Britain and the European Union

[Karl]

The polls suggest young people are more remain and old people more leave.

 

What's wrong with my opinion????

 

And now we know why young people choose to stay. The good thing is that the young are fickle and unmotivated. The last time I went to a polling booth with my wife I saw no youngsters under the age of 35.

 

I'm disheartened with your opinion. Not because it doesn't agree with mine, but that you appear to have fallen for project fears scares regarding there being no plan for what a post Brexit world will look like.

 

I wonder how that will work for Cameron in the event that leave triumph ? It's hardly credible for 50% of the Conservative party and virtually all of the Labour Party to start doing anything when they are so terrified of the future. The Labour Party appear entirely dependent on the EU to make every decision, so, as unelectable as they already are, they have tacitly admitted that should they get into power, then they woukd just stand around waiting for God or a resurrected Marx to tell them what to do.

 

 

[dust]

I've found the argument that I couldn't be bothered to write myself.

 

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/05/27/dear-friends-this-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/

 

Now... any takers?

 

Point by point, or not at all. Leave the rhetoric at the door and use some substance.

 

I know none of you are going to, but felt it polite to ask.

[Apech]

And now we know why young people choose to stay. The good thing is that the young are fickle and unmotivated. The last time I went to a polling booth with my wife I saw no youngsters under the age of 35. I'm disheartened with your opinion. Not because it doesn't agree with mine, but that you appear to have fallen for project fears scares regarding there being no plan for what a post Brexit world will look like.  (snip)

 

I think the lack of a convincing plan - plus the absence of a convincing leader who could make it work is a perfectly valid point.  If it is really so obvious and clear that we would be better off - then it shouldn't be difficult to make budget projections.  the reason they won't is because they know the economy will take a hit - at least in the short term.

[Karl]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Schuman

 

"... he was instrumental in building post-war European and trans-Atlantic institutions and is regarded as one of the founders of the European Union, the Council of Europe and NATO."

 

He never ascribed Europe's peace to NATO, but to the coming together of Europe, beginning in 1951 with the Treaty of Paris (1951).

 

NATO is a widespread military agreement; the EU is a political and economic alliance. The two can't really be compared.

 

Either way, I have not argued, and will not argue, that NATO hasn't played its own peacemaking role; but you equally cannot claim that the EU hasn't.

 

 

 

 

We could talk of the USSR, or we could talk of the USA, or China, or any number of other united nations.

 

Anti-democratic? Exactly how? The EP is directly elected; they vote for candidates for Presidency of the EC.

Is this somehow less democratic than the British parliament? A Queen, a House of Lords?

 

 

 

 

You can condescend to the younger generations as you like, though I'll wager that my experience is not as lacking as you would like to believe. And the historical perspective thing? Please. There are at most a few decades between us; we all have equal access to the study of world history. Age is not a winning card here.

 

You have already admitted to ignoring the opinions of the IMF, World Bank, Bank of England, the majority of British MPs, the majority of tech professionals in the City, the majority of businesses in the country, etc. Is there anyone I've forgotten? Oh, the majority of university-educated people, the leaders of the USA, the G7, the OECD...

 

I can ignore as many as I wish, particularly as they have all been resoundingly wrong on virtually everything. I used to attend the BoE business updates from 2005. They just got more ridiculous every month. The forecasts were so far outside their own widest forecast that they began to make jokes at their own expense.

 

I don't require 'experts' DB. I'm a long way more informed and knowledgeable than they will ever be. I'm well versed in economics and I understand business and entrepreneurship having run several.

 

Most firms are small to medium sized business which make up over 90% of the businesses in the UK and most of those are not represented by the CBI. Only 6% of our businesses export to the EU and of those, many report that it will make no difference. Nissan were one of the companies that said that they would pull out of the U.K. Should we fail to adopt the Euro. They expanded as a result of not joining the Euro. Now they are saying they are worried about leaving the EU-on current form, if we leave, they will double in size.

 

My experience of youngsters is that they lack in many areas.

