Should Britain leave the E.U. ???
 

Sort out our understaffed and ailing Health Service

Sort out our defence budget and stop axing our forces

More help for the elderly and homeless

Sort out the flood defences

Recruit and train more Police, Fire and Medical services instead of cutting some of them back

Bolster the UK border force

To name but a few

But any way we are off topic

Wayne


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk while having a cold beer

It's a good article Ted but still there are some things that need to change

Wayne


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk while having a cold beer

Found this in Money week Mag
 

Taken from Money Week Magazine.........

I am a businessman with investments in the European Union (EU). I am a big fan of a free-trade zone, an aspect of the EU that works well. I am, however, deeply concerned by the EU’s declared agenda of moving to full federalism. This is badly thought out, yet every time the strategy shows signs of faltering, the reaction of the unelected bosses in Brussels is to push for even further integration.

The sensible move would be a pause to allow the EU’s institutions to consolidate and develop. One model might have been the 50-year twin- track absorption of Hong Kong into China, which has worked fairly well so far. In contrast, the EU’s 28 nations, with highly disparate cultures and income levels, simply cannot integrate at the pace that the likes of Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission president, feel is possible. So the fractures are becoming increasingly evident – and dangerous.

The pending euro crisis
In fact, the most prominent example of that attempt at over-rapid integration – the currency union – is in deep trouble. With or without a referendum, and with or without Prime Minister David Cameron’s timid renegotiations, I feel that brutal but necessary reforms – up to and including disintegration – will be forced on the eurozone. These will likely force it back to the model of a free-trade bloc, with different currencies. We don’t want to be a full member of the EU when these events take place, because the cost to us would be huge. Despite the sclerotic influence of the EU on growth and entrepreneurial dynamism, the UK is still growing – and at nearly three times the average rate of our continental neighbours. If we stay in the EU, that growth will come to a shuddering halt – and it’s all because of a looming disaster facing two of Europe’s largest nations.

That might sound extreme, but my forecast is based on a dispassionate analysis of national debts. France and Italy are respectively the second and third-largest eurozone economies. They cannot repay their debts while they remain participants in the euro. They are unable to grow their nominal GNPs fast enough to escape the debt traps they are in. Meanwhile, the maturities (see page 34) of their sovereign debt, at about seven years on average, are short, and the proportion owned by potentially skittish foreign investors, at over 50%, is high. France and Italy have not reformed sufficiently to avoid the simple fact that, one day, markets will take fright at their situation and mark down their bonds. The European Central Bank (ECB) can buy up their bonds for a while, and more quantitative easing (QE) from ECB boss Mario Draghi (assuming the Bundesbank – Germany’s central bank – allows it) could stave off the evil day a bit longer.

But that day is certainly coming. When it arrives, interest rates on French and Italian bonds will rise sharply as risk premia (see page 37) reassert themselves, and we’ll see a crisis that will make Greece look like a picnic. At that point, the most likely outcome is a division of the eurozone into two or more blocs, with Germany heading up the “hard block” zone, and France and Italy either adopting their old national currencies or forming a “soft” southern block. There is no way that Germany either wants to or is able to prevent this, short of allowing a full-scale monetisation of French and Italian debt. That won’t happen because of the inflationary consequences. An “extend and pretend” approach won’t work within a single currency, and France and Italy are about 20 times bigger than Greece in terms of aggregate GNP.

Brexit fears are nonsense
Plenty of other arguments can be made for “Brexit” (and, to be fair, there are some good ones for staying too). But the best reason for leaving is that the eurozone will implode sooner rather than later, and it is better to be in a comfortably-appointed lifeboat in the Channel, than to be dragged under by the wake of the doomed eurozone vessel. All the nonsense spoken about Brexit putting jobs at risk, or of the City’s position being under threat, is, in my view, just that – nonsense. I believe the UK’s capacity to grow will be enhanced by Brexit, and very little will change in terms of trade. We can sit out the carnage that is coming in financial markets. And the City, away from the grasping jealousy of Frankfurt and of Paris, will thrive.

So how will it unfold? As follows: first, Greece and Portugal will suffer another bout of financial crisis. But then the real debt implosion – the one involving the really big boys – will arrive. This time, the eurozone will be floored – and unable to rise from the mat. A new EU – a customs union with regulatory agencies supervising trading standards – will probably emerge from the wreckage. My own support for that type of union would be strong.

It's relevant and interesting that just about all of the points mentioned in that article have already been brought out in this thread; to me that indicates that this thread is pretty well informed.

But the article is 22 months old and things have changed greatly since those days. Hence the discussion points in here go in to more detail than the article.

This is the author of the linked article:
Hugo Dixon | Contributor | Breakingviews

There will be many more articles in the main stream media (MSM) between now and the referendum.

