All of them are true?
No, they are all false, but you wouldn't think so if listening and reading all manner of misinformation.
The key to understanding this is that nation states are not at all associated with the economics of individuals or any other entities of any kind other than other nation states; but this fact is obfuscated by those who wish to deceive or who, at best, are simply deceived themselves.


Perhaps it is these self truths that provided the strength of mind to the people of Iceland when they called time on the banking scam perpetrated in their country and returned to first principles and straight forward thinking, casting off the bluff, self-aggrandisement and general bravado of the system that had attempted to subvert that nation.
As it happens they, the Icelanders, have also had the presence of mind to stay out of the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Access...European_Union

There is little enough discussion herein so my contribution is whatever it is; it is for others to make their own cases and, surely, they can speak up for themselves.

The case related to Brexit is made in a number of earlier posts by many others whereas the opposing case appears to be assumed to be some form of "status quo" based on the mantra "stronger, safer, better off".


As far as links are concerned, it is necessary to read them to some extent or another as one sees fit; such as the Flexcit plan that I posted a while ago that runs to more than 400 pages - naturally, no one has to read it or anything else posted in here.

With these lies who needs statistics?
 

The relevance of my current very wide perspective is that many arguments put forward by sundry commentators within the MSM and via many other sources are based on untruths – those untruths are repeated ad infinitum to the point where they become accepted as representing a universal truth.
In effect, those who are aware of this become complicit in the lies or they are not aware of how wrong their own pronouncements are; there is no compromise on that as per my source material for those who wish to know more:-
The 7 key issues in this article are fundamental and are argued succinctly.
http://www.moslereconomics.com/wp-co...oints/7DIF.pdf


Like all well designed and propagated propaganda, the lies gain a life of their own; just today on TV-based commentary some of these hackneyed lies were used as a means of arguing for staying in the EU – variants of the “stronger, safer, better off” mantra, a mantra that is never deconstructed by the tame media journos with the exception of a few rare cases.
“Don't drop your grandchildren in the mire”.
“How will we ever afford to exist outside of the big EU?”
and on and on, all BS based on the fraudulant 7 lies.



The link above runs to about 60 pages by the way, so not so bad. :(

The case for leaving the EU isn’t about free trade or immigration
 

I've just read a great piece on this debate, which makes HUGE sense to me. Worthy of posting here; and a great 'common sense' view on this whole vexed issue:

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

By: John Stepek - MoneyWeek.com:

I went to an event on Brexit the other night.

It was primarily making the case for “leave”. There were a couple of political heavy hitters there, who made their views eloquently enough. Nothing you won’t already know.

But for me, the most interesting insight came from the “remain” speaker…

What the EU means to believers is very different to our view of it

The most interesting contribution to the Brexit event I attended the other night came from an Italian speaker. He was there to provide something of a “minority report”, as someone who thought Britain should remain within the EU.

I always find it fascinating to get a view of the EU from someone within continental Europe who actually believes in the project. We don’t hear that enough in the UK.

And it’s very useful. Because it rapidly becomes very clear that they have an utterly different take on the EU to even the keenest British “remain” people.

For me, the most telling point is that continental Europeans who are keen on the EU have no shame at all about acknowledging that the EU is about ever-greater union. They don’t have a problem with admitting it in public. They see this as the whole point.

This is a very fundamental perception gap, and one that really matters. The “remain” camp in Britain contains very few people who would argue publicly for ever-closer union (not since the eurozone crisis, at least).

The debate is generally framed as being about whether or not we want to be part of a free trade area. And when you frame it like that, the idea of walking out seems somewhat foolhardy. Why would you do it?

A vote to “remain” is a vote for the status quo. A vote to “leave” is a weird decision to give two fingers to our existing trade partners in the hope of getting a better deal from a global superpower that really couldn’t give two hoots about us, and an emerging superpower that basically feels the same.

The problem is that this isn’t true. It never has been. And it doesn’t matter how many bland reassurances David Cameron gets about ever closer union being off the cards. The entire bureaucratic structure of the EU was built on ever closer union. A few lines in a treaty won’t change that.

For me, this is the core reason why Brexit makes sense. It doesn’t seem terribly helpful to be a member of a club that wants something that we are implacably opposed to. The EU wants ever-closer union. We don’t.