[Karl]

I think the lack of a convincing plan - plus the absence of a convincing leader who could make it work is a perfectly valid point.  If it is really so obvious and clear that we would be better off - then it shouldn't be difficult to make budget projections.  the reason they won't is because they know the economy will take a hit - at least in the short term.

 

We don't need a leader. This is your dependence on the state showing through. Governments don't create wealth, they like to pretend they are an indispensable part, but they are completely dispensable.

 

I watched Chukka today saying how he thought business had 'contributed'. Jesus Christ give me strength.

[Karl]

I've found the argument that I couldn't be bothered to write myself.

 

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/05/27/dear-friends-this-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/

 

Now... any takers?

 

Point by point, or not at all. Leave the rhetoric at the door and use some substance.

 

I know none of you are going to, but felt it polite to ask.

 

Yes, very easily. I haven't got time at the moment, but I will do so with the evidence to match.

[dust]

Most firms are small to medium sized business which make up over 90% of the businesses in the UK and most of those are not represented by the CBI. Only 6% of our businesses export to the EU and of those, many report that it will make no difference. Nissan were one of the companies that said that they would pull out of the U.K. Should we fail to adopt the Euro. They expanded as a result of not joining the Euro. Now they are saying they are worried about leaving the EU-on current form, if we leave, they will double in size.

 

The numbers I'm finding pretty much all state the share of exports of UK goods and services to the EU at around 44%

 

Even if only 6% of UK businesses export to the EU, that's well over 300,000 businesses, and 44% of exports accounts for a hell of a lot of trade -- £12 billion in EU exports in March alone.

 

When you say "many of those report that it will make no difference" it is perhaps prudent to note that information already presented shows that the majority indeed believe that it will make a difference.

 

 

 

 

Yes, very easily. I haven't got time at the moment, but I will do so with the evidence to match.

 

I look forward. Though if you can find someone else's argument like I did and mix-n-match the responses it might be a lot less work

[dust]

As far as these:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Schuman

 

"... he was instrumental in building post-war European and trans-Atlantic institutions and is regarded as one of the founders of the European Union, the Council of Europe and NATO."

 

He never ascribed Europe's peace to NATO, but to the coming together of Europe, beginning in 1951 with the Treaty of Paris (1951).

 

NATO is a widespread military agreement; the EU is a political and economic alliance. The two can't really be compared.

 

Either way, I have not argued, and will not argue, that NATO hasn't played its own peacemaking role; but you equally cannot claim that the EU hasn't.

 

The EP is directly elected; they vote for candidates for Presidency of the EC.

Is this somehow less democratic than the British parliament? A Queen, a House of Lords?

 

 

 

I think a discussion on the peacemaking/keeping role of the EU would be interesting.

 

And there have been repeated claims that the EU is run by an elite of undemocratically elected fatcat bureaucrats, and it may well be, but I'm still unsure as to how, or how it's any worse than many modern democracies -- how the decision-making process is any worse and run by any less qualified or more corrupt people than in the UK, for example....

[Karl]

The numbers I'm finding pretty much all state the share of exports of UK goods and services to the EU at around 44%

 

Even if only 6% of UK businesses export to the EU, that's well over 300,000 businesses, and 44% of exports accounts for a hell of a lot of trade -- £12 billion in EU exports in March alone.

 

When you say "many of those report that it will make no difference" it is perhaps prudent to note that information already presented shows that the majority indeed believe that it will make a difference.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I look forward. Though if you can find someone else's argument like I did and mix-n-match the responses it might be a lot less work

 

Trade with Europe won't cease. It won't even change at all for two years. We can accept the trading rules as they are and pay the maximum WTO tarriff and overall it will be less than we pay now and we would be free from the political union.

 

My guess is that when we leave, the entire thing will begin to rapidly break up. It's a foolish kind of project based on hubris and arrogant assumptions. If we remain it will take slightly longer to collapse, but then we will have dragged our country into a darker place than leaving now.

