with about two thirds of the price being tax. As I said privatisation of essential services and green taxes (which are levied on conventional power sources) have pushed prices up.

Uh, can we just call what you call ‘Europe’ by its proper name, the European Union or the EU please? It has the worst mix of the socialist and capitalist systems ... I don’t care how anyone labels it.

I repeat: people, including European Commissioners have been talking about the need to reform for years, but the EU's love for red tape gets stronger anyway. Reform never comes. It’s always jam tomorrow with the EU.

Is anyone in any doubt that it's the 21st Century? What the Swiss pay for their food is up to the Swiss, not you. Switzerland still has its democracy and it’s consistently ranked as one of the best countries in which to live. They don’t seem to need outside advice.

The EU has decided that the new entrant member states will have their CAP subsidies upped so that they are on a par with the older member states by 2013. I can’t imagine why you’d believe the CAP is on its way out when it's actually expanding. Why do you think that?

I haven’t ignored or failed to grasp anything. The action taken by past governments in destroying our manufacturing base and making our trade policy subject to the EU’s approval is something I profoundly disagreed with them on. One of the problems is the EU’s refusal to allow us to subsidise our own industries when it suits us, (see below for confirmation.) and undoubtedly British politicians have got their policies wrong, which is just one more reason for not supporting them or their parties. Also perhaps you could educate yourself a little better ... use effect and affect and its and it’s appropriately before you start criticising British educational standards? Or failing that, use a spell checker.

It’s all of those things, plus the effects of EU legislation.

Yes, the EU forbids subsidies, though of course it allows them when it suits the EU. And let's not get into the banking bit.

"Within the context of free competition in the internal market, and specifically the opening up of public services to competition, Member States sometimes intervene through the use of public resources to promote certain economic activities or to protect national industries. By favouring certain firms over their competitors, this State aid is liable to distort competition.

"State aid is prohibited under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. Nevertheless, some exceptions authorise aid justified by common interest objectives, i.e. for services of general economic interest, as long as they do not distort competition in such a way as to be against the public interest. The monitoring of State aid carried out by the European Commission therefore consists of striking a balance between the positive and negative effects of aid." Link

Get it? The EU sometimes allows state aid (as in the case of its flagship Airbus project and the banking industry, ie when it suits the EU and its objectives. When it has refused to allow us to state fund our industries here, it has given Structural Funds to allow other member states to compete in the same industries they’ve refused to allow the UK to state aid. In other words, British workers are required to fund competing industries but our own government may not subsidise their jobs here.

Oh for Heaven’s sake! I don’t think you’re pro-EU because you’re in favour of labour mobility; I’ve told you I’m in favour of labour mobility. I think you’re pro-EU because you’re in favour of its immigration policy, which allows for mass immigration over the wishes of the population and I’m not in favour of that, and you actually have faith that it will reform. A variety of opinions are welcome, but understand ... if a member state decides it wishes to leave the EU, it is not your place to try to dissuade them. And euroscepticism is growing in the UK and in other member states, not lessening, so your theory is wrong.

No one’s denying it would be painful, and I’m all too well aware of how eurozone debt affects the UK, but better the pain now than prolonging the agony and racking it up for future generations. A single currency can never work unless there is a single fiscal policy across member states, and the people concerned aren’t ready for that, no matter how much it might suit some politicians, bureaucrats and corporations. And you’re scaremongering like the worst of the europhiles.

Your concern is touching, but don’t worry about us. We’ll survive and prosper a lot sooner outside the EU than we will inside. We’ve followed the EU’s model for too long already and there is a (*)(*)(*)(*) sight more to consider than economics. And in your smugness, have you taken into account that Ireland, a country of about 4.5 million, owes billions of euros? Are you hoping that Ireland will rat on its debts?

How true, but you’ve ignored my question about how you’d feel if America’s affairs were run from Mexico City or Bogota or Canada.

 

It's not just a EU tactic but a global elite tactic. Be it the UK, US or Germany.

It will never exist.

From a Global standpoint you guys are pretty darn close to it. But again, to a European, it's not socialist, but what they grew up with.. so it's the "middle" in the left-right paradigm. Programs after WW2 which were suppose to be short term solutions to housing, medical care, unemployment benefits and such kept getting extended and are now mainstays within all European economies. That's not delusion that's a fact. Europeans riot/protest when things get cut by the Government.

I am not saying the US isn't socialist, it's on par with Europe now. I am just saying it's a lot further.