Meanwhile, a couple of abstracts from that article in the "Independant" (I can't quite remember who owns it nowadays by the way - it could be a Russian oligarch?)

The chances of this occuring are exceptionally slim:
"The peripheral countries have to solve their own problems. But the EU can help in four ways: it can complete the single market in services, which is patchy; it can open up Europe's markets to trade with other parts of the world, especially the United States and China; it can help develop a modern financial system based more on capital markets rather than banks; and it can lighten the burden of regulation on business by cutting red tape."

As for this; the ECB is the means by which the EU keeps Greece in line.
"The euro crisis is an opportunity for Britain, because all these things would be beneficial for our economy. Just think how Germany is the big winner from the single market in goods because of its prowess as a manufacturing nation. Extending it fully to services, where Britain excels, could be correspondingly beneficial for us. Or think about what would happen if the EU was less "bankcentric" and relied more on capital market instruments, such as shares and bonds, to channel funds from investors to companies. The bulk of the business would flow through the City of London with its army of investment bankers, lawyers and accountants. More trade and less red tape would help our businesses, too"

It's very hard to argue with those points... In fact I agree with them.

I dislike the EU. I'm not pro EU at all.

But perhaps 'Better the devil you know'

What is out future is we close the door to what is by far our biggest trading partner and access to skilled or cheap labour ??

New trade deals aren't going to just appear overnight and our products and services are not going to be cheap. We will end up in competition with the EU and I don't think it's battle we can win.

There are plenty of counties who can beat our prices on pretty much everything..

And we all know those childish beaurocrats in Europe will make us pay for leaving.

And what about the Billions in subsidies we receive from the EU ?? I think it costs every UK citizen about £130 a year for EU membership. I pay more to be in the AA.

Britain is not a global super power. It's a small Island and the actual global powers are not in awe of us any anymore. We can't scare anyone with our Navy and we dont have anything special to sell anymore.

I think if we do leave, it will be painful. There will be severe consequences.

It might be worth it in the long run. With that I agree..

But for those not nearing or in retirement with their own houses or nest eggs, its could be a very bitter pill to swallow and really hurt a lot of people.

So when this vote comes along, are you going to vote what suits the greater good of our nation or what makes you feel better about yourself.

It's a tricky decision and not to be taken lightly. The politicians will just do what suits themselves as always.

China et al
 

I feel that China has peaked, for now at least, and it has enough issues internally to deal with.


Hegemony


China is a block based on a wide spread revolution of the 1940s that consumed those areas involved in considerable pain and extensive loss of life.
Nowadays, it is a one party state based on absolutism of control at the highest level whereby it is possible for individuals to feel some sense of individual freedom so long as they toe the line.
5 individuals in neighbouring Hong Kong who broke these rules are currently missing, location unknown.


Russian society has only recently come out of 300 years of serfdom based on autocratic monarchy closely followed by a similar level of autocratic rule via a communist party and the associated dogma.
They are finding their feet, in summary.


The USA is based on the outcome of a relatively recent civil war from which there could be but one winner and it is now a grouping of 50 states with a federal structure to deal with international interests.


The middle east consists of autocratic rule in the main, via Kingdoms or single party military government, or it is in turmoil and potentially throwing off those nominal national borders imposed upon it post WW1.
It is highly tribal in nature.


Africa is consumed with throwing off the vestiges of earlier colonial rule; they got what they asked for post WW2 and are making something of it.
For instance, there are various regional currency and custom unions among some of the nations but no obvious appetite for closer union.


Asia. I will omit from comment on this on the grounds that there are far more independent countries there and
they are in very different levels of development.
In other words, it is best to refrain from over generalising.
The same goes for South America.


Notably, the large blocks that exist today all arrived at that state via years of immense bloodshed.


Europe.
What is one to think?

Europe won't ever achieve any sort of geopolitical influence and it's physically impossible that it does. Each country has its interests, its international affiliations, its internation partnerships, etc, etc, which positively prevent that the EU as a whole can have any sort of geopolitical influence. Quite the opposite, in fact! And, as things go, it's loosing the little it had in the past and what is worst, the geopolitical influence of Europe in the world is smaller than the UK alone or France alone had 20 years ago. I think that the French already started seeing this and taking steps to regain back what little of what they lost they can.

The power axis of the world is moving from the Atlantic to the Pacific in large part because of Europe's actions towards itself which prevents it from having a real world influence. The EU as a whole, under influence from several countries, behaves like an old ruined lady which preaches moral standings that nobody neither cares about nor listens to. One of the itens where this matherialises is pacifism which led to an enormous reduction in military power in several countries, the UK one of them. Well, it's simply impossible to have geopolitical influence without a strong military and the declared will to use it behind diplomacy.