 

The simple fact is, for me, if I had to pay a few hundred pounds a year not to be in the political union then it would easily be a price worth paying. For me the economic argument doesn't stack up and I'm not at all concerned about the ability of entrepreneurs and innovators to carry on producing, trading and employing in a global arena. The sovereignty argument far outweighs the economic or even the immigration argument-even though they are linked.

 

When the EU began, countries were much more tarrif based, but over the years these Tarriffs have fallen away and the purpose of the EU customs area has vanished. The EU has gone in reverse, it has ceased to function in the way it was meant to work and has become inwardly and outwardly protectionist whilst the rest of the world rushed passed it. It's like paying for a state TV license(aka BBC) now that the world is streaming subscription services. It's unsustainable in the short run.

 

That means we are left with a monolithic monster fighting to keep and expand its power into other areas in order to keep itself alive. It suits the crony party that has gathered around its tax funded frolics, but is no longer useful to anyone outside of its public funded largese. It is more like an extended monarchy that has not realised its time is up and continues to act as if it has a purpose.

[Karl]

As far as these:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I think a discussion on the peacemaking/keeping role of the EU would be interesting.

 

And there have been repeated claims that the EU is run by an elite of undemocratically elected fatcat bureaucrats, and it may well be, but I'm still unsure as to how, or how it's any worse than many modern democracies -- how the decision-making process is any worse and run by any less qualified or more corrupt people than in the UK, for example....

 

It doesn't have any peacekeeping role. The US tells it what to do. The EU spends very little on defence and relies on the 5 eyes for its intelligence and defence. Individual countries within the EU are off fighting there own little wars. You greatly over estimate the EUs influence in the global arena. It is a dog without teeth or claws. When faced with a minor situation it is unable to cope and runs in rings chasing its tail. The politicians are useless idiots and can't even cope with immigration. They allowed an invasion. That isn't peace keeping, that's sacrifice. To date, for the first quarter, the crime statistics are 169,000 crimes, or attempted crimes by recent immigrants. FFS. :-/

[joeblast]

I've found the argument that I couldn't be bothered to write myself.

 

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/05/27/dear-friends-this-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/

 

Now... any takers?

 

Point by point, or not at all. Leave the rhetoric at the door and use some substance.

 

I know none of you are going to, but felt it polite to ask.

reminded me of "for pennies a day, you too can help these poor starving children"

 

somehow trade would stop, or something?

 

oh, no, the scots might try to leave again, knowing their desires were stolen last time...

 

france wanting to leave....um, what the heck does that have to do with england?

 

soviet blah blah blah at this point you know this is nothing but a propaganda puff piece

 

its hard to see how england becomes a more powerful global actor if they leave....wtf who wrote this tripe again?

 

"the right of younger brits to retire to other places in europe" um, you dont have no stinkin right to retire wherever you please *facepalm*

 

criminals.....are in the government and security services, so when you're worried about criminals, why not start there...

 

in sum, if england rejects this, but then later wants to re-join, it wouldnt have such a good bargaining position as it did when it entered? 

 

facepalm to the max.

 

 

 

 

 

this is like comparing cankles and trump.  with trump, you dont really 100% know what you're getting.  but you know that you're getting a corrupt, self serving, could-care-less for america, "when are the retards getting off the lawn" con-woman.

 

 

 

people need to put down the nostalgic feelings they've been programmed with about the cozy little union and recognize its only there to steal sovereignty from the member nations.

[joeblast]

 They prescribed an invasion.

ftfy

[dust]

I've found the argument that I couldn't be bothered to write myself.

 

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexitvote/2016/05/27/dear-friends-this-is-why-i-will-vote-remain-in-the-referendum/

 

Now... any takers?

 

Point by point, or not at all. Leave the rhetoric at the door and use some substance.

 

reminded me of "for pennies a day, you too can help these poor starving children"

 

somehow trade would stop, or something?

 

oh, no, the scots might try to leave again, knowing their desires were stolen last time...