Your link did. Member that? The one about the cost of privatizing causing prices to rise? It's not the privatization of an industry but Government taxing things. If 66% of the cost of fuel comes from taxes and 33% from supply and demand of the Oil market, what is really the issue?

Green Taxes are evil. You'll get no argument on that.

How can a economic policy put foward in Australia first, then in the UK and the US be a "EU thing" when the EU didn't formally exist at that point? Tony Blair and Gordon Brown screwed the UK, not the EU.

I never said it was. All I said was I wouldn't live there due to food costs and I know what they are ranked and why they are ranked that way. That's gonna change soon as Basel 3 comes into play.

EU is gonna be a different area in a few years.Funding issues will come from the lack of gross national income that's taxed.This accounts for 70% of EU's budget. You could see a decline of 10% to 20% in funding. Then VAT which is another 15%. I can say this because EU revenues have been declining for the last 3 year and it didn't even have a "Financial" crisis yet. This is why you see many pro-EU calling for "Euro bonds".

With or without the EU, UK manufacturing was leaving anyways. It's too (*)(*)(*)(*) expensive to produce there. Your trade policy would be the same anyways as Protectionism would kill what's left of the UK manufacturing in a matters of months.

Oh look, you use it the same way I do. Isn't it ironic, don't cha think?

No different if it was the UK doing it.

No, I get it. It's no different if it was the UK or Germany running the show. Now the issue of Structural Funds are used bring many countries which lack industries to get on a level playing field with those countries with established industries. While it may seem unfair, it's actually done to prevent trade imbalances within the EU.

Uh.. labour mobility and immigration are hand in hand issues when you are purist in labour mobility. I've already told you that but you still insist you are in favor of it, but you really aren't. You just think you are.

I never said that the EU will be reformed, I stated things would naturally even out down the road due to the Southern Economies (South America, Middle East, Africa and even China) growing and that growth will bring wages in line with the Northern Economies (Europe and US). Until that happens no "reform", nothing changes. It's not a EU issue but a Global one.

I don't care if the UK leaves, I want RoI to leave and Germany personally. Euroscepticism will not effect EU membership at all. It will be due to Financial issues and nothing else.

And I don't disagree. I was against the US TARP bailout and other laws. The only thing EU wise I was in favor of was Ireland taking over it's banks, but they screwed the pooch and did it incorrectly.

Euro bonds (a single fiscal policy in a little by little fashion as we've seen in RoI and Greece through the IMF/EU bailouts) will be issued sooner rather then later and it will be done based on what you think is scaremongering. I don't scaremonger. I tell the truth on what's really happening in the Finance/Banking industry. Greece should have defaulted this week (hell years ago), it still might this weekend (but will by early 2012).

I don't worry about the UK. It'll be the end of the UK (as you know it). As UK relies on the EU as 40% of it's exports go to EU countries. Leaving the EU would cause a 15% tariff on all UK products. EU's model is UK's model. UK was doing it first..

Yes, I know Ireland's position. Ireland can go back to the punt and pay off it's debts by inflating it's way out or do Argentina. I've long had the position I would take a hair cut (I own a large amount of Irish bonds) and a citizen myself. Ireland got crappy terms for it's bailout paying 5.8% on the 100 billion euro bailout, which is just wrong.

Also I should point out, Irish banking issues were caused by Foreign banks and Ireland defaulting on purpose would be perfect due to all that 100 billion euros went to pay off debt created by German, UK and French banks.

UN does a fine job of it already.

 

I won’t answer all your comments because time is limited and these posts are long enough.

That would be the common sense attitude, but if the EU took the common sense attitude the eurozone wouldn’t be in the mess it’s in now, and European taxpayers, including the British, wouldn’t be bailing out the euro. The EU has long known about the coming funding issues, but it still has not reigned back its spending, quite the opposite, then it has the bloody nerve to lecture member states for spending too much.

The EU certainly didn’t help. Take the steel industry for instance ... abiding by the Treaty of Rome, the British government weaned the British steel industry off subsidies in the 1980s and it became one of the most efficient and competitive industries in the world. Other EU member states continued to pour subsidies into their steel industries, enabling them to undercut British Steel. British Steel then became so frustrated it refused to build a planned new plant here and the work went the US instead and hundreds of jobs with it. Some countries seem to have been far more adept at persuading the European Commission to ignore their illegal subsidies than the British ever were and from a British perspective nothing changed with single market legislation. There are other examples too.

So you’ll understand why I’m not impressed to put it mildly, by the EU’s puny attempts to level the playing field or prevent trade imbalances.

