|
|
|
|
Matt V2.0
Registered: Apr 2002 Posts: 17728 - Threads: 847 Location: Surrey
2016 | Honourable Mention Party Animal
|
|
Quote:
| Quin. wrote on 04-09-2017 03:17 PM
Over-simplifying it rather than just very much simplifying it TBH. what we need is access to the EU to support our financial services industry rather than actual goods, we can get things from elsewhere but business is what will suffer the most and as a knock on effect tax receipts also.
We need their money more than their potatoes. We are a gross importer rather than exporter, our manufacturing sector has basically flatlined for the best part of 10-15 years, we don't produce enough food to sustain us and our economy is unbalanced towards services and financial industries. If these companies move (which they are starting to) to europe because we don't have full or unfettered access then it will hurt us hard and also europe to a degree because whilst they would like to get some of those companies in their countries London has the whole gamut of services in one place making markets and trade cheaper for all of europe, it could cost more for all of europe (but mostly us) otherwise.
Also buying "stuff" from abroad would involve higher transporting costs and most likely lower quality, even when in Japan recently May was asking for essentially the same deal we have while being part of europe, and she'll be incredibly lucky if we get that.
|
|
Ain't going to happen, and there's the rub.
The EU can't and won't allow the UK to have any control over their financial system, and quite rightly. Remember the UK is not in the Eurozone and I can't see that changing. Ever. We had our stab and crashed out, many of us will remember 15% interest rates, friends being repossessed and made redundant.
The EU wants a Robin Hood tax, a small fee for every financial transaction, which was vetoed by the UK. Because of our financial interests, at home, in the EU and around the world. Now they'll be free to implement this, again quite rightly.
Brexit has been coming for a long long time.
The question is, will the EU cut its nose off to spite its face?
Or can they face the realities and realise they can still have massive payments from the UK, in return for a good trade deal (perhaps with some element of financial services, but vastly restricted) and a 3 stage Europe.
Where those who believe in "ever closer union" can move towards The United States of Europe, others want the Euro and are willing to accept certain dictates from the EU, whilst the UK and others are willing to contribute but are only seeking a good trade deal.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
04-09-2017 15:56 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quin. ???
Registered: Oct 2010 Posts: 33316 - Threads: 426 Location: london
|
Quote:
| Matt wrote on 04-09-2017 04:56 PM
Ain't going to happen, and there's the rub.
The EU can't and won't allow the UK to have any control over their financial system, and quite rightly. Remember the UK is not in the Eurozone and I can't see that changing. Ever. We had our stab and crashed out, many of us will remember 15% interest rates, friends being repossessed and made redundant.
The EU wants a Robin Hood tax, a small fee for every financial transaction, which was vetoed by the UK. Because of our financial interests, at home, in the EU and around the world. Now they'll be free to implement this, again quite rightly.
Brexit has been coming for a long long time.
The question is, will the EU cut its nose off to spite its face?
Or can they face the realities and realise they can still have massive payments from the UK, in return for a good trade deal (perhaps with some element of financial services, but vastly restricted) and a 3 stage Europe.
Where those who believe in "ever closer union" can move towards The United States of Europe, others want the Euro and are willing to accept certain dictates from the EU, whilst the UK and others are willing to contribute but are only seeking a good trade deal.
|
|
Which makes even more of a mockery of voting for Brexit when we had a veto and the ham faced twat had secured us an opt out of ever closer union.
And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those that could not hear the music -Nietzsche
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
04-09-2017 16:08 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Matt V2.0
Registered: Apr 2002 Posts: 17728 - Threads: 847 Location: Surrey
2016 | Honourable Mention Party Animal
|
|
Quote:
| Quin. wrote on 04-09-2017 05:33 PM
You say not if but when like it is fact when it actually opinion, what part of what I said was rubbish, the part that we had a veto, or had secured an opt out of ever-closer union so that was no longer a valid reason for brexit?
|
|
Sorry, I was writing a slightly softer version of my previous post but got way-laid by a client.
"Rubbish" was in response to "it makes even more of a mockery of voting for Brexit".
Here's the follow up:
Perhaps to temper my reply a little bit, we've been the pariah of the EU for years, focussing on our unique requirements to the detriment of the rest of the EU and ever closer union. We look after number one, in much the same way as the other 27 sovereign countries do, and the net result is long-winded discussions with uneasy compromises and unhealthy alliances.
That is impractical and unsustainable.
The EU is never going to reform its headlong rush towards closer union, despite our vetoes and opt-outs. We had those before, and, as I recall, some fancy foot work was done when it came to signing up to previous treaties which fundamentally changed our relationship with the EU at which point we were supposed to have a referendum. Not surprisingly, this didn't happen.
Yes, this is my opinion, but it's based on some rhetorical questions:
Will the UK adopt the Euro?
Will the UK join Schengen?
Will the UK agree to much larger EU budgets and the EU taxing citizens directly?
Will the UK accept EU control over foreign policy and defence?
Will the UK cede sovereignty to become a "state" in the United States of Europe?
An EU army? Of course not, they said, but they were wrong as that's being discussed now.
Here are some less emotive and actual examples of how member states in the EU work for their benefit but to the detriment of others.
When Greece applied to join the Euro, Goldman Sachs fudged the figures so they joined at a far higher rate than was tenable. This was known before the crash in 2008, but nothing was done. As a result of the EU wanting, no, needing to keep everyone in the Euro, Greece received massive bailouts and agreed to austerity beyond our wildest dreams. Net result, 54% youth unemployment.
Spain, Italy and Portugal are on a knife edge financially.
Last year, Merkel opened the floodgates to immigrants. Why? Because Germany desperately needs fresh blood, workers who will pay tax and support their ageing population. But look at how this affected Turkey, Greece and Hungary... In desperation, Hungary built a fence and threatened to shoot people who crossed - not the best advert for the EU and free movement! Germany is the strongest member of the EU so fudges needed to happen: Turkey was offered a load of money and the promise that their EU membership application would be expedited but that has stalled with Erdogan's coup and now he's threating to open the floodgates...
https://thewire.in/174035/turkey-president-tayyip-erdogan-criticises-german-populism-after-merkel-shift-on-eu-membership/
BTW the reason Germany welcomed immigrants is exactly the reason the UK needs immigration.
This isn't going to go or end well, the question is whether Brexit will provide the shake-up the EU desperately needs.
Report this post to a moderator |
IP: Logged
|
05-09-2017 08:47 AM |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may post new threads You may
post replies You may post attachments You
may edit your posts
|
You may delete your posts
HTML code is OFF
BB Code is ON Smilies are ON
|
|
|
|
|