If you frame it like that, then in effect, the “remain” argument is that we should sit inside the tent, being as disruptive as we possibly can, rather than sit outside the tent and let everyone get on with it. And when you put it like that, I can see why a significant number of Europeans must think: “I do hope they vote to leave”.

A United States of Europe is fine – if that’s what the people want

Of course, the tricky thing with the ever-closer union argument is that the British are far from being the only voters in the EU who have no desire to be tied together as part of a United Europe. It just so happens that we’re getting a referendum on the topic.

To be clear, I don’t have any problem at all with other countries who have a desire to merge as a United States of Europe (USE – maybe needs a better acronym). In fact, it’s the only way that the euro – in the long run – makes sense.

And countries with grossly different economies and even political cultures have merged in the past. You only need to look at the gap between East and West Germany before reunification. That re-merging process was not easy, but there’s never been any real suggestion that it wouldn’t happen or that it would ever be reversed.

However, it only works if the people – the voters – want it to work. History amply demonstrates to us that when you impose artificial borders and artificial unity on a group of human beings, it tends to blow up nastily, and usually in your face.

So what I do question about the whole European project is whether or not they genuinely have the “buy-in” from their electorates to forge ahead with it. Because if they did, then the question of the Greek crisis and Grexit would never have arisen. Germany would have given Greece money, and Greece would have tried harder to be a good citizen of the USE.

And ultimately, this is the reason I think we’d be better off out of it. The EU is a mess because like it or not, there is this hubristic unification project at the heart of it. And I suspect that many other EU nations are glad that the UK is a member, because we act as a curmudgeonly brake on its worst excesses – and a lightning rod for criticism.

If we leave, then it might force the EU to take a proper look at itself, and encourage some transparency and an acknowledgement of realities that are currently being glossed over largely by money printing and political wishful thinking.

Maybe we get a two-speed EU. Maybe we get a split in the eurozone. Maybe the whole thing just decides to lumber on in self-deception. But at least we’ll have tried.

Source

Go with the flow or stand up and be counted?
 

**Edited to remove most of an unneeded quote

Many thanks for the well written post; I was considering a reply to the post shown below and you have done that very eloquently, fully supporting the "plea" made below.
As an aside, a further reason that I have been doing my own reading about economic issues is because that is where the main arguments made by the "remainders" within the MSM have been to date.
Therein lies their own weakness with very little breadth of discourse; this may change of course as the official starting gun is fired at which point we may get a better range of argument.
As a further comment, as you have found, points made by "remainders" can inadvertantly support the case for Brexit.
In a few days time I am off on a visit around some of the European countries to get some feeling for the ambience - I did a similar trip over the border a couple of weeks before the Scottish referendum.
Democracy Vs Debt (aka Wonga).
Democracy and Debt | Michael Hudson
An interesting discourse about how oligarchies become aristocracies followed by democracies and so on through history.
A couple of short abstracts:

“giving priority to bankers and leaving economic planning to be dictated by the EU, ECB and IMF threatens to strip the nation-state of the power to coin or print money and levy taxes.”


“Iceland and Argentina are most recent examples, but one may look back to the moratorium on Inter-Ally arms debts and German reparations in 1931.A basic mathematical as well as political principle is at work: Debts that can’t be paid, won’t be”


Which reminds of the oldish saying “privatising the profits and socialising the debt” (of the banks).
On this basis, it is logical that Britain will morph from a less-than-complete democracy into an oligarchy – all historical evidence says that it is inevitable according to the article above, although the German system of banking may have greater success in avoiding this progression (but only when the Dm has been reinstated).

Pithy commentary
 

Thanks, I was going to do that and then forgot.

Received by email during the last 24 hours:-

I have a very generous offer for anyone who wants to stay in the EU – send me your salary every year!
Don’t worry. I am not heartless - I will slowly dribble 40% of it back to you to spend as you wish – as long as you have my written approval first.
“What do I get in return?” I hear you ask – well plenty – I’ll send you lots of rules and regulations governing just about every aspect of your life.
If you buy food, use electricity or drive a car that burn fossil fuel I'm afraid I will have to punish you severely – don’t complain, it’s for your own good, it’s called “tough love.”
Of course all of this requires a lot of work on my part, so I’ll need to slice a large piece off the top of your “contribution” to pay my salary, accommodation, expenses, perks, and to help fill my platinum plated pension pot.
Oh, and by the way, leave your house doors open at all times – I’ll decide who can enter!
I expect to be deluged with applicants – so be patient – I’ll get round to everyone…. Eventually.