 

france wanting to leave....um, what the heck does that have to do with england?

 

soviet blah blah blah at this point you know this is nothing but a propaganda puff piece

 

its hard to see how england becomes a more powerful global actor if they leave....wtf who wrote this tripe again?

 

"the right of younger brits to retire to other places in europe" um, you dont have no stinkin right to retire wherever you please *facepalm*

 

criminals.....are in the government and security services, so when you're worried about criminals, why not start there...

 

in sum, if england rejects this, but then later wants to re-join, it wouldnt have such a good bargaining position as it did when it entered?

 

facepalm to the max.

 

this is like comparing cankles and trump. with trump, you dont really 100% know what you're getting. but you know that you're getting a corrupt, self serving, could-care-less for america, "when are the retards getting off the lawn" con-woman.

 

people need to put down the nostalgic feelings they've been programmed with about the cozy little union and recognize its only there to steal sovereignty from the member nations.

 

 

Yes, a decent example of the type of reply I'm not looking for.

[dust]

Trade with Europe won't cease. It won't even change at all for two years. We can accept the trading rules as they are and pay the maximum WTO tarriff and overall it will be less than we pay now and we would be free from the political union.

 

My guess is that when we leave, the entire thing will begin to rapidly break up. It's a foolish kind of project based on hubris and arrogant assumptions. If we remain it will take slightly longer to collapse, but then we will have dragged our country into a darker place than leaving now.

 

The simple fact is, for me, if I had to pay a few hundred pounds a year not to be in the political union then it would easily be a price worth paying. For me the economic argument doesn't stack up and I'm not at all concerned about the ability of entrepreneurs and innovators to carry on producing, trading and employing in a global arena. The sovereignty argument far outweighs the economic or even the immigration argument-even though they are linked.

 

When the EU began, countries were much more tarrif based, but over the years these Tarriffs have fallen away and the purpose of the EU customs area has vanished. The EU has gone in reverse, it has ceased to function in the way it was meant to work and has become inwardly and outwardly protectionist whilst the rest of the world rushed passed it. It's like paying for a state TV license(aka BBC) now that the world is streaming subscription services. It's unsustainable in the short run.

 

That means we are left with a monolithic monster fighting to keep and expand its power into other areas in order to keep itself alive. It suits the crony party that has gathered around its tax funded frolics, but is no longer useful to anyone outside of its public funded largese. It is more like an extended monarchy that has not realised its time is up and continues to act as if it has a purpose.

 

... more of the same. I'm still wondering where the sources are. You rarely back up what you say, and it's hard to argue with someone when they preface with "For me, it's like this..."; and when you do cite sources/use figures etc to back up claims, they still seem to be easily refuted; and often when presented with or asked for evidence, you ignore, and focus on something else.

 

I will give the benefit of the doubt, and wait for the longer argument.

[joeblast]

its tough when someone accepts fraudulent aspects of the system as simple givens that cant be altered and thus debate false choices.

 

as noted here,

http://www.thedaobums.com/topic/40503-britain-and-the-european-union/page-30#entry691133

 

there are quite a few aspects of EU membership that are flatly illegal when juxtaposed with english law.

 

I just dont know how one reads that, and says well....we might want to stay anyway

 

/0

[joeblast]

https://www.sott.net/article/319146-The-Nazi-origins-of-the-European-Union

 

...

The European Parliament, the only democratic institution of the union, has only an advisory status and is therefore not a real legislature

....

 

 

German historians have repeatedly published the Nazis' documents containing plans for European integration. Gerhardt Haas and Wolfgang Schumann's collection of documents was released in 1972 in East Berlin, titled The Anatomy of Aggression: New documents concerning the military goals of German imperialism during the Second World War.

 

....

 

 

- Hyper-centralism in the economic and political spheres, which leads to the infringement of the national sovereignty of member states.