I said you were scaremongering like the worst of the europhiles because you raised the spectre of Hitler. Europhiles are not scaremongering when they raise the issue of Eurobonds. Greece and Ireland and the rest of the PIIGS should never have joined the euro in the first place. That’s the truth. The EU was always doomed to fail because it had fundamental flaws. That’s the truth too.

What I know is that you listen to too much europhile propaganda. How do you know what tariffs would be imposed on us? The UK runs a huge trade deficit with the EU, so the EU is hardly in any position to start any kind of hardball negotiation on tariffs or anything else, ie the EU has a lot more to lose than we do. Trade would carry on as before. [British politicians were fond of telling us that 3 million jobs depended on trade EU membership. They took got this information from a report which said that 3 million jobs depended on trade with the EU, but they conveniently forgot to say that the report had also said that this trade would continue as before if we left.] A lot of British goods also go through Europe's largest container port, Rotterdam, and they are included in our "European" trade figures even though their final destination is outside Europe. Statistics shouldn't be taken at face value.

And what the UK has done in the past can be changed by a new government as long as it's not EU policy which can't be changed without the agreement of the other member states.

The UN doesn’t have anything like, not even a little bit close to, the influence over the US that the EU has over the UK and we also have the UN to put up with too. Recently the UN’s Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has been lecturing us on human rights “abuses” because a local council is to evict so called travellers from a site, for which they have no planning permission to erect their caravans, after a ten year legal process.

Hilarious! You really don’t understand when to use effect or affect (and its and it’s seems to have you completely stumped!) Keep your criticisms of British educational standards to yourself and I promise not to mention this shortcoming again.

 

No country, Union or Government body for that matter has common sense. Even the UK knew the issue of spending too much money and it still spent. But this has nothing to do with EU in general as every country is guilty of this, except, China. As China is very conservative on this matter. While others rely on charts and predicted growth. They always assume the market is gonna grow by x% each year, so when you have a couple of bad years you are left with huge deficits.

Oh sweet jesus..you are bring up an industry that was in decline long before the EU and it's further decline had nothing to do with EU but countries like Japan, India and China which produced products more cheaply and dumped them on the world market during the 1980s to today and what was know as the "Steel Crisis" of the 1970s. While your British Steel was declining, the US Steel production was declining as well. US Steel and other major producers declined massively which lead to the decline of the Rust Belt. To this day US Steel only has 16,800 employees (in it's peak it was employing 168,000).

Oh and the other major producer of Steel in Europe during that time also declined as well. Ruhr area (Dortmund, Essen, Duisburg, and Bochum) in Germany.

Ironically the Rust Belt and Ruhr area adapted and moved to different industries.

But I suggest you read "The British iron and steel industry since 1945" it's in Journal of European Economic History Winter 1997, Vol. 26 Issue 3.

Considering it's not an EU issue when the world markets change I think you clearly want to blame the EU for everything. You can do that all you want. Still doesn't change the facts that 1st world (Europe and US) are competing more and more with the 2nd and 3rd world. So EU policy or even US policy will never make things a perfect little world for us. Japan will still pump out cars and steel at cheaper prices because the Yen is a carry trade currency (a cheap currency) and China will pump out products at cheaper rates until Union leaders realize the problem isn't in the 1st world, but then 2nd and 3rd world were there are rarely any labor laws. As I said before until 2nd and 3rd world (Southern Economies) nothing will change. EU is trying to address it's 2nd world economies within the EU. It won't get fixed overnight.

But my raising Hitler is based on historical fact. When an economy is crappy, you usually get the worst kind of leaders. Europhiles are scaremongering over the Eurobond. Have you heard the Eurobond cheerleaders? They make the same threats they made towards Ireland over the Lisbon Treaty.

Because the EU would punish the UK. EU would look out for it's interest such as preserving it's markets, not the UK's market. Having huge trade deficit is a bad thing if you are considering or wanting to leave the EU as having a trade deficit means the EU hold British pound. (Here comes the tariff bit). EU would sell it's British pounds driving down the value of the pound forcing British citizens to pay more for EU products and the EU would pay for less. UK trade is roughly 40-50% (depending on the Rotterdam Effect) to the EU. Now the Rotterdam effect is a little bit overblown because I never knew the Dutch and Belgian consuming 2 or 3 times more British products then the Germans, French, Italians or even Spanish.

But it doesn't matter if the Rotterdam is the first port or not. It's how the products are bought. For example.. You or I can avoid certain exchange rates in buying products for shipping. I'd buy UK products not in Euros. But through a third party currency.. like the Yen. So I'd help the Yen and not directly effect the Euro/Pound trade. Companies do this all the time.