BINGO! It's not an option. It's either yes or yes. See what was the Europe Constitution which, after being refused by referendum in a few countries, was replaced by the Treaty of Lisbon which is the European Constitution with some minor changes. Without any referendum, of course, except the one in Ireland.


Quite true. Very, very true indeed. But then, even in continental Europe there are certain differences, very different societies in the continent which is impossible to mix.


Imagine that you are in Morocco and reach the border with Mauretania. You see that no-man's land which you know have mines here and there, you can't immediately discern what is the best route, you think about Mauretania being an islamic country, etc, etc, etc. What do you do? Go back to the safety of the known Morocco or do you move forward towards Nouadhibou?


That access to skilled or cheap labour has nothing to do with the EU. The UK can design its immigration laws in order to keep attracting those. Just like Canada or Australia do.


It's up to Her Majesty's Government to acquiesce to Brussels demands or not. Or even simply ignore them.


Who cares about Europe outside of Europe? :)



twowheels03, just love that article you posted. It reflects practically the views that I have on the subject being the major point of contention the view of the author regarding a future rebirth of the EEC out of the ruble of the EU's implosion where I tend to think that right now, with so much bad blood between several countries that isn't really an option anymore.

I know this is a mainly British topic, but:

- as a German I would love to see Britain staying in the EU. Britain has always been a voice of reason in a circus of 28 highly different countries. Britain is dependable. The EU would be even more of a totalitarian regime sans British influence.

- Now Britain out of the EU would give me a place to emigrate to, if things get uglier on the Old Continent ... :oops2:

You guys have good reasons for both staying and leaving.

Good luck!

Ain´t that the truth! :thumbup1:bier

"Outside of Europe?"
The thread is about in or out of Europe for the UK (or the rump of the UK when Scotland splits away).

But, my main point is in the heading of that post.
What price Hegemony?

Its good to see Germany and The Netherlands warming to the UK demands, maybe they are starting to think its time for change
Cameron optimistic of February EU deal but France downbeat — EU - European Union business news and information | eubusiness.com

Even Michael Caine has has his 2 pence worth :rofl:
Michael Caine 'certain' Britain should leave EU — EU - European Union business news and information | eubusiness.com

Wayne

Another island far away
 

Japan and GB.


There is much to learn from the other island at the other end of the world.


From a couple of years ago, this article provides an overview of the relations between the two nations over the past 400 years and it comments on the current situation.
A tale of two islands: England, Japan and 400 years of shared history | Asia | News | The Independent


There is much in common nowadays, apart from the historical view above and, again, there is food for thought within the bare statistics.
Comparison of the UK with Japan
(Credit to the junior school in Kent that produced this data).


There is no nation in the world that does not want to trade with Japan.
It is a highly stable society with a strong work ethic, it is highly industrialised and it relies on exporting to earn its way in the world.
Japan has very little in the way of natural resources other than it's forests -- It imports raw materials, adds value to them via a highly developed economy and exports.
If the island of Japan can exist independently by judicious use of treaties and trade agreements with other nations such as Australia then can the islands of Great Britain do the same?


If not, then why not?

Cameron knows full well that both France and Germany have stated they do NOT want the Brexit referendum held in 2017 as it will interfere with their own elections.
Until now Cameron has helpfully—and in my view, rather optimistically—suggested the UK referendum will be in 2016, so long as an early agreement with EU leaders can be achieved. But today Cameron is saying, "I'm not in a hurry, I can hold my referendum at any time up until the end of 2017."

The other EU leaders realise that Cameron has a recent mandate from the British electorate (i.e. the renegotiation was in the Conservative manifesto and the party got elected). I think Cameron is in a fairly strong position and what he's asked for isn't outrageous. And that's unfortunate because if he achieves his demands it weakens the exit campaign.

Main difference between UK and Japan is they have a very strong and thriving industrial manufacturing sector. Ours got sold down the river years ago.
We don't invest in training and the training now given is a joke.
We have a trainee that's given a certificate in changing a wheel, really?
The only remaining manufacturing industries are now under foreign ownership, which to be honest usually do far better than when they were under British management.
Our economy is far too reliant on the financial sector.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed.
Including Japanese ownership of car assembly plants in the UK.

It is clear that the UK/GB would have to change its whole outlook in a manner to which you allude. But, again, the UK needs to do this in any case if globalisation of the world economy continues apace.
(I mentioned the Japanese work ethic which means a lot more than simply being prepared to undertake hands on work - it was the Japanese who took on the principle of Quality Control and developed it to the status of a semi-religion which may be in accord with their own "Zen").