- Aiming to eliminate the national state sovereignty Europe

- The unification of Europe by a single ideological standard (Nazi or liberal) and the submission of national interests to this abstract idea (whether Nazi or liberal)

- A basically undemocratic nature of European institutions, which are accountable to the financial and industrial elite, not the people of European countries

- The exploitation of weak peripheral countries (Greece, Eastern Europe) by Western European powers, especially Germany

- Anti-Russian geopolitical orientation.

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

the wars were economic, financiers played both sides.

 

the world wars were not world wars, they were campaigns in a broader sense, always meant to keep the public's eye off the real  root of the problem: robber barons, and collections thereof.

 

financialism is this same issue: robber barons, robbing, and causing problems to cover their tracks where the tracks get big enough.  the bigger the track, the more chaos to spread to diffuse the detectability of the core issue.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

at any rate, I agree with this assessment of the situation:

 

Firstly, the welfare state is austere by design.  It is a demoralized culture of limited advancement sold to the ignorant and programmed into the masses from birth as virtuous.  The ideology is bankrupt and contradictory in reality.  Under the Western democratic style of government, which promotes the welfare state, the rich get richer.  Please explain that?  

 

The system removes incentives for advancement, penalises ambition and entrepreneurship, and rewards sloth.  Dependence breeds dependence.  This system is incapable of building up society.  It is only capable of tearing it down based on the limits imposed.  Government jobs and working for your corporate masters as a 9-to-5 paper pusher are considered ambitious or prosperous.  Service jobs are the average person's safe haven.  The welfare state always fights for centralization and what seems economically obtuse policy.  Of course it is all by design.

 

Now, so-called European austerity, which goes for balanced budgets, has certainly not happened as Debt-to-GDP ratios are measured.  There has been the fabled deceleration of government borrowing or a decrease in the rate of indebtedness, but they have not 'cut' or 'balanced' any budgets.  Here on Zerohedge, it ias been dubbed fauxsterity Mr. Glasnost and Ghordius respectively, as government spending has increased over the last decade in the wake of the contraction in consumer borrowing to fight deflation.  Government is not getting any smaller.  Big business is getting bigger and of course big government mandates big business and destroys small business by its very nature as 'progressives' support their own demise for some magical politically correct speech and a feel-good mentality devoid of all reality.  Freedom is the only ideology.  Equality doesn't exist in nature but non-violence does exist and to violate the non-violence principle is to violate another's freedom to be secure in their person.  

 

Austerity exists by design but it has not been brought about in the last ten years by Brussels or European bureaucrats and therefore it is better termed fauxsterity.  The poor are still poor and voting left of centre, the rich are getting richer and voting for bigger government that gives greater benefits to shareholders of big businesses, and all the while the middle class, whose ideal is freedom, gets crushed and pays for all of it in their ignorance.  There is dissonance but it is best cognitive and therefore its effects are sparingly felt in society as people are too indoctrinated to know where to direct their anger.

Edited June 8, 2016 by joeblast

[Apech]

https://www.sott.net/article/319146-The-Nazi-origins-of-the-European-Union

 

...

The European Parliament, the only democratic institution of the union, has only an advisory status and is therefore not a real legislature

....

 

 

German historians have repeatedly published the Nazis' documents containing plans for European integration. Gerhardt Haas and Wolfgang Schumann's collection of documents was released in 1972 in East Berlin, titled The Anatomy of Aggression: New documents concerning the military goals of German imperialism during the Second World War.

 

....

 

 

- Hyper-centralism in the economic and political spheres, which leads to the infringement of the national sovereignty of member states.

 

- Aiming to eliminate the national state sovereignty Europe

 

- The unification of Europe by a single ideological standard (Nazi or liberal) and the submission of national interests to this abstract idea (whether Nazi or liberal)

 

- A basically undemocratic nature of European institutions, which are accountable to the financial and industrial elite, not the people of European countries

 

- The exploitation of weak peripheral countries (Greece, Eastern Europe) by Western European powers, especially Germany

 

- Anti-Russian geopolitical orientation.