Now if you want a deregulated UK, it might work. But it'll have you complaining even more but nobody to blame..

And what the UK has done in the past can be changed by a new government as long as it's not EU policy which can't be changed without the agreement of the other member states.

Keep digging the hole. As I was using word effect to mean it doesn't effect (has no result/change). I was not saying it didn't have influence. Maybe you'd pick up on that when I said hardly effects. Hardly by definition "minimal amount".. so it hardly effects the Swiss is a grammatically correct statement.

So you understand.. it would read like this in long form: it (has) minimal amount of effect (on) the Swiss.

 

The EU is not a country or government though, is it? And it’s still spending European taxpayers money very, very freely, whilst telling democratically elected governments that they’re spending too much and Europeans are facing cuts in services. Everyone who understood the plan knew the single currency couldn't work without fiscal union (the European Commission has admitted this) but people's livelihoods took second place to European leaders' vanity, either that or they knew it would come to crisis point, a crisis which they could then use to make people believe fiscal integration is the answer. (It wouldn’t be the first “beneficial crisis” to be used as an integration measure. British leaders were just as keen to join the euro as the rest, but they were held back by public opinion. Unlike most European integration measures, British leaders could not bring the euro in by stealth.

Sweet Jesus! The fact that some countries abided by the treaties in the matter of state subsidies and others did not and were able to profit massively at the expense of those who did from the start is irrelevant to you? Just why do you consider yourself a eurosceptic? Do you at least recognise how the political establishment's refusal to have a genuine debate about how the EU affects domestic politics skews the political debate at least in the UK? And no one, least of all me, ever said that other factors didn’t and don’t come into play.

Maybe that was Germany’s excuse for the heavy illegal subsidies is gave to its steel industry. And no, Germany’s adaptations are not at all ironic and good for them. I don't think anyone ever doubted German industriousness.

And I suggest you look at both sides of the European Union's case for centralising power and consider issues other than economics too. It's not all about money by a long, long way.

Didn't say it was an EU issue when world markets change, though the EU is providing world economic markets with their greatest problem now. To say I blame the EU for everything is plain silly when we haven’t even touched on most issues. It is however an EU issue when the EU allows countries to gain an advantage in contravention of its own rules. It is an EU issue when the EU plays favourites and disadvantages one country to favour another whilst still expecting the disadvantaged countries to pay to be disadvantaged. It is an EU issue when it loads petty, bureaucratic costs onto busineses, making it even harder for them to compete with low cost economies. (You can say that British officials make EU regulation even more of a burden and I'd completely agree, but it shouldn't be there for them to meddle with.) It might not matter to you, and the EU has worked for Germany until recently and Ireland did well for a while too, but it matters to British taxpayers. I'm not expecting the EU to change, and I don't believe it's at all reformable. I just want out.

When an economy is crappy, it is usually because of crappy leaders. I want crappy leaders out before the crap gets any worse. Europhiles need to stop handwringing and tackle the eurozone's problems ... either admit that it was all a terrible mistake or set about unifying economic policy quick smart. I think the first option is infinitely preferable as European citizens don't seem to want their countries borders rubbed out and its patently obvious that one policy won't work for half a billion people living in such diverse economies anyway.

How would the EU punish the UK without punishing itself even more? If the EU forced us to pay higher tarrifs (which would flout WTO rules) we'd have to increase tarrifs on EU goods, so who d'you think would lose? Like I said the EU is not going to play hardball, especially in such economically dire circumstances. You must think they EU is even more ridiculous than I do! And on what basis do you say the Rotterdam Effect is overblown? I do hope you’re not relying on official British sources. Listening to europhiles a person could be forgiven for thinking British trade ends at the borders of Europe.

Of course it matters! You commented on the proportion of UK goods that go to EU countries. The Rotterdam/Antwerp Effect distorts trade figures.

An independent UK's policies would be the UK's affair, but I entirely accept other countries would react accordingly as they see fit and so they should. And independent UK will work much better than a UK under EU control.

Priceless! Stop digging indeed and run your stuff through a spellchecker if understanding this is beyond you. I just ran your text through the Word spellchecker and it picked up the errors nicely, but any good spellchecker would do, and don’t worry about it’s and its (though the rules for these are easy to understand if you make the effort.)

And I'd still like to know if you'd like to see the US governed from S America with Americans having absolutely minimal control over policies. What would the average American think of that? (At least you wouldn't have the huge translation bill EU taxpayers pick up.) Please stop evading these questions.