:rofl:

If you've signed up for it and paid, it must be a trade deal and therefore a good idea doh

Andy

Anyone else heard about this?
 

On a somewhat more serious note, there is commentary in circulation that the ECB is conducting monetary exchange restrictions with parts of the Eurozone who are in rebellion against the central powers; it's new stuff to me and I haven't got into this much to date - it is also possible that it is France that has instituted these arrangements (apparently, it is illegal in France to criticise the French banks, so online commentators who live in France are being quite circumspect in how they discuss this matter).

The countries specifically having issues with business transfers of cash out of France are Greece, Poland and Northern Cyprus (aka Turkey).

I will say one thing about it all, if we stay in the other countries will spank us and it won't be nice :thumbdown:
I can't believe that they have the audacity to tell us we would be safer due to information sharing, oh really, strange that as we could not share info with some of the newer members of the eu, due to the fear that it would end up with criminals as the police in certain countries were corrupt.
As for border security, forget it, if I told you what really goes on, which I can't due to having signed something, you would have a fit...... It is really that bad and has been for a very long time...... Out of control is a reasonable description.
As for Cameron saying that we have upped security with extra police etc since belgium who is he kidding, where have all these extra officers come from??
I'll take my chances out thank you very much............. keepcalm

The highest paid female politician in the world is a Labour life peer called Baroness Ashton who is an EU commissioner. The British public have mainly never heard of her, and none of us have ever voted for her, but she gets paid £400,000 a year to make up laws and sign trade agreements that impact all of us.

Respect for democracy comes very much second to the "grand vision" for Eurocrats. Their argument effectively seems to be that democracy can be suspended to get us to an USE/EUSSR where the European parliament becomes supreme over the council of leaders, and then who we elect to it will start to matter, and democracy will return. Therefore, issues that run counter to a USE/EUSSR such as free movement of labour are never up for debate or renegotiation regardless of the will of the people in the member states

The Lisbon treaty was forced through in most countries. When the Irish voted no, it was simply taken back to them for a further vote after some additional pressure. Therefore, I suspect that if the UK does vote to leave, a second reform deal and a second referendum will occur, although the in campaign are desperate to play this down and frame this as a one time leap into the unknown, much as they did with the Scottish referendum.

I am voting out for many reasons, but the 'democratic deficit' the EU creates is as good a reason as any.

It was this former junior council officer's (and now de-facto EU foreign minister) bungling diplomacy in encouraging that ethnically mixed country Ukraine to prepare to apply for EU membership that precipitated the current Russian v. West crisis that resulted in annexation of the Crimea, a low level war on their border, the deaths of all those souls on the Malaysian airlines flight and the strengthening of Russia's military position in the Middle East and necessitated an increase in NATO forces opposing Russian forces.



So much for the EU keeping us safer.

Anyone know the truth of claims the EU will stop us taking over what TATA steel don't want? Common law would certainly allow a British government to buy or even take the steel mills as strategic assets but the idea that EU law actively prevents it seems like propaganda? I'm guessing it can be done but will take so long the steel workers will all be retired and China will rule the world by then or is it really enshrined?

Andy

Yeah, I have seen that on the news also. This is the kind of b0!!ocks which says we should be out of the EU. Who are they to say that our Government can't help our Steel industry or anything else for that matter? Think I read somewhere that it was due to sh!te EU legislation that the UK Steel has gone the way it has

Wayne

If it is wrong it harms the leave case though. There are also stories that UK gov voted in the EU not to block Chinese imports!

UK steel is high quality, high spec and high cost. We do not for example just photocopy the same x-ray report over and over again, we actually test the stock. Typical practice in half the world is to use British steel for the first half of a building then top it off in Indian or Chinese ***p. It is in trouble because this differtiation has not been made. The rebuild needs to sort this and take into account the strategic needs if we ever need ships or tanks. The government have a role to play supporting this side. The EU can't do this because the German specialist steel makers want us out of the game.

Andy

Read in the Times today that the Chinese have put a 46.3% mark up (Tax) on steel imported to China from Japan, South Korea and the EU where as the mark up on Chinese Steel coming into the EU is only 9%, go figure

Wayne