 

-------------------------------------------------

 

the wars were economic, financiers played both sides.

 

the world wars were not world wars, they were campaigns in a broader sense, always meant to keep the public's eye off the real  root of the problem: robber barons, and collections thereof.

 

financialism is this same issue: robber barons, robbing, and causing problems to cover their tracks where the tracks get big enough.  the bigger the track, the more chaos to spread to diffuse the detectability of the core issue.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

at any rate, I agree with this assessment of the situation:

 

The European Union is not a federal state and has not achieved political union.  A treaty designed to set this in process was defeated.

[Chang]

The European Union is not a federal state and has not achieved political union.  A treaty designed to set this in process was defeated.

 

With regard to the E.U think not of what is but of what will be. No one is suggesting that the European Superstate and those shadowy figures who mastermingd it have as yet achieved their aims.

 

Whilst i will critisize them on most thing i will not offer any criticism as regards their persistance. Those who want out are angry at what the E.U has already done. They are also fearful of what lies in store.

[Karl]

With regard to the E.U think not of what is but of what will be. No one is suggesting that the European Superstate and those shadowy figures who mastermingd it have as yet achieved their aims.

 

Whilst i will critisize them on most thing i will not offer any criticism as regards their persistance. Those who want out are angry at what the E.U has already done. They are also fearful of what lies in store.

 

I'm fearful of our own traitorous Governments that have skewed our constitution in order to give the impression that they have 'pooled sovereignty' and not given it away illegally.

[Karl]

 

... more of the same. I'm still wondering where the sources are. You rarely back up what you say, and it's hard to argue with someone when they preface with "For me, it's like this..."; and when you do cite sources/use figures etc to back up claims, they still seem to be easily refuted; and often when presented with or asked for evidence, you ignore, and focus on something else.

 

I will give the benefit of the doubt, and wait for the longer argument.

 

I've decided not to give an answer on this occasion. I think you have set your sights on voting to remain and you will either get your way or you won't. If you get your way then it won't be long until it becomes clear exactly what has been given up, as all those things come home to bite.

 

Interestingly I note that Cameron is not even extending the referendum to cover our exit from the single market, so, basically this entire referendum is a fraud. As Peter Hitchins said 'you can check out but you can never leave'. A serious vote on the leave side might push things to the next stage, but, it seems like Ireland, at best we will have to keep having referendums until we get the result the EU wants.

[Karl]

"“The most puzzling development in politics during the last decade is the apparent determination of Western European leaders to re-create the Soviet Union in Western Europe.” - Mikhail Gorbachev.

[Karl]

Mohamed El-Erian is the co-founder of Pimco, a legend in the investing world who is now the Chief Economic Adviser to Allianz, the world’s largest insurance and financial services group which is also the largest company in Europe according to Forbes. He has just told a conference of money managers at the FundForum International in Berlin that a Brexit could resolve key issues within the EU.

 

“There are two fundamental divisions of the EU: There’s the British view — that it’s a super free-trade zone, that it’s a destination. Whereas the Germany-France view is that it’s a means to something else — to an ever closer union. These are fundamentally two very different views on what the EU is about. If the referendum [results in the U.K. remaining in the union], we don’t resolve these different views. It means we are going to have tensions over and over again, because they are pursuing two different objectives, within one institutional agreement. So, ironically, over the longer term, an exit may actually solve one of the basic inconsistencies of the European Union.”

His argument is that Brexit essentially secures the future of the EU, at short-term volatility cost. No one got rich betting against Mohamed El-Erian…

 

courtesy of Guido Fawkes.

Edited June 8, 2016 by Karl

[Karl]

 

http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2016/06/Pew-Research-Center-Brexit-Report-FINAL-June-7-2016.pdf

 

The EU coming apart at the seams.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad

[zerostao]

stand strong britain 

this us presidential primary season should be an example and major wake up call for the world.

[Apech]

stand strong britain 

this us presidential primary season should be an example and major wake up call for the world.

 

because you've elected Hillary without meaning to?